Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard is a parody (of itself)

So what does any of this have to do with D3Publisher's upcoming shooter, Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard? Unfortunately, this supposed "comedy shooter" is less "Shaun of the Dead" and more "Disaster Movie." Although it attempts to make fun of the shooter genre (and the industry as a whole), uninspired and mediocre gameplay mechanics hinder it from garnering the respect a proper parody needs. The poorly developed story elements also need serious reworking. The game's greatest asset, its unique premise, is stunted by generic game design -- and that's a pity.
In the universe of Eat Lead, Matt Hazard is a legendary gaming icon, having starred in some quintessential games from the 8-bit era. However, after being thrust into a consistent stream of mediocre games from his overzealous publisher, Hazard found himself out of a job ... and out of the industry. That is, until he was offered a comeback to the gaming scene in a new 3D game made for modern consoles. Eat Lead would be that game.
Matt Hazard's character seems to closely mirror Duke Nukem's rise and fall in the real-world gaming scene. The premise is quite refreshing, and the history of this character is already well documented through fake documentaries (embedded), websites and blogs. A lot of effort has been put into creating the world of Matt Hazard, and it shows.
Unfortunately, the same kind of care and effort isn't evident in the actual game itself. The originality of the game's unique premise isn't translated very well into the gameplay experience. In almost every way, Eat Lead is a generic third-person shooter. You've played this game before, in Gears of War, Army of Two, or Uncharted. The cover-based stop-'n-pop gameplay of Eat Lead was fun -- until it became overused by developers everywhere. Hey, isn't that what you're trying to make fun of, Hazard?
Perhaps the use of such a familiar gameplay engine is commentary on the state of the industry today. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear the game is that smart. When asked if Eat Lead would feature any other kinds of gameplay, we were politely told "no." The game could have easily changed into a FPS game for one level, a cart racing game another, if only simply to emphasize the ridiculous nature of Matt Hazard's fictional career. This is a missed opportunity. Instead, it appears players will have to go through series of generic enemies in generic levels with an overused gameplay mechanic.
The Eat Lead demonstration focused largely on the game's ability to "download" new enemies into levels. For example, while going through an industrial complex, zombies from one of Matt Hazard's previous horror games will show up. Revolver-wielding cowboys may be downloaded in, from Hazard's previous western game. Somehow, this is Eat Lead's big "innovation." To us, it just looked like a cheap way of having random enemy spawns.

According to a Vicious Cycle rep, variety in the game will come from the weapons each of these themed enemies drop. For example, you may have a sci-fi weapon in the old west level. That seems like too timid of a gameplay mechanic for a title which is meant to be making fun of gaming and its tired conventions. Instead, Eat Lead plays it so safe, it becomes boring. From the looks of things, Eat Lead is the same thing it's attempting to parody: an uninspired shooter that does nothing to advance the genre forward.
Hopefully, our assessment of Eat Lead is wrong. We'd love to see Matt Hazard's misadventure translate well in the final game. However, we're not confident the game can change much before its upcoming Q1 2009 release. Until then, we're going to have a lot of fun reading and watching the marketing campaign for this game because it does something the game wasn't able to make us do: laugh.





Get a WordPress.com Blog





Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
McWeen @ Oct 28th 2008 8:06AM
Shaun of the Dead was amazing.
Ranus Studios @ Oct 28th 2008 8:12AM
Dammit. I was so excited for this one.
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Oct 28th 2008 8:16AM
Shaun of the Dead does indeed kick major cinematic ass. I suggest anyone who hasn't seen it do so; Britain wins at parodies. I hadn't even thought to compare Shaun of the Dead with Scary Movie and the likes, I suppose the answer simply being Shaun of the Dead is in another league.
KILLJAW @ Oct 28th 2008 8:30AM
I did not like Shaun of the Dead so obviously I did not think it was funny. But you can not seriously tell me that Shaun of the Dead "never forgets its comedic intent". That movie COMPLETELY forgets its comedic intent at one point and ceases to be a parody. It actually turns into a real zombie movie.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Oct 28th 2008 8:50AM
And what's wrong with that? Even though it's a parody movie, at the end of the day, it's still a movie about a handful of people against a city filled with zombies. Of course there is going to be some tragedy.
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Oct 28th 2008 9:31AM
I think the film was more about how these (amusingly silly) people deal with a zombie infestation. I mean, the film isn't non-sensical; it fits its own continuity and there's very little about it that goes awry in terms of what could happen. I think the fact that it follows its own story, and without divergences that make little sense, is what makes it such a solid film. But American parody films rarely make any sense, just jokes for the sake of jokes, and it makes them a hell of a lot weaker.
kaneda @ Oct 28th 2008 9:44AM
I think there is truth to your statement, but it just depends on how you interpret "never forgets its comic intent." If by that, you mean, it is never more serious than funny, I would say you are correct that this is not the case.
But while the parody may be blatant at times, what was most appealing about the movie was that, given a zombie infestation actually happening, it was a very realistic portrayal of how people could react. Nothing stupid and obviously farsical like penises through the ear. In fact, Shaun of the Dead really blurred the line between parody and Zombie movie with humor elements. IMO, this was to its benefit.
Shmil @ Oct 28th 2008 12:31PM
some of the greatest parts of Shaun of the Dead are the subtle real human emotions you see in a Zombocalypse. Instead of weilding a shotgun and aggressively blowing the heads off of zombies, these people are cowering in fear nearly the entire time. They're unorganized, unskilled, and hilariously human.
Not to mention the parodies of zombie films within the film. New reports of everything going wrong, others seem to know before you do, early sightings, and the most important: a family member must be turned and shot by a loved one.
hahnchen @ Oct 28th 2008 8:39AM
I saw the Matt Hazard discography site a few days ago, didn't know anything about the game itself, and it sounds disappointing.
What would have been awesome, if instead of Gears of War lite, we had a whole history of Matt Hazard in one game, a best of compilation.
The first level takes you back to Megaman 9's 8-bit worlds, and the 2D Duke Nukems. Moving then towards slicker 16-bit style graphics and then onto early sprite FPS's. Before the 32bit 3rd person platformer and then the now, with the Gears of War style.
That would have been fucking cool, it's screaming out to get made.
Jakka @ Oct 28th 2008 8:40AM
Hot Fuzz > Shaun of the Dead, but both are fucking amazing.
You shall not compare it to Disaster Movie!
Dirty @ Oct 28th 2008 10:25AM
I think Shawn of the Dead appeals more to our sense of humor on this side of the pond.
xtremeholymuffin @ Oct 28th 2008 8:56AM
CAN'T...STOP ME NOOOOOOOW!!!
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Oct 28th 2008 9:32AM
It's on random!
kaneda @ Oct 28th 2008 9:47AM
must....fight...need to....correct....aw f*ck it. It's DON'T stop me now.
(Recovering accuracy nazi)
John Z @ Oct 28th 2008 8:57AM
As awesome as the idea of a "Behind the Pixels"-style parody game would have been, I'm a little depressed to hear it's not living up to the promise. The case could be made that the game is intentionally crappy, so as to further hammer home the whole "retro cash-in" thing... but it's probably just poorly executed.
The comparison to Disaster Movie and any of the rest of the garbage Seltzer and Friedberg defecate into film canisters is a bit harsh. It looks like D3 and VV are actually making an effort with the storyline, as opposed to just mish-mashing a bunch of elements together in the name of absurdist humor. I'd guess really that they spent more time on a well-crafted story than they did on the game design.
Bottom line: Captain Rainbow would be a better stab at this type of game, but that will NEVER EVER leave Japan.
T @ Oct 28th 2008 9:31AM
Too be fair, the first Scary Movie was amazing. Excellent use of slasher genre cliches and a great blend of references centered around a core spoof (Scream).
But they completely lost their direction with the sequel, and since then NOTHING in the "Movie" franchise has amounted to anything more than a collection of jokes for people with ADD.
kaneda26 @ Oct 28th 2008 9:50AM
Nope...I have ADD and I fucking hated those....look! a kitty!
fred @ Oct 28th 2008 9:56AM
I like those movies and I am offe
This game looks fine to me I dont know what you guys are
I like bicycles
Shmil @ Oct 28th 2008 12:32PM
Don't forget the movies not in the movie section: Meet the Spartans, which was just 30 guys in front of a green screen for fucking 90 minutes
In A World (XBL) @ Oct 28th 2008 3:28PM
I actually have ADD and you guys are misrepresenting my people. I would just like to add that Scary Movie 1 and Scary Movie 4 were full of win, but 2 and 3 were awful. Nevertheless, I have the whole series on DVD and would gladly add a 5th movie to the collection, should one ever be made.
T @ Oct 28th 2008 5:00PM
I also have ADD. I am very familiar with the stereotypes OUR people face.
That said, the movie itself has a severe case of "What the hell am I supposed to be about"-itis. I'm guessing Patient Zero for that though is Family Guy...
Markusdragon @ Oct 28th 2008 9:52AM
What if I haven't played Gears of War, Army of Two or Uncharted?
bvhj @ Oct 28th 2008 7:44PM
Then you aren't missing much
sickNasty @ Oct 28th 2008 10:29AM
The whole 'Behind the Game' segments are weak. They just reak of trying to be hard, and therefore being lame. It's funny enough that they created a fake history of ridiculous Matt Hazard games. But to have video game characters being interviewed doesn't make any sense. That's like doing an E True Hollywood story with Hannibal Lector being interviewed instead of Anthony Hopkins.
If they wanted to set up the history of this character, they should have just made interviews with fake developers or voice actors from the previous Matt Hazard games.
Neuromancer @ Oct 28th 2008 11:52AM
With Will Arnett as the voice of Matt Hazard I still hold out hope this might be a funny game.
SithLibrarian @ Oct 28th 2008 12:30PM
That's a shame. It's a cool concept.
Shmil @ Oct 28th 2008 12:34PM
In the end The Simpsons Game made an excellent parody on games
t_m @ Oct 28th 2008 11:23PM
except that it also had dull gameplay.
If you're gonna make a parody of a game, you HAVE to make sure your game is fun or it'll get crucified.
Gonzo @ Oct 29th 2008 2:04PM
I wouldn't write off the popularity of it just yet.
This article makes it sound almost as bad and makes all the same mistakes as No More Heroes and look at how all the critics seemed to love that piece of shoe.