indiedesigninterview

How Baby Steps’ ‘Pathetic’ Protagonist Became an Anti-Hero Players Love

UUnknown

2026-02-13

9 min read

How Baby Steps’ whiny Nate redefines empathy in indie games. Lessons for designers on character risk, fairness and player identification.

When players complain protagonists feel flat, Baby Steps answers with a whine

Tired of protagonist designs that read like polished facsimiles of player ego? Do gamers worry that most leads are built to flatter rather than challenge, leaving little room for messy, human identification? Those are real pain points for our community in 2026 — players want fairness, honesty, and characters who earn empathy instead of demanding it. Baby Steps and its deliberately “pathetic” protagonist, Nate, flipped that script, and the lessons from its design are essential for any indies and AA studios or narrative lead who wants empathy without patronage.

The elevator: why Nate matters now

In late 2025 and into early 2026, indies and AA studios increasingly permitted protagonists who are unlikable, whiny, or unprepared — but few did so as openly and lovingly as Baby Steps. The game’s creators, including Gabe Cuzzillo and Bennett Foddy, leaned into an aesthetic of mockery that doubles as authenticity. Nate isn’t a blank slate; he is a specific, flawed person in a onesie who complains while climbing a mountain. That specificity is the point.

“I don’t know why he is in a onesie and has a big ass,” Gabe Cuzzillo shrugged. “Bennett just came in with that at some point.”

That line — playful, candid — illustrates the design philosophy at work. By giving Nate a set of odd, exaggerated traits, the designers forced players to confront a character who is not designed to mirror them. Instead, players are invited to project, judge, sympathize, and gradually understand.

How deliberate “patheticness” becomes empathy

Designing a whiny, unprepared protagonist is a high-risk, high-reward move. Here’s why it works for Nate and why it’s useful as a model.

1. Specificity breeds recognition

When a character is highly specific — a russet-bearded man in a onesie, for instance — players don’t see a blank avatar. They see choices. Specific traits reduce the uncanny valley of generic design and create an emotional hook: either you laugh, you cringe, or you relate. That tension is fertile ground for empathy because it forces a judgment that can evolve into understanding.

2. Mechanical and narrative alignment

Nate’s physical awkwardness is mirrored in the game’s mechanics. The struggle up a mountain in Baby Steps is not just a platforming challenge; it’s a narrative beat that mimes the protagonist’s internal state. When mechanics and narrative communicate the same vulnerability, players don’t just watch Nate fail — they feel the cadence of his attempts. That alignment is a core principle for player identification. Designers looking for concrete system-and-story alignment can get practical guidance from a broader set of edge-first patterns that show how low-latency systems and dynamic state can power procedural empathy systems in modern games.

Baby Steps trades in “loving mockery.” The humor is not designed to punch down at vulnerability but to create a safe distance where players can openly criticize and then soften. Bennett Foddy’s history with intentionally exasperating designs (QWOP, Getting Over It) informs this approach: frustration becomes part of the shared experience, and shared experiences build communities.

Design choices that made Nate work

Let’s break down the concrete choices that shaped Nate and made that risk pay off. Each of these is actionable for devs working on protagonists who aren’t strictly likable.

Visual exaggeration

Big, cartoonish features (the onesie, the butt, the beard, the glasses) create instant personality without lengthy exposition. Visual shorthand lets players infer backstory and foibles quickly. Implement this by choosing 2–3 exaggerated traits that hint at a life lived off-camera.

Vocal tone and performance

Grumbles, mutters, and half-explained complaints humanize Nate. Your protagonist’s voice should complement their physicality: awkward movements need awkward words. In practice, record multiple micro-utterances and play them during moments of failure or rest to create rhythm and character continuity.

Mechanics that reflect incompetence

Don’t mask incompetence using gimmick difficulty. Instead, let controls or constraints reinforce the character’s unpreparedness. For Baby Steps, climbing that mountain with an awkward animation and deliberate limitations lets the player experience Nate’s inexperience rather than merely read about it in text.

Small reveals, big payoff

Let players uncover why Nate is the way he is via tiny environmental cues and optional logs rather than forced cutscenes. This respects player agency and rewards curiosity — a fairness principle that builds trust between creator and player.

Player identification vs. player projection

Traditional protagonist design tends to favor projection: the player sees themselves. Nate encourages identification instead: the player understands someone else. Those are different psychological processes. Projection erases difference; identification sustains it. With identification, empathy grows through observation and interaction, not through substituting the player’s preferences for the protagonist’s.

Practical test for designers

Prototype a protagonist with at least one glaring personal flaw that affects gameplay.
Run A/B playtests: one version favors blank-slate traits, the other specific, awkward traits.
Measure not only completion rates but language in player feedback: do players describe feelings toward the character? Do they use empathy language (“I felt bad for him”)?

Indie risk-taking: why small teams can push harder

Indies like the creators of Baby Steps can take these risks because they have lower commercial expectations and direct relationships with communities. That freedom is a fairness advantage: you’re allowed to fail in pursuit of sincerity. But risk must be managed — a flawed protagonist will alienate some players, and teams must be deliberate about how they communicate intent and handle backlash.

Guidelines for risk management

State intent clearly: use dev diaries and launch notes to explain the joke, the critique, or the empathy experiment.
Offer opt-outs: provide an optional “skip voice” or “tune down cringe” setting for players sensitive to satire-heavy content.
Moderate community spaces: enforce anti-harassment rules so players who sympathize with a flawed protagonist aren’t drowned out by abuse. See the recent platform policy shifts for context on moderation expectations in 2026.
Collect qualitative feedback: track language in player chat and reviews to understand if the character elicits empathy or mere mockery — you can scale collection with tools that automate metadata extraction to surface emotional language.

Fairness and transparency: design policies for controversial leads

When you intentionally make a protagonist unlikable, fairness requires transparency. Players should know the creative intent and have choices about exposure. Below are policy elements indie studios can adopt — they sit at the intersection of creative freedom and player rights.

Developer transparency checklist

Publish a short developer statement explaining why the protagonist was designed as-is.
Offer content descriptors in store pages that note tone (e.g., “satirical, cringe humor, intentional protagonist unpreparedness”).
Provide accessibility options for audio/visual cues tied to the protagonist’s humiliation or distress.
Create a public moderation policy for community hubs to prevent harassment against players who defend or identify with the protagonist.

Community response and emergent empathy

One of Baby Steps’ strongest outcomes was the emergent empathy in streaming and meme culture. Players who began by mocking Nate often pivoted to protect him in chat, creating a counterintuitive sympathy loop. That demonstrates a social mechanism: once a character is seen as someone rather than something, social norms shift from derision toward care.

Designers can encourage this shift

Seed small sympathetic beats early to give players reasons to care.
Incentivize cooperative or protect-the-protagonist mechanics that make mocking counterproductive.
Highlight player stories that show growth in empathy (community spotlights, dev tweets, etc.) — and use cross-promotion tactics (for example, cross-promoting streams and social badges) to amplify positive narratives.

2026 trends: where flawed protagonists are heading

In 2026, three trends are amplifying the lessons from Baby Steps:

Procedural empathy systems: Tools that adjust NPC reactions based on player behavior are allowing studios to craft protagonists who elicit dynamic empathy rather than static responses.
Transparent narrative design: Players increasingly expect creators to explain narrative choices at launch rather than assume implicit intent. Post-launch dev transparency is now a fairness best practice.
Platform moderation upgrades: Major platforms rolled out better tools in late 2025 for creators to moderate harassment — important when a protagonist invites mockery that can escalate into abuse; teams should also prepare contingency plans (see playbooks for platform outages).

These developments mean that indie experiments like Baby Steps can scale their emotional ambition without leaving players vulnerable to toxic backlash.

Case study: translating Baby Steps lessons into your project

Here’s a practical blueprint you can apply to your next protagonist-driven indie.

Phase 1 — Concept and constraints

Pick a single, specific flaw that will influence gameplay.
Design visual shorthand (2–3 details) that telegraphs that flaw immediately.
Draft a short developer note explaining the character intent for public use.

Phase 2 — Playtest for empathy

Run targeted playtests with mixed audiences (fans of satire, narrative players, streamers) and use a tools roundup to source low-friction playtesting and feedback tools.
Collect both quantitative metrics (time-to-skill, retention) and qualitative responses (language indicating empathy).
Iterate on audio and animation to tune the character’s “annoyance factor” without tipping into cruelty.

Phase 3 — Launch strategy

Lead with transparency: dev diary, store descriptor, and a short FAQ about intent.
Offer settings to tone down cringe and voice lines.
Prepare community moderators with guidance on protecting players who defend empathetic responses.

What Bennett Foddy and Gabe Cuzzillo teach us about humility in design

Foddy’s track record of intentionally frustrating mechanics and Cuzzillo’s narrative instincts created a space where failure is not humiliation but conversation. Their candid, almost self-effacing approach — “it’s a loving mockery, because it’s also who I am” — normalizes vulnerability in creators themselves. That honesty invites players to mirror it. For more creator interviews and workflow notes, see this veteran creator interview that covers humility and process in 2026.

Actionable takeaways for creators and studios

Design for identification, not projection: craft characters who are people with constraints rather than player mirrors.
Align mechanics and narrative: ensure gameplay expresses character flaws so players feel empathy through action.
Be transparent: state intent and provide opt-outs to respect player choice and fairness.
Prepare community supports: moderate to prevent harassment and highlight empathetic player responses.
Measure emotion: include qualitative metrics in playtesting to detect empathy rather than just completion stats — automation can help surface the right signals (automating metadata extraction).

Final thoughts: why the risk is worth it

Making a protagonist deliberately whiny, unprepared, or himself a bit of a mess is an artistic risk that asks players to do work — to judge, re-evaluate, and eventually empathize. In an industry that often defaults to flattering player fantasies, Nate is a reminder that empathy can be earned by honest design choices. For indies especially, that honesty is a fairness advantage: transparency and specificity build trust.

If you’re a developer, consider what your protagonist asks from players. Are you giving them a mirror, or inviting them on a journey to understand someone different? If you’re a player or community moderator, think about how your reactions shape whether flawed characters are torn down or helped to live.

Call to action

Read the full creator interviews, share your own playtest notes, or join our next Fair Design workshop where we break down protagonist experiments like Baby Steps. Sign up for our newsletter for developer toolkits and policy templates that make risky characters fair and sustainable in 2026.

Unknown

Contributor

Senior editor and content strategist. Writing about technology, design, and the future of digital media. Follow along for deep dives into the industry's moving parts.