I mean I had the exact same reaction. The character comes across as awfully generic at a first glance. By simply changing his race they would already be breaking the mold because there are not many games based off scruff black or asian men. You guys just need to accept that until there is equal opportunity and representation and these comments will never be treated the same as someone saying it about a minority.

Fair enough, but then why add the description "white" at all? 

What ever mental gymnastics people use to justify it - it's a racist statement, made by a writer of a major publication, which is absurd that that's even allowed - and yes I realize we're probably overrepresented in entertainment, and that as a whole, we have it pretty good in the West, but that's besides the point.

I love the race threads on this site. They are always enlightening, lol.

"While I’ll admit that I initially rolled my eyes at yet another Gruff White Male Protagonist™ in a grim world - especially one with such a Gruff White Male Protagonist™-ey name as Deacon St. John - I ended up getting far more invested than I’d initially expected."

This is what the writer said.  It's right there.  I have no earthly idea how people are trying to downplay the ignorance of this sentence.  He made a baseless assumption based on the appearance of the character, period.  The very fact that he admits to being wrong perfectly illustrates just how idiotic such assumptions are.  

Even beyond that, where is common sense in the first place?  How the bloody fuck is a survivor in a post-apocalyptic world supposed to look?  Oh, no, he didn't shave this morning!  He looks awfully gruff!  Is he supposed to be wearing a tuxedo?  Maybe a sturdy sweater vest?  

We know what this is about.  The character is a white male.  Take the same character and change the race or gender and the writer wouldn't be complaining about "gruff" anything.

Forget that, though.  It's kind of laughable that this kind of generalization is only acceptable because he's a white male but it's not what bothers me.  As a reader, I come across something like this and all I can think is that I can't take this writer seriously.  Before he even begins, he's going to assume that he knows all about the character?  That's more than just ignorance, that's flat out stupidity.  How about learning about the character BEFORE MAKING IDIOTIC ASSUMPTIONS?  Why not try THAT?  The same with all these, "oh, he looks like a boring character because there are other characters who look generally similar."  I mean, the fuck?  What a character looks like is often one of the least important aspects.

Yes, ultimately the writer was just trying to be witty while scoring a few brownie points with his direction of choice but the end result is that it makes him look less than intelligent.  Not really a criteria that I seek out with reviewers.  

Reading the context of it, I don't think he meant it as he shouldn't be white, but rather your typical type of Protagonist we have seen in many recent games.

It is similar to how when people describe a suspect to the police they throw in colour.

I completely agree with both of you.

Because there aren't a million games out there with a gruffy gravel voice bearded Asian dudes. 

It's not a racist statement. When I watch a TV show and see a character and think 'oh great, another loud angry black female character'. It's not racist to say that, it's okay to be tired of a character trope that's been over done because the first thing you think of is the lack of imagination that went into it. If I said 'oh great anther black female character' or 'oh great other white male' that would be racist. 

Currently doing rehab for a knee injury so those fun holidays I usually do are off the list. Chilling by the beach is just what the doctor ordered. Nice gym here to do my rehab as well. 

Well that's where we disagree then I suppose. A simple observation or describing attributes is one thing, but if it's inferred that the color of one's skin somehow makes for a negative attribute (or even a small factor), I don't see how that can be construded as anything other than a racist observation, at least to a small degree. 

I totally get that there are certain "tropes" that I feel would be a positive for arts and entertainment to steer from and utilize more unique, underrepresented attributes. But I don't know.. for my money at least - a person's (real or fictional) personality, actions, overall character, etc is far far more important than simply the way they look, especially with baked in traits like race. But maybe that's just me. 

You think those online magazines had an evil plot to bring politics into the gaming community?

What's now going on in gaming already happened in literature and cinema it's just the natural evolution of every medium.