I know this is an old video, but I just finished playing this game today and wanted to look at some content on it. Was a bit skeptical of the low view count, but I've gotta say you made an excellent video! A lot of good points here especially on what can/can't be considered a game. You deserve more viewers.
May try this game, but ever since What Remains of Edith Finch, my standard for walking simulators has become a lot higher. While not every WS needs to be as good as that game, I believe they should attempt to use game mechanics to tell a narrative instead of being a movie you basically click buttons during
you probably dont give a shit but if you guys are stoned like me during the covid times you can stream pretty much all of the latest movies and series on instaflixxer. I've been streaming with my gf for the last weeks :)
Look, I’m from Wisconsin. There are no “mountain towns.” We have big hills. Beautiful big hills. Splendid scenery and lakes and big hills. No goddamn mountains
A game is not about the fail state. A game needs a challenge that tests a skill. Which is why confounded with failure state. It's the existence of player skill that makes it a game.
Well, when it comes to Ethan Carter it actually have a few inherent failure states, one example you actually took up in the video, getting caught by the ghoul in the labyrinth sends you back to the entrance. Another example of failure state is when you chose the wrong door in the house puzzle (you'll know witch one if you've played the game) you, likewise, get sent back to the entrance of the house. Although the penalty for these failures are lenient, merely forcing you to restart that specific section/puzzle, it is still very much a failure state, it's just not very punishing. Then we also have the more obscure and debatable failure states, such as missing one of the optional areas in the game, leading you to not experiencing everything the game has to offer. Its not a clear cut failure state, but it can certainly be seen as a failure/negative outcome for many players nonetheless, assuming most players wish to experience as much as possible. You can of course go back and do the objectives, but to be fair, many games allow you to go back and do over or retread if you wish. additionally, you don't get to experience the story in the intended order, which can also be seen as a sort of failure of sorts.
Really interesting and well-made video! Small correction at the start: It's "run the gamut", not "run the gambit". When I played Vanishing... I couldn't first make sense of the fantastical puzzles and discoveries. Like the space thing. That was the first puzzle I solved, because I missed the trap and train puzzles. So I'm walking in the forest and suddenly I'm in space, then I'm back in the forest. Huh??? That took me out of the game quite a bit. But then as the story unfolded, those bits made sense to me. Finally, I don't think you mentioned enough just how jawdroppingly beautiful this game is. It's SO real and that really helps it. I don't think I would have wanted to keep playing if it looked a lot worse, but now the exploration was actually very interesting, even if I hit a few lulls story-wise.
I'll have to say that I usually play action first person shooters, Rpg action, survival horror , and hack and slash games. But for some odd reason I was boured one day after purchasing and beating The Blair Witch game and it came up on a recommendation list for games to play that are some what similar to what I played. I was hesitant to get it but after watching your review it got me intrigued to adventure outside the usual games I play every day and since I was yearning for a game that lets you think instead of using brute Force to solve problems and I love a good story if it makes sense. So far I'm loving this game it's a little mind boggling but I'm getting the hang of what to when you go to certain areas in the game. Over good game and good review on your input you just earned a subscriber to your channel
Hmm, the term "walking simulator" is used by people who wants to criticize a game for doesn't have anything else other than walking. Is not a genre but a critic for certain kind of games, and most times is done by people who doesn't get it, and I suspect most of those critics are done by people who never played the game. I would qualify Dear Esther and Protheus as walking simulators, but the Vanishing of Ethan Carter definitively has much more than walking, and same with other games wrongly accused of being walking simulators, like Gone Home. Now, if it's not "walking simulator", then which genre is? is just graphical adventure, like the old point & click games, or the new telltale games.
I haven't played or even heard of this game before this video, so I can't really say anything one way or another. However, I despise walking simulators. I'm not saying that they're bad in any shape or form, but I just can't get engaged with them.
I recommend it. It's been discounted a lot since it launched, and as far as a short narrative game, it's one of the best I've played in a while. On PC and PSN, I know.
A really nice outlook on Waking Sims, I esp. liked your argument of "Negative State", as well as the principles of Jane McGonnigal's book. And really well produced. One thing, I think that since you've already spoiled a few puzzles, and the mystery of what a sleeper is, why not go full spoiler territory and explain why story is strong, in a lot more detail? One more, you've stretched some of the concepts a bit too long, and repeated them several times in between, which made the video a bit too long to sit through. You should've cut some parts to structure your thoughts better. Also, during this summer sale, check out Life is Strange, and (esp.)The Beginner's Guide. The latter is something.... different. You'll know... Can explain again why you disliked Gone Home again? I rewatched that section of your video, and still wasn't able to get my head wrapped around it. Why was the presentation bad? or how annoying was the dialogue? Can you go into specifics?
Sure, thanks. I've been trying my hardest to avoid spoilers on games like this because I want people to still be able to enjoy the narrative, despite watching my video. If I spoiled everything about the story, anyone hearing about this game for the first time through my video wouldn't be able to experience the game as purely. I did the same thing with my Danganronpa video: spoiling the story twists would make playing the game for the first time feel far less impactful. And you're right: I did mention some puzzle elements and the surprise in the mine, but I don't believe either reveal any major plot twists. The story of Ethan Carter and the other characters isn't spoiled, and that's what I wanted to keep especially pure. I'm still working on my editing, so that criticism isn't going unlistened. I ramble and I'm working to fix that. Appreciate the critique, though. I really didn't like Gone Home because of how predictable the story was. There weren't any twists that I didn't see coming. I also hated the vocal performances. They felt melodramatic, like the performers were trying to hard to sound like dreamy high-schoolers. Gameplay also felt...I dunno...uninventive and mundane, I suppose.
***** Hmm... I think I get what you mean. I think though that the gameplay of that game reminded me of of old point-and-click games. Still, I see your point. Wanted to say this again, but you should check out The Beginner's Guide. And all the best for your feature videos :)
Walking simulators are a lot like Myst (27 years old btw) but in many ways they suck in comparison. Myst is hard but rewarding, story is a bit weird but fresh and creative. Ethan Carter feels like it's made for really young people. No depth, no challenge. Nothing to remember. Subbed, great channel anyways
While this game involves a lot of walking, it does have fail state and challenge, so it is a true game, while things that you consider bad walking simulators are usually aren't.
That "Fails state" argument to say that certain kinds of games are "not games" is ridiculous, you don't need to invent the "negative state" to justify the right to exist of certain kind of games. The sole idea that the fail state is needed for a game to be a game sounds like an argument made by somebody obsessed with old school consoles that doesn't want to look further. Even prior the existence of videogames there have been puzzles without a fail state, just with the objective to find the solution (like Rubik's cube or the Hanoi's towers). During the 90s the adventure games (like Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle or Grim Fandango) were very popular in home computers and many of those doesn't have fail state. During the 80s there were already text adventures on home computers, but I haven't played them so I don't know if there was common for them to not have fail state. The lack of objective is something much newer, but I don't think objectives should be part of the definition either, usually in sandboxes the objetive is not really important, the most important thing is just to play around and have fun. Stating that games without objective would not be games would imply that Minecraft wouldn't be a game prior the update when they introduced the Ender Dragon and after the update it became a game, of that if you already got 120 stars in Super Mario 64 and you keep playing it then is no longer a game. Lastly: In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter is possible to die, in the substory of the ghosts if one of those gets you, you get a scare, a fadeout and restart the section, pretty much a videogame death.
The whole idea of the "negative state" is a reverse of a player's idealism, meaning not solving a puzzle or incompletion of a task. Also in the case of sandbox and objectives, you create your own objectives which the game allowed. Otherwise you are a passive viewer. A spectator.
I know this is an old video, but I just finished playing this game today and wanted to look at some content on it. Was a bit skeptical of the low view count, but I've gotta say you made an excellent video! A lot of good points here especially on what can/can't be considered a game. You deserve more viewers.
May try this game, but ever since What Remains of Edith Finch, my standard for walking simulators has become a lot higher. While not every WS needs to be as good as that game, I believe they should attempt to use game mechanics to tell a narrative instead of being a movie you basically click buttons during
you probably dont give a shit but if you guys are stoned like me during the covid times you can stream pretty much all of the latest movies and series on instaflixxer. I've been streaming with my gf for the last weeks :)
@Wells Jaxton Yea, I have been watching on instaflixxer for since november myself :)
Look, I’m from Wisconsin. There are no “mountain towns.” We have big hills. Beautiful big hills. Splendid scenery and lakes and big hills. No goddamn mountains
A game is not about the fail state.
A game needs a challenge that tests a skill. Which is why confounded with failure state.
It's the existence of player skill that makes it a game.
Well, when it comes to Ethan Carter it actually have a few inherent failure states, one example you actually took up in the video, getting caught by the ghoul in the labyrinth sends you back to the entrance. Another example of failure state is when you chose the wrong door in the house puzzle (you'll know witch one if you've played the game) you, likewise, get sent back to the entrance of the house.
Although the penalty for these failures are lenient, merely forcing you to restart that specific section/puzzle, it is still very much a failure state, it's just not very punishing.
Then we also have the more obscure and debatable failure states, such as missing one of the optional areas in the game, leading you to not experiencing everything the game has to offer. Its not a clear cut failure state, but it can certainly be seen as a failure/negative outcome for many players nonetheless, assuming most players wish to experience as much as possible. You can of course go back and do the objectives, but to be fair, many games allow you to go back and do over or retread if you wish. additionally, you don't get to experience the story in the intended order, which can also be seen as a sort of failure of sorts.
Finished thia game yeaterday. This was an absolutely magnificent video. Amazing analysis and breakdown of the game and genre. Well done.
Really interesting and well-made video!
Small correction at the start: It's "run the gamut", not "run the gambit".
When I played Vanishing... I couldn't first make sense of the fantastical puzzles and discoveries. Like the space thing. That was the first puzzle I solved, because I missed the trap and train puzzles. So I'm walking in the forest and suddenly I'm in space, then I'm back in the forest. Huh??? That took me out of the game quite a bit. But then as the story unfolded, those bits made sense to me.
Finally, I don't think you mentioned enough just how jawdroppingly beautiful this game is. It's SO real and that really helps it. I don't think I would have wanted to keep playing if it looked a lot worse, but now the exploration was actually very interesting, even if I hit a few lulls story-wise.
I CAN NOT understand how your videos get so few views. Good shit as usual.
I'm small-time. Thank you, though. :)
I'll have to say that I usually play action first person shooters, Rpg action, survival horror , and hack and slash games. But for some odd reason I was boured one day after purchasing and beating The Blair Witch game and it came up on a recommendation list for games to play that are some what similar to what I played. I was hesitant to get it but after watching your review it got me intrigued to adventure outside the usual games I play every day and since I was yearning for a game that lets you think instead of using brute Force to solve problems and I love a good story if it makes sense. So far I'm loving this game it's a little mind boggling but I'm getting the hang of what to when you go to certain areas in the game. Over good game and good review on your input you just earned a subscriber to your channel
Hmm, the term "walking simulator" is used by people who wants to criticize a game for doesn't have anything else other than walking.
Is not a genre but a critic for certain kind of games, and most times is done by people who doesn't get it, and I suspect most of those critics are done by people who never played the game.
I would qualify Dear Esther and Protheus as walking simulators, but the Vanishing of Ethan Carter definitively has much more than walking, and same with other games wrongly accused of being walking simulators, like Gone Home.
Now, if it's not "walking simulator", then which genre is? is just graphical adventure, like the old point & click games, or the new telltale games.
I haven't played or even heard of this game before this video, so I can't really say anything one way or another. However, I despise walking simulators. I'm not saying that they're bad in any shape or form, but I just can't get engaged with them.
I recommend it. It's been discounted a lot since it launched, and as far as a short narrative game, it's one of the best I've played in a while. On PC and PSN, I know.
***** I may give it a go.
dont get me wrong I like it. But the game has only 6 puzzles.
A really nice outlook on Waking Sims, I esp. liked your argument of "Negative State", as well as the principles of Jane McGonnigal's book. And really well produced.
One thing, I think that since you've already spoiled a few puzzles, and the mystery of what a sleeper is, why not go full spoiler territory and explain why story is strong, in a lot more detail?
One more, you've stretched some of the concepts a bit too long, and repeated them several times in between, which made the video a bit too long to sit through. You should've cut some parts to structure your thoughts better.
Also, during this summer sale, check out Life is Strange, and (esp.)The Beginner's Guide. The latter is something.... different. You'll know...
Can explain again why you disliked Gone Home again? I rewatched that section of your video, and still wasn't able to get my head wrapped around it. Why was the presentation bad? or how annoying was the dialogue? Can you go into specifics?
Sure, thanks.
I've been trying my hardest to avoid spoilers on games like this because I want people to still be able to enjoy the narrative, despite watching my video. If I spoiled everything about the story, anyone hearing about this game for the first time through my video wouldn't be able to experience the game as purely. I did the same thing with my Danganronpa video: spoiling the story twists would make playing the game for the first time feel far less impactful.
And you're right: I did mention some puzzle elements and the surprise in the mine, but I don't believe either reveal any major plot twists. The story of Ethan Carter and the other characters isn't spoiled, and that's what I wanted to keep especially pure.
I'm still working on my editing, so that criticism isn't going unlistened. I ramble and I'm working to fix that. Appreciate the critique, though.
I really didn't like Gone Home because of how predictable the story was. There weren't any twists that I didn't see coming. I also hated the vocal performances. They felt melodramatic, like the performers were trying to hard to sound like dreamy high-schoolers. Gameplay also felt...I dunno...uninventive and mundane, I suppose.
***** Hmm... I think I get what you mean. I think though that the gameplay of that game reminded me of of old point-and-click games. Still, I see your point.
Wanted to say this again, but you should check out The Beginner's Guide.
And all the best for your feature videos :)
Walking simulators are a lot like Myst (27 years old btw) but in many ways they suck in comparison. Myst is hard but rewarding, story is a bit weird but fresh and creative. Ethan Carter feels like it's made for really young people. No depth, no challenge. Nothing to remember.
Subbed, great channel anyways
While this game involves a lot of walking, it does have fail state and challenge, so it is a true game, while things that you consider bad walking simulators are usually aren't.
That "Fails state" argument to say that certain kinds of games are "not games" is ridiculous, you don't need to invent the "negative state" to justify the right to exist of certain kind of games.
The sole idea that the fail state is needed for a game to be a game sounds like an argument made by somebody obsessed with old school consoles that doesn't want to look further.
Even prior the existence of videogames there have been puzzles without a fail state, just with the objective to find the solution (like Rubik's cube or the Hanoi's towers). During the 90s the adventure games (like Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle or Grim Fandango) were very popular in home computers and many of those doesn't have fail state.
During the 80s there were already text adventures on home computers, but I haven't played them so I don't know if there was common for them to not have fail state.
The lack of objective is something much newer, but I don't think objectives should be part of the definition either, usually in sandboxes the objetive is not really important, the most important thing is just to play around and have fun.
Stating that games without objective would not be games would imply that Minecraft wouldn't be a game prior the update when they introduced the Ender Dragon and after the update it became a game, of that if you already got 120 stars in Super Mario 64 and you keep playing it then is no longer a game.
Lastly: In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter is possible to die, in the substory of the ghosts if one of those gets you, you get a scare, a fadeout and restart the section, pretty much a videogame death.
The whole idea of the "negative state" is a reverse of a player's idealism, meaning not solving a puzzle or incompletion of a task.
Also in the case of sandbox and objectives, you create your own objectives which the game allowed. Otherwise you are a passive viewer. A spectator.
20th