In Defense of me0wtr0n

I was wrong to refer to me0wtr0n as a 0-button game, and I want to talk about that. me0wtr0n has a single button, requires the use of a single button, and uses it very specifically and judiciously. If you haven't played the game, you can try it out here. It takes less than 5 minutes.

OK! You're still with me. What was your score? Maybe write it in the comments.

me0wtr0n is a game heavily inspired by Noby Noby Boy. The environment and AI in Noby Noby Boy comprise a wonderfully playful world, but the game rules and all your control of Boy provide only a tiny sense of overall agency in the universe. As a player, you eventually lose your sense of self and the weight of your decisions. I personally found that to be a groundbreaking moment in the expressive power of video games.

Kokoromi allowed us to construct stripped ideas of interactivity and present them to GDC. The more obvious decision for me was to try a one-button version of Noby Noby Boy, and Syed and I did exactly that. It was ok. But I think we are doing something far more significant by reducing interactivity to an entirely passive relationship with the game rules and wondering about the questions that brings up about context in video games.

me0wtr0n consists entirely of a single cut-scene and a game with no input, both aesthetically similar and lasting similar durations. What's the difference? The start button. You have to choose to play me0wtr0n.

The intro, the credits, the final score, and the secret hallway in me0wtr0n are all cut-scenes that run on automatic timed loops, never reaching the gameplay scene until the player presses start. If me0wtr0n moved without player input from the non-interactive scripted introduction into the non-interactive rule-based gameplay, wouldn't the entire experience feel like watching an animated movie? But it's not, right?

This is why video games are sometimes more interesting than other games. Hell, this is why cut scenes are interesting too.

We added a secret hallway level that we didn't quite finish. Getting me0wtr0n out to the hallway would increase your score to 1,000,000 and continue to rack up really high from there. The high scores sheet of paper at GDC would fill up with scores that seemed entirely impossible, and the conference-goers would be incredulous, they'd want to explore this mysterious game world some more.

But what does it mean to explore when all you can do is decide to keep trying? Why would you press the button to play me0wtr0n? Is it the score? Are the rules fun? Is it a narrative you want to complete? Is it simply to watch the eye candy in the next cut scene? Should we have made a me0wtr0n pachinko machine?

I don't know. These are all great questions!

What do you think?

Name
Comment
	Add a Comment

MARI OK OK OK OK OK OK - (Feb 08, 9:00PM)

39048!!! YEAH YEAH YEAH

Kunal - (Feb 03, 1:36PM)

28524 !

Dillon - (Feb 03, 11:37AM)

I got 20000 on my first try The keyboard cat is good points

Knaul - (Feb 02, 12:10PM)

I'm getting the feeling we should make a me0wtr0n pachinko machine...

Eric - (Feb 02, 11:39AM)

I think this statement would be stronger if the fifth paragraph didn't end with "Wow!"

Marc - (Feb 02, 12:34AM)

This is a great argument for moral responsibility in the world of a hard determinist. I felt compelled to help me0wtr0n, and even if i hadn't been, I would not have been allowed to not play once I started the game. It truly is a 1-time-button game. I would like to see the next iteration: a true 0-button game.

Kunal - (Feb 02, 12:15AM)

I really have no idea if this page is sarcastic.

Kunal - (Feb 01, 11:58PM)

TRIVIA: me0wtr0n actually has a javascript particle physics probability engine. when me0wtr0n is LOL'ing, he actually moves exactly like an electron in the 2s orbital of a hydrogen atom can empirically be expected to move. It's hard to prove this, though.

Kunal - (Feb 01, 11:24PM)

LOL