‘Walking simulators’ and effective game design.

“The Vanishing of Ethan Carter (4k)” by Gronkh is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

A new ‘genre’ of games has quickly arisen on the PC gaming space over the past few years, and has been the subject of much debate since its debut. The ‘walking simulator’.

It’s not clear what actually defines the walking simulator beyond extensive amounts of walking as a main gameplay mechanic, but the general consensus seems to be a game where there’s little to nothing to do, but walk and take in scenery, exposition and events you have little ability to interact with. The debate amongst gaming journalists is whether these ‘games’ can actually be considered part of the gaming medium.

“Dear Esther (2012)” by RMA2kay4 is licensed under CC by 2.0

The first game to spark these debates was Dear Esther. An indie game released in 2011 that originated as a mod for the Source Engine several years prior. The game revolves around a man with an unknown background making his way to a mountain in the middle of a mysterious island. You the player, guide this man around through different environments, finding items, places and other ‘things’ (No spoilers) whilst the protagonist spouts randomised exposition that differs every playthrough.

Aside from the game’s extremely ambiguous narrative that never really comes into its own (Or make sense), can it really be considered a good game? Or even a game? Does walking around in a 3-D space emulating an experience more like a novel or a film fall under the category of actual ‘gameplay’?

Put simply? It depends. In traditional terms, a game is defined by the existence of some kind of “fail state”. Which means that the ability to fail or lose the game is the key trait defining it as a part of the medium. Even this definition has sparked controversy, as many consider never reaching the end of Dear Esther (A game with no traditional fail state) as a fail state in of itself. Proteus and Gone Home are two similar ‘games’ in the genre that are worth checking out if only to help your understanding of the criticisms placed upon the ‘typical’ walking sim.

Two recent releases, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter and The Stanley Parable do the walking sim in ways more deserving of the title ‘video game’, however and have been recognised as such by the gaming community as well.

“Stanley Parable at A MAZE. Berlin 2014” by Iwan Gabovitch is licensed under CC by 2.0

The Stanley Parable is an expertly written work of genius that exists to be a commentary on the gaming medium and all of its typical tropes. While there are no gameplay mechanics beyond walking and the occasional button press, it has numerous endings (Going into the double digits) with various types of ‘fail’ states depending on what you did what you were told by the narrator. The game gets away with its lack of mechanics by being almost a critique of the genre as well as itself.

The Vanishing of Ethan Carter however, is a mystery game that most typically resembles Dear Esther with its forest based setting and beautiful aesthetic, but actually contains some complex gameplay mechanics within it. You are tasked with finding clues, using supernatural powers to put events into chronological order as well as myriad of different logic puzzles to undertake. Not only that, but it has a ‘fail state’ in that you can fail to uncover the entire plot if you fail to decipher clues and events correctly. Unlike the former mentioned, Ethan Carter manages to incorporate lots of walking in pretty environments as well as some complex game mechanics.

So, is the walking sim a genre of video game? If you were expecting a definitive answer, you’re not going to get one. It depends. Some of them are lazy, unimaginative and lacking in all things required to be a video game at all. Some of them, like Dear Esther are trying to be something beautiful, minimalist and artistic in their exclusion of typical game mechanics, but ultimately fall into a very difficult grey area of classification by doing so. And very few, the exceptional ones within the genre, manage to be games in their own right, as well as be classified as a walking simulator.

But even if it’s not a game, does it matter if you enjoyed ‘playing’ it?

Feminism in the game’s industry: Part 1

Rant time.

If you’ve been at all paying attention to some form of game’s journalism over the past few months, you may have heard a multitude of things regarding feminism in gaming. Articles ranging from how game developers need to make more female protagonists, to internet personalities being attacked and sent death threats over what many consider to be misandry (The male targeted equivalent of misogyny) and radical “feminazism”. While these people are wrong in the way they’re expressing their disdain for these feminist based views and are absolute scum for treating people this way under ANY circumstance; I see where they’re coming from.

This all started with a very influential internet personality: Anita Sarkeesian. She is well known for her videos dissecting the various sexist tropes towards women that exist within modern gaming. While she has maintained a large following for several years, the recent rise of awareness regarding feminism both in and out of gaming has garnered more attention than she would have liked. Sites dedicated to gaming news such as PCGamer, Kotaku and Destructoid have been posting articles quite firmly siding with her opinions for quite some time now, and while the journalistic gaming media are content in singing her praises, the majority of the non-journalistic gamers have responded VERY negatively to her views and the influence she will inevitably have on the gaming industry.

Why? You may be asking. The most prevalent criticism brought up by Sarkeesian and the media is the number of playable female protagonists in gaming and how they’re presented. Ubisoft holds much of the responsibility for this uproar having announced the lack of playable female characters in the upcoming Far Cry 4 and Assassins Creed: Unity. And while if main female characters were non-existent, or portrayed in a sexist manner, I would agree one hundred percent, but I ask you: How can you criticise a developer for choosing to create a story led by a male over a female any more than you can bash an author or director for doing the same? By telling developers that they’re in fact sexist for choosing male characters over female ones, you are not only trying to restrict a game studio’s creative freedom and integrity as well as their freedom of speech, but you are essentially turning the sexism cart right around on the male gender by saying that one gender is better than the other. That’s just wrong, no matter how you look at it.

“Bioshock Infinite” by jit is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

There are many female led games in the medium these days: Tomb Raider (2013), Bioshock Infinite, The Last of Us, Mirror’s Edge, Alice Madness Returns, Bayonetta, Beyond: Two Souls, and dozens more. These are all games that have come out in the past 10 years that have important, if not playable, characters that are portrayed as strong, independent women who within their respective games, overcome any male antagonists they encounter. With the exception of Bayonetta (A character who’s independence and strength is directly tied to her sexuality and her use of it to manipulate male characters within the game), only Beyond and Tomb Raider feature any form of sexual violence or abuse or in fact, anything of sexual nature, and these games are restricted to single scenes.

In fact, Tomb Raider’s implied rape scene ultimately ends in being a completely non-sexual murder scene that the player can respond to and prevent. Beyond’s attempted rape scene is a consequence of player choice that is ultimately portrayed realistically and gives the subject matter the respect it deserves, as it is shown to scar and damage the protagonist’s potential sexual advances with her partner later on in the game. Anita even states in her videos that sexual abuse of this nature is okay to use if it is used as a main theme or plot point to be explored by the main game if portrayed realistically and respectfully and not as a throw away prop – But more on that later.

It makes even less sense as to why developers are being labeled as sexist regarding their character choices when you take the settings and themes of these respective games into account. Assassins Creed: Unity is a game about assassins in the French Revolution. A time period where women still lacked the same basic human rights that men had, a time where women would be viewed as unworthy even by the self proclaimed “freedom fighters” because of the time period the game is trying to accurately replicate and represent. Far Cry 4 has less of an excuse, I admit, but the main themes of the franchise involve the use of male power fantasies and violence, their place and effect on mental health and morals in real life scenarios. And I firmly believe this is a kind of narrative device that could NOT be replicated with a female protagonist. If anything, Far Cry is sexist in capitalizing on a male stereotype that men desire to be violent, dominating and want nothing more than to hold power over others.

Ultimately, I disagree with the belief that there are “too many” male game characters. No developer should have to sacrifice their creative freedom and potentially compromise a game’s quality because they are bound by the need to be “diverse”. No. I believe that there is room in the industry for more powerful female characters in gaming. That’s for damn sure. Elizabeth from Bioshock Infinite is one of my favorite characters in all of gaming. A princess-trapped-in-a-tower stereotype rescued by a man, only to transcend her vulnerability to ultimately become the most powerful being in the universe. A clever, inspiring use of something that should have been nothing more than a sexist cliche that laid the foundation for an amazing character and narrative. MORE female characters does not, and should not mean “in place of male characters”. There is room in the industry for more female driven games without compromising or binning the iconic and amazing male led franchises we already have. While I see Sarkeesian’s and many others point in this matter, I do believe that they are failing to see the bigger picture regarding both gaming and feminism in general.

In my next article, I will continue to comment on Sarkeesian’s videos. I will be moving from the most popular view on gaming feminism she has put across to the most controversial: The use of women as background decoration in gaming, and why her video represents a growing trend of a very narrow minded form of women-only feminism.