The Chinese Room Fires Almost Entire Staff- "We're done with doing walking sims and story stuff" - Sensationalist Headlines

snip

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;52725651]My main issue with walking Sims is that I just feel like I could get a similar experience in a more compact format just by watching an immersive movie. So much of the time spent in walking simulators is looking at nothing particularly important to "soak in the atmosphere". Pacing is important but I don't think having the player slowly walk through a forest is the right way to go about it. The best walking sims seem to understand this and cut the fluff.[/QUOTE] I kinda agree with this. But that's fine to me even if the pacing is slow, as long as there's a solid story, visual design, environnement storytelling, sound design and music. The overall point is that all theses games arent walking sims, thats a catch all term people who hated the genre placed on it, and not what the devs call it. It's just different story focused 3d games with more or less light mechanics.

[QUOTE=Loadingue;52725432]Yeah, I'm not really okay with Penumbra being a walking sim. But SOMA... It's pretty close, it had a lot of uneventful walking. For most of the game, you aren't in active danger.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Loadingue;52725536]I'll admit that SOMA is not a walking sim but it's pretty close. So close in fact, that there's a simple [URL="http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=560988617"]mod[/URL] that makes it a walking sim by making its (few) enemies not attack you.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://soma.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Enemies"][B]There are a total of[/B][/URL] [sp]11[/sp] [URL="http://soma.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Enemies"][B]enemies encountered in SOMA.[/B][/URL]. That's more than a few :v:

I won't lie the enemy parts were the worst part of SOMA because the systems were so obvious and dull, I don't think we're at a point anymore where all games need some form of combat or physical conflict.

[QUOTE=J!NX;52726307][URL="http://soma.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Enemies"][B]There are a total of[/B][/URL] [sp]11[/sp] [URL="http://soma.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Enemies"][B]enemies encountered in SOMA.[/B][/URL]. That's more than a few :v:[/QUOTE] Seriously? By video game standards, that's incredibly few for a 10-hour long game. [sp]One enemy per hour is not "few"??[/sp] [editline]28th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=bdd458;52725629]what kind of argument is this. you can claim any game is a "Walking simulator' if you have the ability to stop enemies from attacking you or whatever via mods.[/QUOTE] I said that SOMA is not a walking sim since you insist so much.

[QUOTE=Rossy167;52726318]I won't lie the enemy parts were the worst part of SOMA because the systems were so obvious and dull, I don't think we're at a point anymore where all games need some form of combat or physical conflict.[/QUOTE] I agree with the first part, and I think it's because SOMA was no different in terms of gameplay and it's enemies and how you dealt with them compared to Amnesia or even Penumbra. They didn't do anything new in terms of gameplay, in fact it even has less mechanics than Amnesia and Penumbra, and I think this hurt the novelty of the game - if you've never played Amnesia or Penumbra then you may not figure out how simple and unintelligent the AI is and therefor have a better experience with the game compared to if you do realize it. That's the strength - and weakness - of all of Frictional Games' games, they put the focus so much on atmosphere and story that you're generally terrified while playing them and that distracts from the lacking gameplay, and they're not very long so that helps too. Once you figure it out it takes away from the tension of the games, which is a shame, but that's just how those games are made. That's why I hope that any future games they release actually has more new gameplay elements because when they released Amnesia: The Dark Descent and nobody knew who they were - the Penumbra games were still pretty obscure back then - or what to expect, the game really worked for most people. SOMA, while still a great game imo just like the previous ones, probably worked less well for most people cause the novelty had worn off. I don't think this shows that games don't need to have some form of combat or physical conflict, or anything, just that this minimalistic approach to it has worked for Frictional Games up to this point, but it can't be done forever and they really should do something else next time. Like with A Machine For Pigs I think SOMA strays the line of being a walking-simulator but I think the inclusion of challenges like enemies and puzzles they become less about walking from point A to point B and more about trying to stay alive while doing so and that there is a huge defining difference between these games and actual walking simulators like Dear Esther.

Is there some rule written down somewhere that walking sims can't have puzzles? Gone Home has keys, combinations, and hidden passages to discover. Firewatch and Oxenfree have these to lesser extents. The puzzles don't define the core gameplay, but you also can't beat the game while ignoring them.

[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;52727006]Is there some rule written down somewhere that walking sims can't have puzzles? Gone Home has keys, combinations, and hidden passages to discover. Firewatch and Oxenfree have these to lesser extents. The puzzles don't define the core gameplay, but you also can't beat the game while ignoring them.[/QUOTE] Nah there's no rule, atleast not yet. Walking simulators as a genre hasn't really been a thing up until now (and still maybe isn't??) so just as you can see in this thread, there's a lot of disagreement and differing views on what counts as a walking simulator and what goes beyond that. I think walking simulators can have other mechanics than just walking from point A to point B, and while I couldn't tell you precisely how "many mechanics" a game needs to have to be considered something else/more than a walking sim, it's probably more to do with how present those mechanics are throughout the whole game and how much of the focus of the game is on them - which is also probably difficult to define in an objective matter. [editline]28th September 2017[/editline] Also as a side-note, I appreciate the discussions going on in this thread but I feel like people could maybe be a little less hostile to eachother's interpretations and ideas on this whole matter.

[QUOTE=DinoJesus;52725651]My main issue with walking Sims is that I just feel like I could get a similar experience in a more compact format just by watching an immersive movie. So much of the time spent in walking simulators is looking at nothing particularly important to "soak in the atmosphere". Pacing is important but I don't think having the player slowly walk through a forest is the right way to go about it. The best walking sims seem to understand this and cut the fluff.[/QUOTE] But then what about games like LSD or 21:The World? Those games don't really have a linear sense of progression or story as such, they're all atmosphere and exploring these weird environments.

[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;52727006]Is there some rule written down somewhere that walking sims can't have puzzles? Gone Home has keys, combinations, and hidden passages to discover. Firewatch and Oxenfree have these to lesser extents. The puzzles don't define the core gameplay, but you also can't beat the game while ignoring them.[/QUOTE] It seems generally like its more a matter of having failure states and puzzles that are extensive enough that it presents a challenge / aren't there purely out of plot reasons walking sims have a far higher emphasis on exploration, and story, than gameplay and challange. if you took the failure states, hostile assailants, and (non-plot related) puzzles out of a game, would the game really be all that different? Something like Aporia or Solus Project wouldn't be affected that much at all, Aporia would suffer from having less puzzles but it would largely be the same game, however something like Amnesia would be drastically different and even without tension or immersion. [editline]28th September 2017[/editline] It doesn't even really have to be hard, just something that creates tension walking sims are relaxed, plot based games

[QUOTE=J!NX;52727105]It seems generally like its more a matter of having failure states and puzzles that are extensive enough that it presents a challenge / aren't there purely out of plot reasons walking sims have a far higher emphasis on exploration, and story, than gameplay and challange. if you took the failure states, hostile assailants, and (non-plot related) puzzles out of a game, would the game really be all that different? Something like Aporia or Solus Project wouldn't be affected that much at all, Aporia would suffer from having less puzzles but it would largely be the same game, however something like Amnesia would be drastically different and even without tension or immersion. [editline]28th September 2017[/editline] It doesn't even really have to be hard, just something that creates tension walking sims are relaxed, plot based games[/QUOTE] Challenge is subjective, and plenty of genres feature games without fail states. You can "die" countless times original Prey, the Fable sequels, and Life is Strange without ever seeing a game over screen. "Tension" isn't that great of a qualifier either. Most walking sims I've played have had tension in spades. Firewatch had it's fair share of unnerving moments, and there's a good reason a lot of people thought Gone Home was a horror game when it first came out. Games have other ways of scaring players than siccing the boogeyman on them. Tbh I don't even think "walking sims" are a genre anymore, but more of a descriptor like "survival" horror or "strategy" RPG.

[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;52727006]Is there some rule written down somewhere that walking sims can't have puzzles? Gone Home has keys, combinations, and hidden passages to discover. Firewatch and Oxenfree have these to lesser extents. The puzzles don't define the core gameplay, but you also can't beat the game while ignoring them.[/QUOTE] No, Ether One is a game I'd call a walking sim and it has a lot of puzzles.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;52724860]More like receiving well-deserved flak after being hyped as some kind of revolution by the most pretentious side of games media, and turning out to be a two hours long "walk around and find the five whatevers" where nothing else really happens but it somehow it costs twenty dollars.[/QUOTE] What the media, reviewers and otherwise say for a game has ultimately nothing to do with its content. If they lavish praise upon it when it's barely notable, that doesn't suddenly veer the game into the trash bin, it just means that you should think with your own head about its merits rather than let hype backlash tell you to want to maim it. Yes I can agree some of these games are surprisingly and damningly expensive for minimal content on the basis of their stories, but it doesn't sentence them to the pits of critical hell and mockery unless the game itself is kind of a joke. Just because someone can beat Gone Home in a minute doesn't mean much when the story's less about being beat and more about finding out what the story is. And this is coming from someone that thinks it was overblown in hype and shouldn't of gotten anywhere near the amount of praise it did.

For those interested, TV Tropes has a pretty good [URL="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnvironmentalNarrativeGame"]article[/URL] on walking simulators and several examples of games that definitely fall in that category.

I think current games we'd call walkim sims could keep what I like about them - environnement storytelling, interesting writing etc - and be a bit more like Portal. Portal has an unlocked mouvement and using mouvement mechanics helps you solve puzzles, there's just more freedom of mouvement. One of the things that make theses games less fun for people is the restricted mouvement, no jumping, maybe crouching. Obviously portal is straight up a puzzle game but it shares a ton of sililarity with thoses games. You solve puzzles, the story is mostly told by a character's mononogue and environnement storytelling, and you get to the next story bits by completing puzzles. That's pretty much what What remains of edith finch, Ether one or Craddle does. But the mouvement in Portal is fun and the mechanics are fleshed out. It's not something every indie can dream of reaching. I guess Portal is as much a story game as it is a puzzle game and can be enjoyed both or only one of theses ways. Ik people who hated the puzzles and got through the two games because the loved the narrative that much

[QUOTE=Loth;52727999]I think current games we'd call walkim sims could keep what I like about them - environnement storytelling, interesting writing etc - and be a bit more like Portal. Portal has an unlocked mouvement and using mouvement mechanics helps you solve puzzles, there's just more freedom of mouvement. One of the things that make theses games less fun for people is the restricted mouvement, no jumping, maybe crouching. Obviously portal is straight up a puzzle game but it shares a ton of sililarity with thoses games. You solve puzzles, the story is mostly told by a character's mononogue and environnement storytelling, and you get to the next story bits by completing puzzles. That's pretty much what What remains of edith finch, Ether one or Craddle does. But the mouvement in Portal is fun and the mechanics are fleshed out. It's not something every indie can dream of reaching. I guess Portal is as much a story game as it is a puzzle game and can be enjoyed both or only one of theses ways. Ik people who hated the puzzles and got through the two games because the loved the narrative that much[/QUOTE] So you're saying all they need is gameplay. I don't know if anyone could argue against that.

[QUOTE=Drury;52729234]So you're saying all they need is gameplay. I don't know if anyone could argue against that.[/QUOTE] Don't twist my words, I said different ways of moving around would make theses games more fun. And many "walking sim" do have gameplay and puzzles that makes them close to portal, but the way you get around the map in them isn't as fun as portal, and thats something devs could explore more. People who say they don't have gameplay just didn't play them cause the only one that doesn't actually have any gameplay is Dear Ester. 1 out of many games called walking sim. Nobody ever calls portal a walking sim, yet other story based games with gameplay, puzzles, ennemies and fail states are called that. What's the definition then? The term is bullshit and doesn't mean anything if games with actual gameplay are called that.

Is Myst a walking sim?

[QUOTE=Rufia;52727035]But then what about games like LSD or 21:The World? Those games don't really have a linear sense of progression or story as such, they're all atmosphere and exploring these weird environments.[/QUOTE] Well those games are obviously using the medium to provide something movies can't. My issue is when walking sims might as well be a boring movie with a moveable camera.

what a profound move yet another subtle work of meta storytelling 10/10

[QUOTE=Amakir;52729266]Is Myst a walking sim?[/QUOTE] No. Progressing through Myst requires collecting clues and solving puzzles, with the goal of collecting the red or blue pages to free one of the two brothers. It's an exploration based puzzle game.

'anybody that likes games like doom and counter-strike (aka clicking sims) are idiots... they arent real games if they dont even have a story or cool killstreaks all u do is click' I can understand not liking walking sims but why do some people get super angry about them

[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;52729433] I can understand not liking walking sims but why do some people get super angry about them[/QUOTE] its mostly because they're counter-reacting to the way people act like they exist as a higher plane of art above other video games. Plus over the semantics of calling stuff like gone home and Dear Esther games when they are more experiences, those two in particular are the only games I've seen the anger towards really, after more came out the hate passed really. you can call it an over-reaction, but its at least somewhat from a legitimate place, at least enough to see why. [editline]29th September 2017[/editline] That and because its honestly a very hard way of telling a story unless you do it right (Firewatch for example), because walking sims will need plot tension far more than gameplay tension. It's a hard type of game to make good because even a great plot is only as subjectively good as the viewer cares to make it, while good gameplay is a very objective thing even if you dislike a certain genre.

[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;52729433]'anybody that likes games like doom and counter-strike (aka clicking sims) are idiots... they arent real games if they dont even have a story or cool killstreaks all u do is click' I can understand not liking walking sims but why do some people get super angry about them[/QUOTE] Yeah, I get why people dislike walking sims, but as someone who really, really enjoys them, I don't get why they piss people off so much. Walking sims, to me, avoid the "gamey" feeling that most games have. It's an experience that isn't bogged down with game mechanics and technicalities. It's just an environment that you walk around in and explore with some narration and music, which leaves very little to pull you out of the world that is created. There's no mechanical awkwardness from jumping between rooftops like in Assassin's Creed, there's no sidequests, there's no collectibles to hunt (usually) - all the game mechanics are distilled to the most simple forms, and it leads to a short, linear experience that usually manages to keep my attention precisely because it doesn't suffer from glitchy or broken mechanics. I hate feeling like I'm playing a game. I don't like having to think about the mechanics behind a game, because it immediately pulls me out of the environment. Walking sims just do away with basically all game mechanics and leave you just with the environment, which lets me really dive into the story and narrative and vibe of the environment without getting distracted by "ok i need 30 more gold for this item and then I can do this" or anything like that. It's just an environment, there is zero meta, and I really enjoy that. ABZU is one of very few non-walking-sim games that managed to avoid pulling me out of the game world to think about the metagame, and it's one of my favorite games of all time because of that. Dear Esther and the like aren't nearly as good, since they're so simple, but they still manage to avoid the metagame distracting from the environment and the story.

[QUOTE=Jacen;52729383]No. Progressing through Myst requires collecting clues and solving puzzles, with the goal of collecting the red or blue pages to free one of the two brothers. It's an exploration based puzzle game.[/QUOTE] This is exactly what you do in Gone Home. You collect clues and solve puzzles. [QUOTE=J!NX;52729647]its mostly because they're counter-reacting to the way people act like they exist as a higher plane of art above other video games. Plus over the semantics of calling stuff like gone home and Dear Esther games when they are more experiences, those two in particular are the only games I've seen the anger towards really, after more came out the hate passed really. you can call it an over-reaction, but its at least somewhat from a legitimate place, at least enough to see why.[/QUOTE] Who actually believes this? Walking sims like Dear Esther and Gone Home demonstrate higher emotional maturity than most games, you can't really argue that. Every other medium is capable of telling a serious story without goofy swordfights or gunning down hundreds of terrorists to carry the plot, but the second a game does the same, it stops being a game? I've never heard someone argue that walking sims are anything more than a video game, but I've heard plenty say that they are less. [QUOTE=J!NX;52729647]That and because its honestly a very hard way of telling a story unless you do it right (Firewatch for example), because walking sims will need plot tension far more than gameplay tension. It's a hard type of game to make good because even a great plot is only as subjectively good as the viewer cares to make it, while good gameplay is a very objective thing even if you dislike a certain genre.[/QUOTE] Good story is subjective, but good gameplay is not? What?! I wish you were right. Of course gameplay is subjective. If it was objective, I'd actually be able to enjoy the Witcher series, which I've failed to get into on three different occasions despite being a fan of action RPGs as a genre. Some people are fans of certain mechanics while others are not. The fact that "save-scumming" is a phrase proves that even basic features like saving can come under contention.

[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;52729778]This is exactly what you do in Gone Home. You collect clues and solve puzzles.[/QUOTE] Correct me if I'm wrong, I've never played Gone Home, only watched some gameplay years ago - but do you ever progress in Gone Home (get to a new area etc?) You explore this one house and the experience comes from reading the notes and piecing together elments in your head by looking at stuff and that's it?

i think calling things like dear esther games does a disservice to them because in many people's minds it elicits an expectation of challenge.

[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;52729778]This is exactly what you do in Gone Home. You collect clues and solve puzzles. Who actually believes this? Walking sims like Dear Esther and Gone Home demonstrate higher emotional maturity than most games, you can't really argue that. Every other medium is capable of telling a serious story without goofy swordfights or gunning down hundreds of terrorists to carry the plot, but the second a game does the same, it stops being a game? I've never heard someone argue that walking sims are anything more than a video game, but I've heard plenty say that they are less.[/QUOTE] I think it's absolutely fair to say that Dear Esther isn't a game. An interactive story piece set in a virtual world, sort of like an art gallery. Just cause it's an application, runs in a 3D world and requires controller input doesn't necessarily mean it's a game, imo. I don't think you're doing Dear Esther any favours either to call it a game, or judge it as one either.

[QUOTE=Loadingue;52722197]Jesus Christ could you guys be any more disrespectful to these devs and the people who enjoy their games? No one would dare shit on other niche games but because "walking sims aren't real games!!" then it's okay? Not that that statement is any true.[/QUOTE] ...what? People shit on all kinds of games.

I love a game with a compelling story but I take issue with walking sims for frankly not being super engaging. They tend to shy away from character interaction with the player. It's weird because there's a pretty stable niche of people (myself included) who fucking adore text based games with lite gameplay elements, and a lot of fan overlap between series. Stuff like Phoenix Wright, 999, hotel dusk, Ghost Trick, Danganronpa, etc. They tell really entertaining stories, keep you hooked, and require way less asset creation. I guess I'm spiteful that many indie devs want to make walking sims instead of text based games. It's like they're putting in extra work in the areas that don't matter and building the story around what they got instead of focusing on the stories first. Atmosphere is great and all but it'll only take a story so far.