Poll of the Day > What's up with Walking Simulators with slowass walking?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I just finished Edith Finch, and goddamn she moves slowly in that game. Walking Dead had this problem, but fixed it quickly by adding a run button in season 2. Stanley Parable just makes you move really fast by default to remedy this problem.

Edith Finch came out after those games, why couldn't it get it right? BTW, if you're on the fence about the game, it's incredible even with the slowass walking.
---

What's the deal with walking simulators anyway?
---

People can't just read books anymore. They have to be virtually walked through the narrative. Literally.

It's kinda sad.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

People can't just read books anymore. They have to be virtually walked through the narrative. Literally.

It's kinda sad.

Not really, there's no way Editch Finch or Stanley Parable would be possible in book form.
---

lihlih posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

People can't just read books anymore. They have to be virtually walked through the narrative. Literally.

It's kinda sad.

Not really, there's no way Editch Finch or Stanley Parable would be possible in book form.

This.
---

They're not Running Simulators, duh
---

lihlih posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

People can't just read books anymore. They have to be virtually walked through the narrative. Literally.

It's kinda sad.

Not really, there's no way Editch Finch or Stanley Parable would be possible in book form.

https://i.imgur.com/LJsqz3c.jpg
---

Miroku_of_Nite1 posted...

lihlih posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

People can't just read books anymore. They have to be virtually walked through the narrative. Literally.

It's kinda sad.

Not really, there's no way Editch Finch or Stanley Parable would be possible in book form.

https://i.imgur.com/LJsqz3c.jpg

Your point being? I was reading choose your own adventure books when I was in grade school. Edith Finch and Stanley Parable are definitely(especially Editch Finch) different from those books.
---

I'm not saying there is no value to walking simulators. But I'm definitely saying that they have become the lazy man's replacement for reading a book and simply envisioning the adventure due to clever writing and (shocked expression) imagination.

Some people don't want to put forth the effort to read a book to have a narrative experience. They want it animated and interactive. Read out to them by someone else. To sit back and "passively" experience it on rails.

It kinda reminds me of motion comics. I hate those things. Aren't regular comics good enough? You can't envision it beyond that? It needs to be voiced and semi-animated? Because making it into a full-on movie/animation would take too much time?

It's just weird.

Most walking simulators are boring.

Death Stranding should have just been a Netflix series or a movie. Awesome concept and story. Absolutely abysmal and pointless gameplay purely designed to stretch out the cutscenes.

Of course people are entitled to disagree with this opinion. But it is what it is.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

I'm not saying there is no value to walking simulators. But I'm definitely saying that they have become the lazy man's replacement for reading a book and simply envisioning the adventure due to clever writing and (shocked expression) imagination.

There were people who said the same thing about books when the printing press made them readily available and people didn't have to rely on oral storytelling anymore. It's just a different storytelling medium, with its own advantages and disadvantages compared to others. It's not a replacement for anything.
---

A lot of stuff for the Stanley Parable definitely wouldnt have worked in book form...
---

They want you to be immersed I guess.
---

wwinterj25 posted...

They want you to be immersed I guess.

There's nothing more immersive than hitting "A" to turn the page.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

They want you to be immersed I guess.

There's nothing more immersive than hitting "A" to turn the page.

Good thing theres more to the immersion than that. But because youre you, I wouldnt expect you to know...

Anyway, people make different mediums for different things. Some things, though similar, dont always fit multiple mediums as well as their default medium.

For example, because of how Stanley Parable is played, not many things can be put in a book format that works like other choose your own adventure books. And the ones you can put in wouldnt be that interesting. But they are in game format. Just like how some books are amazing as books, but the movies they make are butchered to almost unrecognizable sometimes. And the games are sometimes like a totally different story...
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

I'm not saying there is no value to walking simulators. But I'm definitely saying that they have become the lazy man's replacement for reading a book and simply envisioning the adventure due to clever writing and (shocked expression) imagination.

Some people don't want to put forth the effort to read a book to have a narrative experience. They want it animated and interactive. Read out to them by someone else. To sit back and "passively" experience it on rails.

It kinda reminds me of motion comics. I hate those things. Aren't regular comics good enough? You can't envision it beyond that? It needs to be voiced and semi-animated? Because making it into a full-on movie/animation would take too much time?

It's just weird.

Most walking simulators are boring.

Death Stranding should have just been a Netflix series or a movie. Awesome concept and story. Absolutely abysmal and pointless gameplay purely designed to stretch out the cutscenes.

Of course people are entitled to disagree with this opinion. But it is what it is.

why do these story-based games have to be seen as a replacement for books? its not the same thing at all. weird comparison.
---

Whats the deal with airline food
---

I would assume it's a facet of narrative pacing. In Stanley Parable there are scenarios that play up your ability to ignore the narrator by rushing ahead or staying in place. In games where the player is less involved in the story they uncover they need to balance how long the audio string are with how quickly you hit them. If the walking speed was increased then the distance would need to be increased with more environment between cues.
---

Man elitism about forms of entertainment is so weird.

And uh yeah I have no idea why the assumption is that people who play walking simulators just give up books entirely forever.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

There's nothing more immersive than hitting "A" to turn the page.

Immersion isn't just about what actions you do but how your brain responds. Someone as zen as yourself should know this.
---

it's so that you don't realize the game is only a couple hours long if you walked at a decent pace.

GreenKnight127 posted...

But I'm definitely saying that they have become the lazy man's replacement for reading a book and simply envisioning the adventure due to clever writing and (shocked expression) imagination.

Saying that video games are a lazy man's replacement for books+imagination is kind of like saying that electric lights are a lazy man's replacement for gas lamps and candles.
---

darkknight109 posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

But I'm definitely saying that they have become the lazy man's replacement for reading a book and simply envisioning the adventure due to clever writing and (shocked expression) imagination.

Saying that video games are a lazy man's replacement for books+imagination is kind of like saying that electric lights are a lazy man's replacement for gas lamps and candles.

its like saying movies are a lazy mans video game. doesnt even make sense as theyre two different things that can co-exist.
---

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?
---

bulbinking posted...

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?

No
---

Mead posted...

bulbinking posted...

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?

No

*GASP*
---

bulbinking posted...

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?

What can a painting express that a doctored photo couldn't?
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

bulbinking posted...

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?

What can a painting express that a doctored photo couldn't?

Wouldnt that depend on the painting?
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

bulbinking posted...

Videogames are a unique means of expression capable of sharing ideas and feelings in a way impossible for other mediums of art to do, the same as every artistic medium in existence.

Can we all at least agree on that?

What can a painting express that a doctored photo couldn't?

Even a highly skilled forgery is still art. Of course the art community would never admit this as it would affect the perceived value of their money laundering objects.
---

bulbinking posted...

Even a highly skilled forgery is still art.

Debatable. Personally, I consider the only criterion needed to qualify as art to be the application of creativity. If you're just replicating something that already exists with no personal interpretive or creative steps, you aren't really producing art.

That said, producing a good forgery absolutely does require a tremendous amount of skill, in many cases comparable to that of the original artist. I won't disagree with that. Just that it's not a particularly creative process.
---

adjl posted...

bulbinking posted...

Even a highly skilled forgery is still art.

Debatable. Personally, I consider the only criterion needed to qualify as art to be the application of creativity. If you're just replicating something that already exists with no personal interpretive or creative steps, you aren't really producing art.

That said, producing a good forgery absolutely does require a tremendous amount of skill, in many cases comparable to that of the original artist. I won't disagree with that. Just that it's not a particularly creative process.

I disagree with the post modern idea of art needing to simply be creative as creative is a subjective term as much as art using the same deconstructionist logic that resulted in that idea.

True art needs to be an elevation of our ability to express feelings and ideas to one another. In actuality I consider art to be a scientific process of evolving interpersonal communication, and any movement which wishes to deconstruct art into any idea as simple as art is whatever you say is art are sabotaging our ability to connect and form deeper bonds through art for nefarious purposes.

Yes, anything can be art, but that doesnt mean everything is art.
---

bulbinking posted...

True art needs to be an elevation of our ability to express feelings and ideas to one another. In actuality I consider art to be a scientific process of evolving interpersonal communication,

And that expression takes place whenever creativity is exercised. The mere process of being creative entails expressing subconcious opinions, ideas, and biases that the artist themself might not even be aware of, let alone able to express verbally. I don't disagree with your assessment, but I think you're gatekeeping way more than is necessary.

Do note that, while simply being creative is all that's needed to create art, that art isn't necessarily going to be at all interesting or impressive, or even worth creating. The postmodernist philosophy has some merit, but the vast majority of postmodern art is inane garbage. It's just important to separate "this isn't art" from "this is dumb."
---

adjl posted...

bulbinking posted...

True art needs to be an elevation of our ability to express feelings and ideas to one another. In actuality I consider art to be a scientific process of evolving interpersonal communication,

And that expression takes place whenever creativity is exercised. The mere process of being creative entails expressing subconcious opinions, ideas, and biases that the artist themself might not even be aware of, let alone able to express verbally. I don't disagree with your assessment, but I think you're gatekeeping way more than is necessary.

Do note that, while simply being creative is all that's needed to create art, that art isn't necessarily going to be at all interesting or impressive, or even worth creating. The postmodernist philosophy has some merit, but the vast majority of postmodern art is inane garbage. It's just important to separate "this isn't art" from "this is dumb."

The best art is something which everybody can appreciate. A beautiful song, picture, or story transcends age and culture. Too often I see artists trying to capitalize on niche markets and being proud only a few can appreciate their work. I find this the opposite of the purpose of art. True beauty is universal and undeniable and if somebody pours they heart and soul into something, no matter their talent, people will be able to recognize it as art even if its not to their tastes.
---

Hell no art doesn't need wide appeal to be art.
---

bulbinking posted...

The best art is something which everybody can appreciate.

Ignoring that "best" is extremely subjective, "art" is not defined purely on the basis of the best stuff. Bad art is still art. Again, there's a very important distinction between "this isn't art" and "this is dumb."
---

adjl posted...

Again, there's a very important distinction between "this isn't art" and "this is dumb."

Nope, dumb things can be art too.
---

AllstarSniper32 posted...

adjl posted...

Again, there's a very important distinction between "this isn't art" and "this is dumb."

Nope, dumb things can be art too.

I think that was the point. Something can be dumb and still be art but people think dumb = not art.
---

I think people are projecting attitudes onto my words that dont exist.

I am not saying art has to have broad appeal to be art, what I am saying is true art, the highest art, is recognized as art by all who experience it.

They do not choose to enjoy it they simply recognize it for what it is.

Art is expression and a perfect expression is understood by everybody.

Im making a philosophical argument for the existence of art in the objective state, I am not stating we can define what is and isnt art based on how many people like it or not. Not all art is perfect but the pursuit of art is naturally the pursuit of perfecting an expression.

Any media or craft produced to exploit for profit can thusly not be called art regardless of its quality.
---