IT’S time to switch gears away from Infocom.

Recently I was browsing various websites promoting interactive fiction games, when I came upon this 9:05. I was quickly sucked into a situation I was not expecting. 9:05 was created by Adam Cadre, and if that name sounds familiar it’s because he’s the same Adam Cadre who created Photopia. Much like Photopia, 9:05 had the player take control of a nameless, faceless character. Adam, much like Photopia, used that ambiguity to its fullest advantage.

9:05 was short. When I say short, I mean it was the length of a blink. However, that’s not a criticism toward the game. Rather, I liked how it was short, as it encouraged multiple playthroughs to let you test the depth of the gameplay, especially after I got the shocked at the conclusion of my second playthrough. It was the genius use of the ambiguity Adam used to craft an experience where the player felt guilty by the end because, spoiler alert, you play as a dick.

Indeed, Adam played it coy up to the point I got put in jail for life due to my impersonation of the man I murdered the night before. Of course, I was left totally unaware of that fact until it was too late. It was in that discovery, I actually laughed. I couldn’t help it. I thought it was a great way to point out how people go along with what they thought the game wants, until it the moment it doesn’t. I thought I was a guy late for work, not some bastard, but sure enough, I’m the problem!

Within that context, I’m glad I died in a horrible ball of flame by the time of my last playthrough. I deserved every bit of it. It was fun, though, going back through where the game mentioned where to find the body and the stolen goods. I then went back and found all of those things in subsequent playthroughs. It was funny, too, how the tone shifted once I realized I was a bad guy. I do think that’s more psychological than anything else. That’s just the genius Adam Cadre brought when he designed this bite sized experience.

Overall, I enjoyed the Hell out of 9:05. It’s only downside is once I experienced it once, it’ll be impossible to play again and be surprised. It’s worth the ride, though. The question I have this post is connected to 9:05’s simplicity. Do we take for granted what we can and can’t do in a video game based upon its perceived scope? To elaborate, this game’s genius thrives on the fact it suspends the scope of the situation by lulling the player into a false sense of security. We have no idea we are the killer, unless the off chance we check under the bed. Even then, the urgency of the phone distracted from anything being out of the ordinary. That kind of deception added a whole new layer of depth I haven’t experienced before in a piece of interactive fiction.

Well done, Mr. Cadre! Until next time, READER.