Not the op, but I didn't interpret the comment as being restricted to certain types.
I particularly dislike any walkthrough. An optional one still needs user-interaction to dismiss. Sometimes multiple interactions.
A few specifics:
- As a first-time visitor to a product, I have usually joined the product with an initial particular motivating intent. Walkthroughs can't typically know this intent (and optimising multiple walkthroughs for many intents would be a challenge), so you're just putting extra clicks in the way of me getting to the thing I joined for.
- If walkthrough experiences were genuinely of use, they'd be integrated as a permanent product feature. Examples of things like this are Instagram / Facebook / Twitter's "discover" features. These are slightly different as they're about discovering users, not features, but the general idea is the same: a user wants guidance.
If it's "click here to dismiss this walkthrough we just started", yes. If it's "click here to view a walkthrough", then... no? User interaction is required to start. That would be optional.
If you're thinking it's the "we auto started something and you can optionally stop it" then yeah, I agree, those are often annoying.
It's essentially the ux equivalent of an ad or newsletter popup.
Imagine that these exist _alongside_ step-by-step documentation reachable by specific searches "How do I download in CSV?".
This is an optional walk-through on the landing page, for those who prefer that over signing up and trying it themselves.