Games of 2009: Noby Noby Boy

Stretching a point.

"I believe that it is alright to create a stupid and irresponsible game, I really do."

That's my favourite quote of 2009. It comes from the second interview I did with Keita Takahashi, the endearingly loopy creator of Katamari Damacy, about his odd little PS3 download game, Noby Noby Boy. In fact, Takahashi uttered all my favourite quotes of 2009 (some more of those later), and Noby Noby Boy furnished my single favourite gaming experience of the year too, despite barely being a game at all.

But those aren't the reasons this morsel of dadaist interactive anarchy is my favourite game of the year. Above all, I love Noby Noby Boy for what it stands for. I love it for standing for anything at all. This stupid and irresponsible game, and the wilfully stupid and irresponsible man behind it, secretly had a deadly serious point to make about what videogames are and where they are going - and the contrast with what the rest of the industry got up to in 2009 could not have been sharper.

Back in February, I sat in a cavernous, empty conference room on a business park somewhere on the outskirts of Paris, and played Noby Noby Boy for several hours for our review. I was completely entranced.

'Games of 2009: Noby Noby Boy' Screenshot 1

I often wonder whether my relationship with Noby Noby Boy would have been different if I hadn't been reviewing it, or even if I'd been reviewing it at home, in less abstracted surroundings, with more distractions around me. I know a lot of people who downloaded it, played it for five minutes and then gave up, failing to see the point. I don't blame them - because Noby Noby Boy has no point.

Or rather, it has no goal. It sets you no challenges, at least not directly, and offers no obstacles for you to overcome. It just gives you a plaything - BOY, a silly little quadruped with two independently mobile ends and a floppy snake of a body that can stretch to infinite length - and a playground, in the form of randomly-generated plots of land dotted with strange animals, people, machines and structures. That's it. As far as having fun is concerned, you're on your own.

It's disconcerting. As grown-up gamers, we're very used to throwing the term "sandbox" around, but we're not used to being confronted with one. We need targets. We need challenges. We need a job to do. We've forgotten what it's like to sit down with a toy and make up our own games and our own stories, even though it's something we all did as children and a vital part of what makes us human. We're so bound up in playing games that we've forgotten how to just play.

Keita Takahashi wanted to remind us. He'd been depressed by the formulaic objectives in the otherwise free-spirited Katamari, he told the audience in his memorable Game Developers Conference session in March. "Of course there are games that absorb these things and result in something wonderful," he said. "But I wanted to throw these off and start from scratch with what games should be." There are many who would debate that this is what games should be, or at least the definition of the word game as he uses it, and they'd have a point - but if nothing else, his willingness to fly in the face of all received wisdom about game design was thrilling.

And, on me at least, it worked. On that day in February, with nothing to do for hours but fool around with Takahashi's ridiculous digital noodle, I remembered - slowly, but with a deepening joy - how to play. I explored the possibilities of the deceptively deep range of interactions, of the wild, skittering inertia of the controls.

I set my own goals: lasso a cloud down to earth, drape BOY between skyscrapers like a washing line. And the game rewarded me, with trophies, surprises, random happenings, hilarious slapstick and an endless supply of new maps littered with new toys. By the end of the day I was in a completely different frame of mind, and had rediscovered a simple, inquisitive pleasure in interaction that, as a gamer - especially one who does it for a living - it's all too easy to forget in the race to the next achievement.

Noby Noby Boy was the only game I played in 2009 that changed the way I thought.

Naturally, it flopped. No-one got it. A few more people might have got it if the camera hadn't been a hideous exercise in finger-twisting motion-control masochism, but not many. It was too strange, too formless, too childlike. Takahashi's bosses at Namco Bandai complained about the design and asked him to give the player goals or it wouldn't sell, and they were right. "I was told something like 'make it look more like a game', 'make it easier to understand', 'make it more accessible' I think," Takahashi said in our first interview. "I just tried not to care about what I was being told. To be honest, I don't really remember."

Does that make him a hero, or just stupid and irresponsible? Well, probably both, but it makes him a hero to me, and not just because his absurd game gave me an epiphany in a conference room on the outskirts of Paris. Noby Noby Boy rejects all expectations, norms and commercial reason. It doesn't care about what will sell or about patting its players on the head. The only things Takahashi cared about were making the game he wanted himself, and challenging our assumptions about what games are and what they can do. Nobody else could tell him what his game was supposed to be.

'Games of 2009: Noby Noby Boy' Screenshot 2

Videogaming is a young medium, but it's getting old before its years. In 2009, it's been deeply conservative. There were many excellent releases, but how many of them surprised us, or changed how we felt about games? Where was the Ico, the Deus Ex, the Super Mario 64? With New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Zelda: Spirit Tracks, Nintendo had to turn the clock back a quarter of a century to regain its creative health. Uncharted 2 and Batman: Arkham Asylum are perfect paragons of structure and presentation, of streamlined gratification, of reducing the number of button-presses between us and what we expect. I loved playing these games, of course I did; they gave me a job to do and made me feel good doing it. They were supremely easy to consume.

But you can't consume Noby Noby Boy. You can't complete it. It offers you no validation or sense of accomplishment. This was the game that dared to wonder why I wanted to be told what to do in order to have fun; the game that dared to ask me what I felt like doing myself; the game that dared to ask me what I thought a game was, rather than telling me what it thought I wanted to hear.

You don't have to like Noby Noby Boy. You don't have to understand it. You're allowed to think it's stupid and broken because, well, it kind of is. But you do have to listen to what Keita Takahashi is saying with it, a message he very eloquently delivered to his fellow game creators at GDC.

"If we love videogames, we have to feel more, and observe more, and enjoy more while we create games. There is no completion in games, they are always developing, but despite that we say that there is a certain way that games have to be.

"Perhaps we are hiding behind these rules, and relying on past experiences. Perhaps we have to ignore the players and our companies. Maybe we should just try creating a game that we like."

Check out the Editor's blog to find out more about our Games of 2009.

Comments (35) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • IronGiant #1 2 years ago

    Bought it.. complete waste of money unfortunately.
  • Ged42 #2 2 years ago

    I just want to know where you can get one of those knitted Noby Noby Boys from the front page pic :D
  • ianegg #3 2 years ago

    I love this game. I got into the top 50 and stopped playing when they started fucking around with random multipliers. Was cool to see Jupiter, but I only played for about 10 mins.

    Other than the thumbs down, I completely agree with disc.

    I hope Takahashi wins the lottery.
  • djed #4 2 years ago

    Hah, lassoing those doughnut clouds was the first thing I did, too!
    Then I went vegetarian and only ate trees, flowers and strange metallic objects. Then I farted a car and ruined a playground :(
  • brn #5 2 years ago

    Noby Noby Boy was great. I think most people was disappointed because they expected a game like Katamary Damacy. For the price of €2?

    I had a full day where and my gf would just sit around and play around with the thing, getting all the trophies, try different ways of stretching the BOY. Loved the idea that everyone on earth worked together to get to the moon.
    Then I put it down until they released the multiplayer patch and now it's a perfect party game. Just messing around with silly things is perfect when you're drunk. Oh and I've been to Mars as well.

    I think I'm gonna visit Jupiter today!
  • ChrisS #6 2 years ago

    Lovely stuff. A brave choice, Mr. Welsh and a case well-argued.
  • oupe #7 2 years ago

    I love what this game stands for, too bad I disliked the controls and camera.

  • wobbly_Bob #8 2 years ago

    oh eurogamer...

    /shakes head
  • Slint1000 #9 2 years ago

    I bought this the moment it came out and got a lot of fun out of it every time I played it.

    I love the fact that it is up to you as the player to set goals or just mess about doing very silly things.

    It's just great and i think more people should give it a chance and let their preconceptions and inhibitions free and give it a try.
  • brainbird #10 2 years ago

    "Complete waste of money"? Really? At that price?

    I see digital downloads as an excellent occasion to try out new concepts and break new grounds. Something Keita Takahashi seems eager to do. Supporting new ideas with a minimal amount of money is not a complete waste of money, is it?

    That said, the camera in Noby Noby Boy was terrible.
  • JohnnyWashnGo #11 2 years ago

    Bought it when it hit the PSN store and enjoyed it for the best part of 15 minutes. After that the novelty factor of controlling two ends of a stretchable avatar wore very thin.

    The lack of any real goals proved the killer for me. Other than giving my length to GIRL, there was sod all to do and in a year full of great games that have objectives to complete and stories to take part in, this game never got played again.

    I think of it as an experiment in how far people will go to waste time.
  • antasari #12 2 years ago

    Barely touched it since it came out. But I'm glad it exists.
  • Widge #13 2 years ago

    Reminded me of the strange faffing around games you could get on the C64 like Little Computer People. I played it for a bit, for its part, and generally just arsed about, then got obsessed with getting in the top stretchers. After a while other games came along to play, but for a punt, I got money out of it.
  • ApatheticRhino #14 2 years ago

    I think the worst thing about this game is the inclusion of trophies. There should be absolutly no definable objectives or rewards. I love what the game stands for.

    It's unfortunate that anyone who has played enough videogames will have been mentally conditioned to desire such specific mechanics (including myself). It's extremely restrictive and narrow when you step back and imagine all the different things that can be done with an interactive picture. Yet we want goals, mechanics to understand, achievements set by the game designers rather than by ourselves. Immersion and freedom seem to drop rather low down the list.

    The fact that so many people just don't get it drives the message further. You only need to watch 6 year old play to realise how restricted your mindset has become thanks to a long history of formulaic gaming.
  • dsmx #15 2 years ago

    The amount of restriction in games is what I can't understand these days. We should be living in an age of games where there is much more freedom in what we can do, years ago we had to have restrictions where necessary because the systems couldn't handle big areas due to the small pools of memory and crappy graphics rendering.

    These restrictions have been lifted we should be living in an age where games like Noby Noby Boy should be the rule not the exception. The point of a game is escapism, to create a world where you lose yourself in it. Even deus ex has more freedom in what you can do than every game on the market to this day.

    Technology has moved forward games have not.
  • webcider #16 2 years ago

    I actually loved this game not that i keep coming back to it over and over its been a while but i must admit its really nice to play and i had a ton of fun playing it. My favorite moment is when i decided to put my boy in those rings under the wings on the airplanes. i got both wings connected and was ready to set out when a car comes crushing into the plane and gave me the push to fall over the edge with the connected wings. It was rather cool because the timing was perfect and it made sense to me that the plane after i done my start up sequence begang to roll and eventually fly "fall" i even got the moment youtubed.

    Link: http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=91KEfqdpWaI
    Edited by 1 at 28/12/09 @ 12:40
  • Accordi0n #17 2 years ago

    GOTY for me.

    Games have become commodity, played for the act of completion not the experience, this game avoids that.

    I dont play it very much, but when i do i get lost in those random spaces just watching the bizarre AI of deformed animals as they gather around BOY in wonder, running away when i try to eat them and occasionally performing some strange mating call.

    Have you ever seen the purple stuffed worm in flap jaw space do a raw blink on Hari Kiri rock?
    No, but there is no better place to look!
  • GamesConnoisseur #18 2 years ago

    I m one of those 'Did not get it' crowd unfortunately, I tried to like it never mind loving it, but found it a bit pointless. Sandbox type of game are fun and great to experiment with. Seem quite a few gamers share the same sentiment, so a kind of marmite perhaps?!

    Happy for those who love the game and consider it GOTY, as obviously not all GOTY nominations are loved by everyone in the planet.

    I can see the appeal of the game though, but I would be dead upset if Trials HD doesnt feature and this does, as for my own humble little opinion I know which I enjoy the most!
  • oreillymj #19 2 years ago

    It's all well and good to commend someone else for committing commercial suicide by giving us something different.
    But then Euroganer (and all the other review sites) give Super Mario 64 Galaxy World Brothers 15 a 9/10 for delivering more of the same with a few gfx tweaks.

    We should have all been deeply worried when the word "franchise" was applied to gaming. We admit that FIFA and PES change little from year to year, and people for some reason go out and buy them. But they still get a an 8 or 9 instead of the 4 or 5 they deserve.

    If we are to get new experiences, then the review sites need to practice what they preach but giving these lazy sequels a 2 or 3 would be commercial suicide. Reward innovation even if it's flawed just for the work involved in giving us something different.
    Edited by 1 at 28/12/09 @ 14:10
  • spliffhead #20 2 years ago

    Hey Oli,

    My 5 and 7 year olds got it in about a minute, they still spend hours stretching Noby around trees, making him eat people an poo them out.

    Then make him wrap himself into a giant poo too and fall off the edge.

    Months on it's still a great babysitter, we all need to regress a little sometimes.

  • dsmx #21 2 years ago

    Sadly if you don't find this game fun then your inner child is dead. The point of the game if you could call it that was for you to create fun, much like in GTA 4 where people created fun by getting 8 of them in a bus and shooting at anything that comes by. It's the same kind of mentality the only difference is there are no guns.
  • webcider #22 2 years ago

    hammerhead666:

    How would you know if its a poor game if your inner child isn't existing / dead already :)
  • shotgun44 #23 2 years ago

    "oh eurogamer...

    /shakes head "

    ^why this? I didn't particularly like this game either but last time I checked, I wasn't the one writing an article about a game that I loved...
  • Wyrm #24 2 years ago

    Love the idea that a game like this can be released on the PS3, but unlike the brilliance of other non-typical fare such as Flower, I played Noby Noby Boy for about 10 minutes and have never touched it again. Most certainly not a 'Game of 2009'.
  • cherryuk #25 2 years ago

    I WANT THAT KNITTED NOBY NOBY AS WALLPAPER IT'S COOL!
  • Scimarad #26 2 years ago

    I got very bored of this very quickly.
  • cherryuk #27 2 years ago

    I've got the link of some lovely crocheted Noby Noby Boy pics & high res!!!!

    http://ww w.etsy.com/view_listing.php?lis...
  • busboy33 #28 2 years ago

    I have to but my vote firmly in the "not a game" camp . . . and the article actually made my point for me.

    A game with no rules, no purpose and no goal isn't a game. It is a toy. A toy can be fun, but it isn't a game. A slinky is a fun toy, but it isn't a game. Now, if you take a slinky and decide to see how steep a stairwell you can walk it down before it tumbles over, you have made a game with the toy, but the toy itself isn't a game. Bouncing a ball is playing with a toy, not a game. Seeing how many times you can bounce it, or trying to bounce it from a specific vantage point -- now its a game. Hopping isn't a game. Hopscotch is.

    An absolutely crucial component of "game" is a purpose or goal. I can't concieve of a "game" that does not have one. IMO, it is the defining difference between "game" and "play". "Play" is doing something that you enjoy. If there is no "play" in a game, then its a pretty sh!tty game ("who can jam this dart into their eye the quickest?";).

    But "play" by itself does not make a game. Once some structure is overlayed upon "play", then there is a game.

    A "sandbox" game (like GTA or Infamous/Prototype) is a game that also functiomns as a toy. You can play with the open-end aspects of the game, but there is an actual game that exists which the player is just ignoring while they explore and innovate. Games are of necessity built on toys (things to play with), but NNBoy doesn't have a "game" facet to it.

    Great idea. Much respect and credit for making something new and different.

    But its not a game.
  • ApatheticRhino #29 2 years ago

    Busboy- Maybe we need more toys and less games then. Why does the vast majority of interactive media have to come in form of a game?

    Spliffhead- That's great. I don't know if you misunderstood what i ment. I'm comparing the restricted mindset us adult gamers have aquired to the freedom a childs mind has. It's amazing watching kids play, my nephew will just play the same level of mario over and over just for the fun of it, he doesn't care about progress or completion.

    To put it bluntly, most games treat us like unimaginative soulless muffins to be spoonfed fun. Given how successful gamerscore and trophies have become i get the feeling they're probably right.

  • DrStrangelove #30 2 years ago

    I was never interested in this game. Will buy it now.
  • Tyronne #31 2 years ago

    Truth be told I find it a fum game to play for a few hours at a time but then leave it for a while and then return to it.

    its one of my guilty pleasures as its so utterly pointless.
  • busboy33 #32 2 years ago

    @ApatheticRhino:

    I'm all for toys. Toys are good, and I'm no fan of limiting toys. Show me a petition for more toys and I'll sign it in a heartbeat. I'm all for NNBoy -- I'm glad that a developer made a fun little doodad.

    But we're on eurogamer.net, not eurotoys.net. No disrespect intended to toys, but personally I hesitate to call them a game. Fun, yes. Game, no.

    @killa:
    "Well it came as a download on PSN, I downloaded it play around with my Sixaxis on it and love it."
    Aside from the "love it" part, how is that different than Quore? You download it off PSN. You manipulate it with your sixaxis (cycle menus, activate actions like play/pause of video, etc.). If the joy of interface flips your switches, perhaps you even love it. Is Quore a game?
    How about XBL Avatars (or Home Avatars)? I download them from the service. I play with them with my controller (make them dance, move about, etc.). But Avatars and Home aren't games (as the Home defenders constantly point out) -- they are toys with which you can play games with.

    I suppose you could define "goal/objective" to include unlocking new worlds, but personally I think that's a stretch that's not justified. That's not a goal -- its just something that happens. What if the new planets were unlocked for every 10,000 downloads? What if the new planets were unlocked on the 1st of every month? To me, that isn't an "objective" so much as a bonus. If you were the only person who bought NNBoy, then could you ever unlock another planet? Everybody isn't "working together" -- everybody is doing their own thing, and it just so happens that cumulatively the designers decided to gove you DL contontent for each meta-milestone. Do people stretch to lasso a cloud to unlock passage for the moon . . . or do they do it because they are playing with their toy?
    And what happens when you unlock another planet? Nothing really -- new assets, but "game"-wise what is the difference between a "level" with people characters and a level with martian characters? The asset might look different . . . but the toy is the same. As an example, let's assume that after a million people solve their Rubik's Cubes, the manufacturer gave everybody new color stickers to replace the ones already on the cube. Instead of yellow, blue, red and green, now your Cube would be white, black, brown and purple. Was the "game" to get new stickers for your Cube?
    It seems like unlocking new levels for NNBoy isn't the "objective", at least based on commenters here and elsewhere. Simply playing with NNBoy appears to be the "point". And again, that's a fine and good reason for existence. I just don't see that being a "game" as opposed to a "toy".

    I'm all for "breaking traditional paradigms", thinking outside the box, and all that. But for something to be a "game", then by definition there must be things that are "not game". That means there has to be an actual line or factor that seperates one from the other.

    "Work is something a body is obliged to do and play is something a body is not obliged to do". When Tom Sawyer (was it Sawyer or Huckleberry Finn? I always get those two confused) tricked his friends into whitewashing the fence by making them think they were enjoying themselves, that they wanted to it, he made the activity "play". But it wasn't a game -- just play. To be a game, there would need to be something evaluating the activity -- who can do it fastest, how much can you do, etc.
    NNBoy is certainly "play", but any "game" comes from you -- how long can you stretch, can you reach from point A to point B, etc. You make games by playing with the toy. As a "game" it doesn't exist (which as people are saying seems to be its charm).

    I just don't see how a "not game" can be a "good game". Again, let me be explicit -- none of this is a knock against NNBoy. Not being a game doesn't make it any worse, just like NNBoy not being a movie doesn't mean it is less fun or meritorious. A slinky isn't a game, but its still a damn fun toy. I just don't think the Slinky should categorized as "games of the last century".
  • Mr.DNA #33 2 years ago

    I got more out of this game watching the Giant Bomb crew playing it in a Quick Look than I did actually playing it ("playing with it"?) myself. Not something that I will play for longer than the half an hour or so I spent on it after I bought it, but I do like its zany art style and tone. Yay for Japanese madness.
  • mcwildcard #34 2 years ago

    I bought this with an idea of what Takahashi was getting at, and although I didn't play with it as much as it probably deserved, I did nejoy it and think he made a very clear point about gaming and the way we look at it
    I remember when I was about 7 years old and my mum bought me a Jetfire Transformer, it was an epic moment, I played with that thing for years and loved it to bits.
    No objectives, no tasks or missions, just a toy and my imagination.

    That's what Takahashi wanted to bring back, the joy of playing with something for the sake of enjoyment, not because it needed to be 'conquered'.
    It's a shame he had to hoodwink his bosses to achieve it, and a greater shame that more people didn't 'get it', because a return to the pure innocent joy of playing with something just for fun is priceless as far as I'm concerned.

    I hope his career isn't over due to this, because he's undoubtedly an absolute genius.
  • distantholler #35 2 years ago

    Thanks for the article! I enjoyed the game and got 100% on it.