What exactly is a Walking Simulator to you and how did it become a term in today's gaming?

I'm confuse here, when I see gamers talking about Walking Simulators, they say it's like Uncharted 4 walking simulator. I don't see how that's possible, the game is an action adventure, shooting, stealth approach, and climbing. It never came to my mind as a walking simulator, other games like Soma, I see it as a walking simulator but other then that, how do you know and label a game as a walking simulator?

People that use it are usually trying to degrade the game they're talking about. I would just say they're minimally interactive, cuz all you do is move and click on objects (possibly moving them too). And if they're saying that about games like Uncharted 4, they're hate-trolling cuz they dont like the game.

As for how to classify this "genre", I'd say look at a game like Dear Esther, as that game is literally nothing but walking and listening to a story being told. Games like Gone Home have you piecing a story puzzle together by exploring. The Stanley Parable makes a mockery of choices in that same kind of environment. It's basically the new adventure game model, only without the moon logic puzzles keeping you from going further.

Games meant for dogs.

Basically, games where all you really do is move forward to continue the story with almost no gameplay besides moving around the game world.

Sony movie games, their only dominant genre. A bunch of walking sims for grandmas and non gamers.

Christ that system has 0 competitive or hardcore exclusives.

this

or sony.

case in point.

guess what console this clearly bitter kid owns

Idk, but I can tell you that I call Elite Dangerous a docking simulator, because that's what that game is. Uncharted has a lot more action and story to be called a walking sim. That's not really fair, even in Uncharted's gameplay is stale, it's heavy action.

Walking Simulators can mean two things:

1. it's a semi-literal walking simulator, i.e. "a game where there is little traditional gameplay, except to walk, explore, and progress story (if any exists)." Games like Firewatch, where you literally just walk around a state park, talk on a walkie talkie, and figure stuff out. You can't really call it a first-person shooter despite being played from the first-person perspective with first-person shooter controls.

2. an insult to dull games. Action games that are light on action, i.e. boring. I think you mentioned Uncharted 4 and how some people called it "a walking simulator". That's likely meant as an insult to say that the game is boring because it feels like all you do is walk around, despite the promise of action, adventure, and so forth.

Personally, I don't think it's fair to use it as an insult or in a derogatory sense; the genre might not be new, but it's certainly gaining ground and it is an excellent medium for the more artistic developers out there who want to break out of the traditional mold of violent games, or maybe they want to explain their story through a more immersive means.

I would have loved to make a stealth walker MGS when the original game had a FPV that wasn't stationary.

I think people usually use this term when they can't stomach anything other than constant explosions and gunplay in a game. I shudder to think what these individuals would do with games like Riven where there isn't one gunshot or platform leap to be made and it is solely about puzzle solving and exploration (and you do it by clicking on the screen no less!!!!). Probably black out.

For me, I like variety. I love a good round of UT or Halo, but I need the stimulation that only comes from variety. Some games suit different moods.

The term came from ArmA and DayZ or that is where i heard it first, where all you pretty much did was walk and walk since the map was a decent size.

Calling Uncharted 4 a walking simulator is proof that person has no clue what the term means.

I've heard people say games like Fallout 3 / Skyrim are hiking simulators, but there's alot more to it than just walking around.

I knew it, UC4 isn't some kind of walking simulator as people make it out to be. Never played DayZ, I'll have to look it up, thanks.

A walking simulator is dubbed to games that lack your avatar doing more constructive demands from the input side of things.

When they can do little else but the basic tasks of walking, ducking, and sometimes running. That would be the common perception.

I've found many Indie FP Survival Horror games being worthy of the namesake_

It's something that can hardly be described as a game, and seems to embody the mechanics that will be shoved into 90 percent of games moving forward, like light rpg elements have been for the last 10 years.

yeah I think that's kind of a key point; I can appreciate a good walking simulator (like, an actual walking simulator, not the sarcastic "oh this is boring" walking simulator), but gameplay is secondary it seems, if existant at all.

I think walking sims are more about telling a story through a video game format than actually being a traditional video game. It can mislead a lot of people who expect a certain amount of excitement; I've played a couple and while they were good, I wouldn't recommend them to anyone unless they were really interested in the material.

I think a lot of people here are under the impression that "walking simulator" is not an actual sub-genre of video games, when the truth is that it's not just some term; there are games that either label themselves or can be labeled walking simulators.

*edit: here's a clip of Firewatch, probably the walking simulator I would suggest to anyone that is interested in the genre. True to it's name, all you're doing is walking around (in this case, a state park in Wyoming) and progressing the story, the story being a guy trying to find himself and budding relationship with another person over a walkie talkie. Presentation is usually appealing, artistic...gameplay can be entertaining, but also boring.

When I think of the term "walking simulaor", I always thought it was those sections where the game takes away all your normal control options, and literally all you do is "WALK". So if you can normally do jump, shoot, run, etc actions during normal gameplay. The game takes all that away and forces you to "walk" slowly for cinematic effect. I absolutely cannot stand when games do that. If you want to do a cut scene, do a cutscene. Don't force me to "slow walk" through a 5 minute scene.

Now I'm aware of games that force vast areas of walking and exploration(open world RPG's for instance), but so long as you still have your normal controls I don't really consider those "walking simulators" - it's part of the experience of an adventure game. Though they need to be careful about pacing the quests and preventing the worlds from feeling too barren.

I have never heard the term outside of DayZ, ArmAIII

Because literally all you do for a waste majority of the game is walk. Since it´s absolute pointless to camp, the map in those 2 games are so big that the chance of you meeting another player is slim to none if you stay in one spot.

DayZ is last i checked still in Early access and has not gotten any update for months. and ArmAIII is released but has a huge map and almost zero player base to cover the massive maps.

It's just simply a game where most of the narrative unfolds as you're walking around enjoying the scenery. If there's very little gameplay in it, it's a walking simulator. I could probably make a case that The Last of Us is a walking simulator, but I would have to measure how much time I'm actually walking around doing nothing versus killing enemies.

I'd probably have nothing against Walking Simulators if they weren't all pretentious artsy fartsy crap. Probably the only Walking Simulator I can stomach is Stanely's Parable.

As for what a walking simulator is, a story driven, narrative driven game with little to no obstacles to present a challenge to the player and that's perfectly fine, I don't have a problem with that, I have a problem with the nature of the stories and their presentation. They're esentially visual novels but where the player takes direct control of the protagonist and that's fantastic for somebody like me who hates reading, wish all the popular VNs were fully voiced VNs, maybe then I'd play them. Sadly, the genre is plagued by pretentious, artsy titles with dead worlds where we rarely see characters show their faces and such.

The genere itself is great, the developers drawn to it who want to make games in this genere are...not the type of people I like associating myself with in life, too artsy and too up their own butts.

To me, they are sections of a game that give you 0 options outside of what the game forces you to do. You're interaction with the game becomes entirely irrelevant. So any of the many walking parts or climbing parts in Uncharted I'd consider pointless "gameplay" sections.

I'd categorize Uncharted 2 as a third person shooter. When the game actually gives you control, it's during shoot out sections. Action adventure denotes exploration/ more openness in my mind. Like the Batman Arkham games, Zelda, or Metroid.

Have you played Life is Strange? Well, that's the perfect example of walking simulator.

Don't bump old threads.

-Byshop