Hmmmmm

“Batman: Arkham Asylum” is definitely among the more hyped video games of the past few years. The timing is right, the previews looked stunning, and Eidos Interactive are not a bunch of idiots, so the game is basically everywhere. Now journalism in this field is not perfect, and one of its great weaknesses is the fascinating dichotomy between “previews” and “reviews.” The former are, almost without exception, gushy love letters to the production team, and completely worthless as any kind of advice. An educated reader will immediately assume that the people behind the game offered access to their product on the condition of a positive write-up, and I have little doubt that is exactly the case. The latter, for some reason, and completely in spite of the former, are usually hard-nosed ball-busters.

So, when IGN slaps a 6/10 on a game that was getting messianic preview coverage, a confusing and admittedly hilarious kind of schizophrenia sets in. I’m sort of okay with this pattern, and I wouldn’t trust previews anyway, because what good is speculation on an unfinished product?

Still, the problem with that standard is that it gives the big boys ideas. People at these massive game publishers know that their Metacritic rating is life or death, and they start wondering, “Hey, why can’t we control that like we control our pre-release press?” To them, it’s a fair question. For us, it has the potential to be the end of an era.

Which is how we find our way back to “Arkham Asylum” and Eidos. The game isn’t out yet, but a couple of raving reviews have already popped up, and a few hotheaded bloggers are crying foul. I don’t blame them, these reviews are pretty out of hand, and it’s somewhat mysterious that they are out there by themselves. There’s no proof that Eidos has done anything fishy, and they emphatically deny it, but this kind of speculation popped up around their latest “Tomb Raider” release too, and I can’t help but wonder. Let me give you a quick list of why I think we could be seeing tampered goods:

-The game is not, in fact, that good. This, I believe, is the main reason everyone is suspicious, even if no one realizes it. When the first two reviews of “Bioshock” were earth-shattering, no one panicked, because we all experienced the demo and knew something special was coming.

But “Arkham?” I think there’s a vague notion from what we’ve played so far that the game is simply…pretty good. It worked, I liked it, but that’s about it. Press like this just doesn’t feel right for a demo that basically mixed “Bioshock” with “Splinter Cell.”

Look, I want to be wrong about that. I want “Arkham” to be mind-bending, you and I both already know that I’m going to buy it. But as Chuck D once said, “Don’t believe the hype.”

-The reviews aren’t well-written. I confess I have not literally read either, but I’ve read summaries on both, and as a piece of journalism they’re both dodgy. There’s no solid, empirical footing beneath these authors, everything is superlatives and accolades. Gamers implicitly develop an incredibly well-tuned eye for reviews, because we’ve had so much opportunity to compare phrases like “engaging combat” and “replay value” to hard experience. Good reviews with substantial products inspiring them will always make direct statements, things that can be disproved: “There are 12 new levels,” “The cover system rarely glitches,” “You can save anywhere.” I don’t sense a lot of that in what I’m reading here.

-This isn’t the first time. Eidos has been getting a reputation for this, fair or not.

Anyway, not that it matters, because I still support the game. Even if it isn’t perfect, the idea of taking the time to make a really quality Batman experience is just right on the money for me. They hit so many of my wish list items: get Paul Dini to write it? Gotcha. Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill? Yes indeed. Wildstorm character designs? Nice. A plethora of reverently recreated rogue’s gallery highlights? Damn right.

Little known fact: there was going to be a “Dark Knight” movie tie-in game. No one knows what went wrong, but it was attempted and then quietly scrapped, its very existence as flatly denied as the aliens at Roswell. Fortunately, Gary Oldman is a man who loves his fans and hates Non-Disclosure Agreements, so one day in an interview he just came out with it, to the shrieking gasps of hundreds of Warner Bros employees. Whoops.

The point is, this is better. I’m happier with “Arkham Asylum” then I would be with a direct adaptation. The “Batman Begins” game was actually surprisingly okay, but most of the time this is far from the case, and if “Arkham” does well, the business model might change. I think it’s incredibly savvy of them to say, “Okay, we need a Batman game. Doesn’t need to be the movie exactly, it just needs to be in the same vein.”

On another note, there are just so…many…games coming out right now, Dear Reader. How can I ever hope to prepare? Let me list some off and tell you how I feel about them:

-Prototype. It’s already out. The reviews are middling, and yet I want it. I want it, damn it! Don’t tell me I can’t have it, IGN! I don’t want to hear it! You just don’t understand! I need to belly-flop an Abrams tank, do you hear me? There has been a hole in my heart where a flying kung-fu sidekick onto a helicopter should be!

-The Beatles: Rock Band. I don’t want it at all, but I love the idea and fully support everyone buying it. I actually enjoy watching other people get excited for the game, because it’s such an incredibly good idea, and I never thought they’d actually make it happen. I often make a big deal out of the fact that I’m not a huge Beatles fan (and I’m not), but you should know something, Dear Reader: I respect the Beatles. I do. Their ability to reach music lovers anywhere in the world for decade after decade means something to me.

Now if you make “The Rolling Stones: Rock Band” or “Bob Dylan: Rock Band” or “Led Zeppelin: Rock Band,” my money is yours. I have fantasies of blasting through “Blood on the Tracks,” “Sticky Fingers,” maybe “Bringing it all Back Home,” and of course “Led Zeppelin IV” top to bottom, on lead vocals. Mmmm.

-Halo 3: ODST. It’s just shameful how you take my money without even asking, Bungie. You’re going to charge me full price for a new campaign (like anyone really plays Halo for the campaign), and two new maps. I said two. No, don’t tell me three, because “Heretic” is a carbon copy of a Halo 2 map and you know it. You didn’t even, like, put some snow on it or something. Two maps and a campaign, and there goes my wallet.

Okay, okay, yes there’s Firefight mode, and I’m excited about that. But it would have been lovely if you hadn’t charged full retail for it. Don’t worry, you know we’ll support you, but…it just would have been nice. You owe us, man, you could have shown us some appreciation.

-Wolfenstein. So, I’m going to shoot some Nazis who have occult super powers?…Go on.

-Shadow Complex. I’m fascinated by you, you little side-scrolling, Orson Scott Card-penned, XBLA hussy. Your antiquated profile view both disgusts and attracts me, you strange creature. I want you, even though I already have “Metroid” on my Wii. Must resist.

-Need for Speed Shift. You had your chance. I used to love you so much, NFS, you were the first game that taught me to love cars, but now you just can’t let the whole “tuner” thing drop. It’s over. You forced me to drive a hot pink Nissan Altima one too many times.

-Star Wars: The Old Republic. Listen to me, Dear Reader. If you love me at all, you cannot let me even come near Bioware’s new MMO. “Knights of the Old Republic” is arguably my favorite game ever, and now they’re making a version that never ends. Do you understand what will happen to me if I acquire this? Have you ever seen a man die in a computer chair?

-Dragon Age: Origins. Sigh. Bioware is coming out with two games? Do those people work for the devil or something? Are they trying to ruin my marriage?

-Starcraft 2. Speaking of those in the employ of Satan, our good friends at Blizzard are back to crazy glue your eyeballs to a computer screen. Blizzard, I’ve said many times, could well be the greatest game studio that has ever existed. Their excellence is to the point that I get frustrated with them, because it takes years to unpack every morsel of their games, and just as you near the finish line, they have a new one waiting. To quote Guy Pearce in Memento, “I want my f___ing life back!”

-Left 4 Dead 2. MINE. MINE. MINE. MINE. MINE.

-Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Sigh. I might honestly not get it. There are, as you might have noticed, quite a few games on the horizon, and I don’t have time for something I’ve always felt rather blase about. I have nothing necessarily against COD, in fact I quite admire it, but I’ve always felt its overshadowing of everything else to be unfair. The first “Modern Warfare” was a game I got thoroughly sick of with relative ease, and I have no doubt the same will occur if I get this.

-Assassin’s Creed II. You burned us once, “Assassin’s Creed,” but it seems like you want to learn from your mistakes. We’ll wait and see.

-Dead Space: Extraction. We all know that the problem with Wii shooters is moving. Aiming via the Remote is fun, but flicking it against the side of the screen to try and induce a head-turn is frustrating and borderline ruinous. So here comes our friends from EA with an on-rails shooter. You intrigue me.

-New Super Mario Bros. I’m not only going to buy you, I’m going to sleep with you tucked into my arms every night. (sucks in a deep breath) Four player simultaneous cooperative/competitive side-scrolling classic Mario gameplay with juiced up graphics and exciting new game mechanics? I thought you’d never ask.

-Metroid: Other M. I want you to find out whoever decided Team Ninja should make the next Samus adventure, and I want you to give them a big bag of money. This person is a genius, and should have statues of him/herself erected in town halls. Thank you, sweet prince/princess.