ritics are loving the new Batman game. I am too, but have doubts I’ll still be playing it a week from now, what with a partially completed Bioshock ‘survivor mode’ playthrough and The Beatles: Rock Band just around the corner (man, I can’t wait for that one).

Since its release 3 days ago Batman: Arkham Asylum has earned review scores above 90 from most major sites, all of whom are calling it the best Batman video game ever, with some specifically asserting that its replay value is high.

I think it’s a good-looking, atmospheric 3rd person adventure game with an engaging story, and offers nearly a perfect blend of combat and stealth, fisticuffs and gadgetry, horror and comedy, and is tons of fun—in short, it kicks ass, and it’s a must-play—but it probably only has a life of 15 hours total. But apparently these days, if there is anything left to do or collect in a game after you’ve beaten story mode, it equals “good replay value.”

SUSPECT	DESCRIPTION	WANTED FOR
Call of Duty: World at War	High-def FPS with average good looks. One of the "big 2" review sites gave it 9.2, calling it "oustanding."	Having less staying power than COD4, and becoming a dust-collector way too soon, even WITH zombies.
MadWorld	Beat-em-up for the Wii. Aforementioned gaming site gave it a 9.0, calling it “a beautiful piece of moving art.”	Being over in 5 hours, and being too glitchy, slow, and poorly-paced to stay interesting for a second playthrough.
House of the Dead: Overkill	Stylish, funny on-rails shooter; basically Tarantino's Grindhouse reincarnated as a video game. Critics gave it an average score of 8.1.	Being too fucking short. A full-price commercial release with a campaign that you can beat in 3 hours, and soft combat which you can non-strategically button-mash your way through, is just criminal.

***SOUGHT IN CONNECTION: The critics who told you to buy them

Yep, reviewers have stopped realistically assessing the replayability of console games, and a lack of replay value is not emphasized heavily enough in their reviews, or in the scores they hand out.

Who doesn’t love a good conspiracy theory? The fact major gaming sites have referral/link partnerships with major retailers (Gamestop, Best Buy, Amazon) might have something to do with critics’ apparent reluctance to say “rent this game, but don’t buy it,” even though that would often be in our interests, as gamers.

A less paranoid theory goes something like, critics don’t emphasize their replayability evaluations simply because they’re required to go through games at such a rapid pace, and because they get much of their software for free, and replay just doesn’t matter to the guy who will be handed a stack of new stuff to play next week. He may know replay value is an important consideration for consumers, but due to his unique career circumstances he’s out of touch with the common man, no longer in a position… etc, etc. Memo to the guys who told us Prototype was an 8.5 out of 10… are you ever really going to put this game back in your console? Didn’t think so.

I’m not critic-bashing. These guys do a good job—building anticipation for a game, evaluating it using multiple criteria, and doing an engaging write-up; all of this takes talent. When they say a game is enjoyable, it usually is. But many people will buy a game specifically because it received a great review score from Gamespot or ign. And in many instances great scores are handed out games which, if we’re honest about it, have no replay value and will be shelved by most people after about three days. And critics have apparently forgotten that doing so is not normal. That’s the contention of this article, anyway.

High praise indeed

For counterpoint, I picked the brain of Brad Gallaway of gamecritics.com. I find that as a critic he’s usually on the mark with his comments, his writing is great, and I think he strikes the right balance between diplomatic and opinionated… which is awesome. Also, he answered my email, which was even more awesome. So I asked him what he thinks about my hypothesis about critics being generally fucked with regards to the replay value of games.

“Replayability comes down to individual preference more than anything—typical replay activities like collecting items or looking for secrets is endlessly entertaining for some, and coldly disaffecting for others,” says Brad.

Agreed. Repetitive tasks like gold farming and leveling-up, unless there’s some kind of arcade-like minigame involved, make me want to gouge my own eyes out. But some people live for them.

But I have my own gaming compulsions. For instance, I can’t not collect things. If I’ve found 19 of the 20 red coins and go to bed feeling stumped, if it dawns on me at 4am that I forgot to sweep that section in the corner of the map (yes I sometimes think about video games while lying in bed), I’ll get out of bed and go do it.

Also, I’m semi-addicted to the frisbee dog game in Wii Sports Resort. Why flicking my wrist and throwing a virtual frisbee to a cartoon dog brings me so much happiness, I don’t know. People are weird. I don’t doubt that there are freaks out there who play Zelda just for the fishing.

With Madworld purported to be the most violent video game in history, Sega has now broken ground on two controversial fronts.

For unsurprisingly, House of the Dead: Overkill has been honored with the Guiness World Record for “most swearing in a video game.”  The f-word is used 189 times, or roughly once per minute, and accounts for 3% of all the dialogue uttered in the game.

The stylized on-rails shooter is published by Sega, and was developed by Headstrong Games. Writer Jonathan Burroughs had this to say about his “achievement”:

“It is a dubious honour to receive such an accolade working in an industry where so often the fruits of your labours are derided and dismissed for being puerile or irresponsible, but in the case of The House of the Dead: OVERKILL a little puerility was the order of business. Parodying the profane excess of grindhouse cinema was Headstrong Games’ objective and I am flattered that this record acknowledges that we not only rose to that challenge, but entirely exceeded it.”

Fuck yes.

… Think the Wii is done over-compensating for the “kiddie system” taunts it’s endured since its launch?

$@%$ed-up genius?

If you’ve played House of the Dead: Overkill, you’re more than invited to sound off on what I write here.

irst I’d like to reflect on the irony that this one, undoubtedly the most profane game you’ve ever encountered (every other word is an f-bomb), is on the Wii, of all platforms. You know, the kiddy-game system… Aside from perhaps Grand Theft Auto IV (which never found its way into the Nintendosphere, to the protests of many but for reasons understood by all) I don’t know of a more foul-mouthed video game anywhere. Here is a transcript of one of many title screen voice-overs (and I should warn everyone now that along with the game, that this review is rated ‘M’):

“House of the Dead: Overkill. It’s not just good, it’s fucking delicious! Critics said it’s fucking good. Other critics said it’s motherfucking good. A street corner prostitute said, I would suck that guy’s dick. A toothless crackwhore said, give me a chicken dinner. House of the Dead: Overkill. Fucked-up genius.”

This is all before you start playing… just to set the mood, you understand…

I must hand it to the game’s developers, Headstrong Games, for succeeding in capturing a ‘vibe’ and a feeling better than any comparable video game I’ve ever played; The House of the Dead on-rails shooting game franchise has changed its spots a little bit for this one. Unlike other HOTD games, this title is aesthetically derivative of Grindhouse, the joint double-feature film by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez, which was derivative of ‘grindhouse’ movie theater fare; 70s exploitation flicks, the cheesiest of the cheesy.  HOTD:OK might as well be dubbed Grindhouse: The video game. From the film-grain filters to the scratches and pops in the soundtrack, to the vintage-style music to the frequent interjection (“In a world where…”) by the voice-over man to distinct retro cut-scene graphical elements to terrific movie poster mock-ups that introduce each level, to the video of a pole dancer which plays as a backdrop to staff credits to the hilarious ‘missing reel’ moment in the storyline… this game is top-to-bottom the most complete send-up of that genre that I’ve come across, and in its own perverse way it’s a work of art.  One gets the sense that a group of movie and computer geeks had the time of their lives making this game; I wish I’d been there with them.

One of the great quarter eaters

But, however stylistically solid HOTD:OK might be, the game simply isn’t that good mechanically, and it’s not hard enough. For the sake of reference, maybe some of you remember an arcade game called Operation Wolf. I loved that game! It, along with Virtua Cop, earned me my light-gun shooter stripes. As a kid I would easily pile 10 dollars into either game on a weekend. I found them not only a rush to play, but also very challenging.

Relative to those on-rails shooting games (22 and 15 years old, respectively), HOTD:OK is just far too easy, to the point where there’s no incentive to learn to attack the levels efficiently. A decent gamer doesn’t need to manage health packs or power-ups in order to beat the game, or think about much at all; the light gun shooter equivalent of button-mashing is enough to plow through this one. There is no penalty for dying (you have unlimited continues) except for losing some points, and with no network play I can’t imagine playing the game enough to begin to care about my score. There are no memorably difficult sequences that you’ll play over and over, talk about with friends and compare strategies, with big excited eyes. The funhouse car-like camera movements are frenetic and varied and very effective in generating some actual suspense (again, more style points) but this is a shooter, and it doesn’t ultimately matter how well you shoot. And that’s bad. There’s a ton of style, but there’s not enough game. Without their A-game a decent gamer will be able to unlock all of the unlockables in a couple of days and once you’ve had your laughs and showed the game to a few people, the novelty of “Grindhouse meets Wii” will wear off, too.

The fact that the Wii remote is a light-gun waiting to happen has meant that we’ve seen a lot done with first-person and on-rails shooters for the Wii, and this will likely continue (Both Resident Evil games are great, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Sega sent a Virtua Cop incarnation down the pipe at some point.  EDIT: Yesterday Capcom announced that The Darkside Chronicles, sequel to Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles will make its way to the Wii sometime this year) but players must demand better gameplay than that offered by HOTD this time out.

The Verdict
Nintendo Power described this one as a ‘guilty pleasure’ and I concur; believe it or not I liked HOTD:OK, I found it amusing and stylistically impressive and in a bizarre way I actually cared about its characters. But the game just doesn’t have lasting appeal. I’ve never played a game that ‘felt’ like this one. But I’ve played plenty of games that are too easy.

Recommendation to seasoned, adult gamers: rent this one; especially if you loved Grindhouse. But not with kids around.  The main female character Varla (named for a character in the cult classic Faster Pussycat! Kill! Kill!) might well have ‘artistic merit’ as a ‘symbol of an era’ and a pop culture reference (or whatever you typically cite to justify looking at smut) but Mom’s disapproving eyes when the camera zooms in tight on Varla’s breasts visibly bouncing and heaving, and your 6-year-old asking what Varla means when she says “that’s not his dick in my back…” well, these things could ruin your fun.