It's like what Yahtzee said: He's fun because he's a sort of "fill in the blanks" character; he is whatever we want him to be. I may see him as an intelligent everyman who is thrust into horrible circumstances, whereas someone else may think of him as an all-out badass. This isn't a trait that's associated with ALL silent protagonists; Half Life (which I have been replaying recently) was actually built to fit this.
So I guess I am pretty fond of Gordon Freeman, but more or less in the same way I would be fond of a character I created in an RPG; since their personality is up to me, of course I'm going to make them likeable.
Silent protagonists are actually okay when they seem like they should be silent. I don't expect Ranger from Quake to start jabbering on; there's no one to talk to, and it wouldn't really fit the game's atmosphere.
I think the best example as to what I'm talking about would be Pointman from F.E.A.R. and Beckett from F.E.A.R. 2. Pointman was supposed to be cold and robotic; the fact that he wore a mask only accentuated this. He was almost always alone, trudging through some abandoned building or basement. Beckett, on the other hand, was almost always surrounded by fellow marines that he never said a word to. He really seemed like he should have talked. He wasn't some mentally disturbed psychic-ninja; he was just a guy.
CleverNickname said:
People don't like Gordon because he doesn't talk and has "no character"?? That's like asking why pizza is awesome and then being disappointed that it hasn't got a PhD in Physics.
Pizza is just obviously awesome, because it is Pizza.
Gordon Freeman's awesomeness is equally inherent. Look at all the shit he goes through and then tell me he isn't awesome.
Screw what I was rambling on about; this is the perfect description.
