why buy and play walking simulators?

[Pipe]

when you can watch them on youtube?

now I'm not saying you're "dumb" for buying them or anything, I'm just trying to understand

for Telltale Games, I get it. they're kind of walking simulators but you can kinda dictate how the story goes - that's a reason why you would want to play them yourself

but for walking simulators, I don't get it. you move forward, occasionally interact with a door or something, maybe read some notes, watch cutscenes, and that's it
I don't know what you're missing by just watching a youtube video

[Kargor]

引用自 Basket Case：

I always found story-driven or walking sim games the most counterintuitive to watch. You're missing out on the little gameplay that they had to offer while simultaneously not gaining anything significant out of it because the genre doesn't leave much room for creativity or witty commentary.

Apparently, you've never seen a good Let's Play. Arguably, I don't "miss out" on anything since I've only ever watched Let's Plays for games I had already played: if I want to play the game, then I want to minimize spoilers. If I don't want to play the game, why would I want to watch a Let's Play?

[Mighty Alien Dwarf]

引用自 AustrAlien2010：

Exploring isn't only about moving forward. It's also about deciding what to do.
Deciding what to do is a choice the player has to make based on the information the game world provides. (Story lore, environment, sounds, other actors, and so on.)

When playing a game for the first time, there are various unknown factors or story elements.
Players generally don't simply perform actions. Instead they must first imagine a reality or scenario based around these unknowns. A reality that isn't quite fixed, but is in a state of flux. (As long as the player hasn't finished the game.)
Experiencing this "shifting reality" may be different between individuals and is part of the entertainment.


You can't experience that in a video.

Indeed.

引用自 Kargor：

Apparently, you've never seen a good Let's Play. Arguably, I don't "miss out" on anything since I've only ever watched Let's Plays for games I had already played: if I want to play the game, then I want to minimize spoilers. If I don't want to play the game, why would I want to watch a Let's Play?

Maybe I haven't, but it doesn't change the fact that it's not the scenario OP asked about. They're asking about watching a let's play as as a substitute for playing the game, not after you've experienced it personally. If you have, you do indeed not miss out on anything.

[Pipe]

@AustrAlien2010 just real quick, can you name me a game or two you consider a walking simulator?

[AustrAlien2010]

No, I should not. It's your prerogative. I would rather call it something else, because the games you're referring to, (in which you can open doors or read something,) are not so much about simulating walking. A walking simulator is something else in my opinion. Something less adventurous. Like standing on a treadmill or whatever.

[B]

By this sort of logic call of duty is a point and click adventure game. Click on the enemies head and move to the next on rails scene

[Basho]

this is gonna be a long one, but as you might expect answering a question like that cant really be done in one sentence. so here are some of my thoughts on the topic.

first of all i have an issue with the term "walking simulator", because it used to apply sarcastically to a very narrow type of (flash) games where you literally only held down right arrow to make a 2D character walk slowly along a fixed side scrolling 2D path periodically interspersed with vague text popping up, alluding to some equally vague overarching theme and that was it.

so as far as i can tell, "walking simulator" as a term came about in a mocking manner to make fun of those types of games, and applying that to games like Stanley Parable and Death Stranding makes little sense to me in that context.
granted, games like those two are kinda hard to pin down genre-wise and meanings can change over time, but it still irks me when games are called "walking simulators" for unclear reasons.
but besides, what is even the definition in the first place? lack of combat? because some games that bear the title do have combat. and some FPS games go long stretches without combat too and/or feature environment puzzles etc and extensive storytelling (Halo 1, Half Life 1, System Shock 2).

but if by "walking simulator" we are referring to a game like Death Stranding (as many people do), then what i like about it is the scenery, music, atmosphere, story, etc, and i like being my own director to an extent - being able to set my own tempo, choose what to look at and explore an when, etc. in a movie the camera pans by the building (and when watching someone play as well) but as a player i can go behind it and see whats there, maybe inside it as well and find all sorts of visual story telling that a movie could not have made room for in the first place.
that last part hold true for any game and is one of the main parts that is unique to video games as a medium.

i may have mentioned this elsewhere, but one of my favorite moments was fording a difficult river, and after making it across, drenched and exhausted, it started raining and i found a slight outcrop in a cliff face to shelter under and sit down for a rest.
just sitting there, listening to the rain and the ambient soundtrack, looking around at the scenery, thinking about how i got there and why, and where i need to go next, generally immersing myself in the world, was such a great experience.
i could not have gotten that from watching a video.
same goes for the moment of panic and terror when slipping during a river crossing and getting flushed down stream while watching your cargo scatter among the currents.

also, building roads, or generators and bridges and such in strategic locations, and coming back to find that other people have been using them and thanking you for it, or finding another players trail or strategically placed asset and having that ease your travels, is quite a unique experience that also dont translate well if at all through a video.

there is overall just a lot of mental stuff going on in that game that isnt strictly bound to a script/story that you can just watch a video of, but is more of a personal meditative experience that i kinda want to liken to how you cant just watch a video of someone eating a pie or solve a jigsaw puzzle and expect to get the same experience.
not the best analogy, but i feel it is a lot like that.

also, especially with Death Stranding, if you like hiking IRL that is a huge part of the appeal of the game imo, and the mere mental act of planning your route ahead is such a big part of the experience that it just goes missing completely when watching someone else do it instead.

if it was just the story, then the idea of just watching a video can apply to a lot of games, but for a lot of games a lot of what i've said above is also true. consider a game like Doom (any version) for instance or others like it.
you could watch a video of those too, but not doing the playing yourself and not experiencing the thrill and terror of tense and skin-of-the-teeth victories yourself by your own effort robs you of a lot of the experience and the impact of any twists and surprises.

i could probably go on, but i hope i got some points across about what i like with Death Stranding in particular, even if i very much hesitate to use the term "walking simulator" as already mentioned.

[Incarnate]

Playing them is one thing. Sometimes it's fun to not worry about being killed.

But I don't see the point in buying them. It's like giving money to play a demo or opening your wallet for a tech engine trailer. None of these games have any replayability.

[Pipe]

引用自 Basho：

snip

finally. an answer that isn't just trying to start a pointless internet piss-fight
here, I'll even mark it

edit: oh also thanks to the others who answered in good faith

[Pipe]

引用自 Incarnate：

Playing them is one thing. Sometimes it's fun to not worry about being killed.

But I don't see the point in buying them. It's like giving money to play a demo or opening your wallet for a tech engine trailer. None of these games have any replayability.

yeah that's how I feel. they're pretty short. example:

引用自 Apteryx：

[...] Firewatch [...] only taking 3 hours to beat

[Tito Shivan]

引用自 Basho：

so as far as i can tell, "walking simulator" as a term came about in a mocking manner to make fun of those types of games, and applying that to games like Stanley Parable and Death Stranding makes little sense to me in that context.

I've always kind of loved how the genre appropiated what was a 'mocking definition', flipped it around and owned it.

引用自 Pipe：

yeah that's how I feel. they're pretty short. example:

Not every book needs to be War and Peace. Not every game needs to last for 300 hours.

[TwisterCat]

The appeal for me is the environment of those games. Death Stranding feels more real than most video games, I can picture myself being there. It's immersive, but not like Ready or Not would be, nor RimWorld. It's a type of immersive that I can practically feel. It's serene. It's vast.

The gameplay is the experience.

[Pipe]

引用自 Tito Shivan：

引用自 Pipe：

yeah that's how I feel. they're pretty short. example:

Not every game needs to last for 300 hours.

you know what, good point, I'll give you this one
you reminded me that old nes games were also short. like mega man 2[howlongtobeat.com]

[Kargor]

引用自 Pipe：

you reminded me that old nes games were also short. like mega man 2[howlongtobeat.com]

Still, while I don't know this particular game, savefiles were only invented some time along the way. Similar for level-codes that would allow you to start the game at any level, provided you wrote down the codes as you reached them (or got them from somewhere).

For Arcade games, they had to be short enough so someone would drop another quarter into it. While this wasn't necessary for homecomputer oder console games, it still took them a while to fully get behind the idea of having long games with stories, infinite lives, and the ability to stop playing and come back much later to continue instead of starting at the beginning again.