It's not often that you can play a full-length videogame that exists as nothing more than one big self-referential in-joke. At the very least, Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard deserves attention simply for what it was trying to do, even though most people were expecting the idea of a game about the star of a fictional videogame franchise to go disasterously wrong.
Does this parody videogame manage to make good use of its inventive concept, and just how far can one idea carry a game when so many other elements are working against it? You're about to find out, as you join myself and Conrad Zimmerman for the Destructoid review of Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard.
Eat Leat: The Return of Matt Hazard (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 [reviewed]) Developer: Vicious Cycle Software Publisher: D3 Publisher Released: February 26 MSRP: $49.99
Jim Sterling
Before the release of Eat Lead, publisher D3 worked very hard to build up a viral reputation for Matt Hazard as a character, sending press releases and information about past games that never existed. In the alternate reality that has been created, Matt Hazard is one of the most recognizable characters in videogame history, with a decades-long career spanning multiple generations and every genre you can think of.
After a run of successful videogames, Matt started to branch off into various ill-advised ventures, moving away from previous action titles such as The Adventures of Matt in Hazard Land and You Only Live 1,317 Times to casual titles such as 2000 Haz-Matt Carts. After 2002's Choking Hazard: Candy Gramm, he went off the rails and slipped into obscurity. Eat Lead is intended to be his big comeback game, but it seems that fictional publisher Marathon Megasoft has other plans.
Shockingly, the premise of the game actually manages to work, and the script is genuinely funny at times with a sense of ridiculousness that never becomes too stupid to enjoy. The various potshots at other franchises and parodies of recognizable videogame characters are all handled with a sense of class that manages to keep the game consistently entertaining, while the vocal talents of Will Arnett and Neil Patrick Harris help bring the humor to life.
The gameplay itself is a bit of an odd duck. On the surface, it's a rather bad game indeed, with loose, sloppy controls and the kind of stunted third-person combat that we saw back in the PlayStation era. Despite the cover-based gunplay, there is an unshakable mid-nineties feel, from the sparse environments to the enemies that seem to wander around or get stuck in looping animations.
A number of bugs plague the game, such as Matt's refusal to efficiently stick to cover at times, or his magic ability to slowly move of his own accord without player input. However, if you can look past the glitches, the bad AI and the backwards design, one finds an undeniably solid experience that is, at the very least, playable. Eat Lead even does a few interesting things on its own, most notably the "point to cover" feature, where Matt can aim his target reticule at a piece of cover, lock onto it and make his way there of his own accord.
Unlike D3's last big joke, Onechanbara, Matt Hazard actually succeeds in being a game that is bad but fun. While Eat Lead meanders between ridiculously easy (you can score headshots without even leaving cover) and frustratingly difficult and cheap, there is so much charm and character that it's impossible to stay mad. The game also makes up for its old fashioned gameplay with some interesting and fun weapons. Lethal water pistols more than make up for mid-nineties game design.
It's difficult to review a game that is quite obviously rubbish, but is still thoroughly entertaining and playable. The enemy AI is awful, but the enemies themselves are a joy to fight thanks to their amusing dialog and conformity to videogame stereotypes, such as masked Russian soldiers that blatantly communicate their positions to the player, or a Lara Croft parody that tells Matt to "smeg off." Even the Achievements are in on the joke, with a vast majority of them being based off self-referential humor. For example, you automatically get a "Multiplayer Master" Achievement upon beating the game, through virtue of the fact that there IS no multiplayer.
When reviewing videogames, there are a number of factors to consider, and Matt Hazard manages to fail in most of them. It's sloppy, unbalanced and frustrating. The graphics are standard at best, the animations are poor and there's zero replay value. However, despite all this, Eat Lead scores points in the most important category of all -- fun. This game manages to be fun no matter how grievously flawed it gets, and that is an accomplishment in itself.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard is most definitely a gamer's game, but the irony is that most gamer's will demand much, much more than what has been offered. However, for those willing to lower their standards and just have a good laugh, this game provides a solid few hours of gaming that will amuse and even cause a few audible giggles. Technically, this game is bad, but in terms of pure entertainment value, it somehow manages to be good. It's worth checking out for the paradox value alone.
Score: 7.0
Conrad Zimmerman
When D3 started their viral marketing campaign for Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard, I completely ignored it. Release after release about a twenty year-old gaming "legend" who I had never heard of before? To be honest, I first thought that it was just some blog having a bit of fun and it took a good while for me to realize what was really going on.
I mention the marketing for two reasons. The first is that I agree with just about everything Jim has said and need to stretch this review out a few paragraphs, but the other is that it truly set the tone for what the final product would be. Not once during the several months of near-constant press releases did the publisher ever break kayfabe.
That is the greatest strength of Eat Lead: its unflinching approach to defining exactly what it is. Every element of the game is tailored around the premise that the world of videogames exists independently of our own. Matt Hazard is a very real "person" and the characters who exist within videogames are real in the sense that they have emotions, relationships and distinct personalities which persist outside of the framework of the game (or games) they appear in. What results is an amazing amount of freedom to both dissect and mock fundamental aspects of games which the audience takes for granted. Matt Hazard does not merely break the fourth wall; it refuses to erect one in the first place.
Because there is no semblance of disbelief expected from the player, every single aspect of the game is open to ridicule and self-referential jokes. Whether it's the cookie-cutter enemies or the text indicating your next objective, absolutely nothing is sacred. The giddy delight of writer/lead designer Dave Ellis (X-Com: Interceptor) is almost palpable as the game rapid-fires one joke after another and the comedy is only amplified by the acting of Will Arnett, whose voice is positively perfect for the role of Hazard.
It's a damn good thing that the concept is so strong and lends itself so easily to humor because the gameplay alternates between being numbingly dull to rage-inducing. I disagree with the assertion that the enemy AI is poor, as they do use cover effectively more often than not and are more than capable of flanking if you get sloppy. But, then again, they are also helped by the fact that they can seem to appear practically anywhere at any time and having one or two baddies warp in behind your back is not an uncommon occurrence. It's unfair, but that's sorta the point. The villainous CEO of Marathon Megasoft is clearly not playing by the same rules you are.
What I can't justify away is the "run to cover" system Eat Lead uses. While in cover, Matt can run to another hiding spot by aiming and pressing a button. It has become a pretty standard feature in third-person shooters for a while now, but winds up failing you at the most inopportune moments in this title. Often, Matt will affix himself to the wrong surface of an object when sent to run, despite what side of it you may have been aiming at, and leaves himself open while you struggle to take him out of cover and around the corner. It's a poor implementation of something which should be second-nature by this point.
All of the other myriad issues Jim mentions are absolutely present, but I find myself not really caring about them in the long term (save for the game's difficulty which more closely resembles a line graph depicting Oprah Winfrey's weight in the last twenty years than a curve). Speaking strictly in terms of mechanics, calling Eat Lead mediocre would be excessive praise. But its charm, savvy writing and excellent humor shines in the face of all of its shortcomings and elevates it to a being a game that may not be worth owning but should certainly be played by anyone who can manage to plant their tongue firmly in cheek.
Score: 7.0
Overall Score: 7.0 -- Good(7s are solid games that definitely have an audience. Might lack replay value, could be too short or there are some hard-to-ignore faults, but the experience is fun.)
I gave it a 6.5 myself and pretty much had the same opinions as these two reviews.
A suggestion offered is: Matt Hazard looks lame and forgettable. If Will Arnett's likeness was used, and his voice wasn't so muffled and forced, it would have been much better for it. Also a lot of the jokes could use some work, and if the game was funnier, it's shortcomings would have been more forgivable.
I had high hopes about this game, apparently I should lower my expectations to save myself disappointment. I hope they patch this up or add more levels...
hmmm. i want to play it, i think it may fall into that "mark of kri" categoty of "good only to a gamer" games. i really still want to try to play it one day.
F&@k that's a stellar concept for a game. & even though I just watched DIE HARD 4.0 last night, I don't think I would get this game. I've never heard of this guy, Is that a bad thing?
I liked how they added that Take 5 achievement. It reminds me. If they made that Chad Punches Old Ladies game for LIVE Arcade, It would be killer if you got an achievement point for punching on old lady. lol. Gold.
With like you said, Zero Replay Value, & no Multiplayer I'M curious to see how many copies it sells. Or how the Publisher has stayed afloat for so long.
I did indeed see this game and think it was worthy of a rent, since the comedy of it seems unmissable. Shame about the gameplay issues, but I guess I can overlook them.
This is the only relativity positive review I have read/watched about this game. I still want to play it because I think it would be a fun game to laugh at, same with the new 50 cent game.
I really don't understand all the complaints of sloppy controls in this. Matt always did exactly what I told him to do. He never popped out of cover, enemies never got stuck in loops, and literally none of the problems mentione dhere or in other reviews ever surfaced in my game. Either I'm incredibly lucky, a far better TPS gamer than I give myself credit for, or there was some serious voodoo going on here.
As a person who hates almost all Third-person shooter games, I absolutely adored this game. I can see myself playing it several times over, doing single-weapon runs and all sorts of shenanigans. On my personal scale, it gets a 9/10, if only because of the odd distribution of enemy types. Soak 'em commandos and Space Marines showed up WAY too often for my tastes, while Zombies, Robogirls, and 2D Nazis didn't show up nearly enough.
I'm definitely going to have to pick this game up after the price drops a bit and I've got some extra cash and time. Even if it isn't that well executed I'm glad these guys would have the guts to make this kind of game.
I just got this game via gamefly and the difficulty has turn me off a bit but I am going to give it a second go because I want to see more jokes. Great review also guys.
I love these video reviews so much. A lot of times just watching them makes me really excited to see what the rest of the review has to say.
When I first heard about this game, I really wanted it to be good. It seems like you guys enjoyed the humor, and that's all I care about, so I'm gonna give it a go!
For me the gameplay was too annoying to truely enjoy the game. The script was pretty funny though, but I would have loved them filming the real world part with real actors.
This is a pleasant surprise. While I always thought the videos made the gameplay look loose, if the humor can make up for it enough, then it sounds like it's worth it.
I would buy this at full price, if only to support such a great concept and a great cast. We need more clever, interesting games, preferably of a higher gameplay quality.
Clearly, this the fun and storytelling outweigh the gameplay concerns. I will buy this at full price, if only to support a studio that is willing to take a chance on a title like this. It matters that much.
I am not going to lie to you guys: I love this game. I definately noticed its mechanical flaws as you guys have stated, but in retrospect the hilarious story more than made up for it. I really enjoyed playing this game!
I can't think of another game that I wanted to like more that this one. The concept is solid fried gold. The execution is exhausting. Terrible level design, AI, controls do not a good game make.
That being said, Will Arnett can adopt me any time. I will be his baby, learn from him, and carry on his name with pleasure.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press living the dream since March 16, 2006
A suggestion offered is: Matt Hazard looks lame and forgettable. If Will Arnett's likeness was used, and his voice wasn't so muffled and forced, it would have been much better for it. Also a lot of the jokes could use some work, and if the game was funnier, it's shortcomings would have been more forgivable.
Great reviews!