FOX in talks for Simpsons Channel

I

nstead of Itchy & Scratchy, the Simpsons could soon be watching themselves on their outdated, purple rabbit-ear television.

FOX is reportedly considering launching a 24-hour Simpsons network. Non-stop, ’round-the-clock gut-busting, laugh-out-loud, yellow hilarity–but is there enough for an entire channel dedicated to Homer, Marge and the kids?

Adding Up The Simpsons 22 Seasons on FOX (and counting!) 486 Episodes spanning 178 Hours 15 Seasons on DVD 1000+ Springfieldians 337 Guest Stars as of Season 16 $400,000 Salary of Simpsons voice actors–per episode 27 Primetime Emmys 24 video games from NES to iPhone 2,151st Star on the Walk of Fame 12 7-Eleven’s turned into Kwik-E-Marts 8th -Highest Grossing Film worldwide, taking in $527,068,706 #1 TV Series of the Century as named by TIME magazine

The Simpsons is the longest-running sitcom, animated program and primetime scripted television series in America. With 486 episodes spanning 22 seasons and a full-length feature film, they have a lot to choose from.

The Simpsons is one of those shows that you’ll watch on syndication as you flip channels on a Sunday afternoon, even if you’ve seen it before and you know how the episode ends. But a channel based on reruns that have been rerun for 22 years could get tiresome, and quick.

It would be fascinating to learn the viewership for different episodes; classics from the golden era of seasons three through nine may be the most watched while newer episodes from the last several seasons might plummet in ratings.

It seems obvious that the network would run promotions during different months for holiday-themed episodes: October would run Treehouse of Horror marathons, December would air Christmas and Hanukkah episodes, and specific episodes that coincide with other occasions.

B

ut to stay fresh, the network would need to offer some original programming, like Simpsons documentaries or vignettes with writers, producers and voice actors on their favourite episodes, characters, chalkboard and couch gags, guest stars, et cetera. Off the top of my head, the network could run 30-minute to one-hour specials on:

• Film Homages: Pulp Fiction, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, The Graduate, A Clockwork Orange, The Godfather and Indiana Jones (to name a few)
• Musical Guest Stars: Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Aerosmith, Michael Jackson, Metallica, NSYNC, Smashing Pumpkins, Ted Nugent, The White Stripes, blink-182
• Professional Athletes: Joe Nameth, Dennis Rodman, Ken Griffy Jr., Elvis Stojko, Tom Brady, Michelle Kwan, Oscar De La Hoya, Tony Hawk
• Perfectly Cromulent Words in Pop Culture: D’oh!, meh, embiggen, kwyjibo, cheese-eating surrender monkeys
• überfans Worldwide: A collection of interviews with self-proclaimed biggest Simpsons fans from around the world.
• Religion in The Simpsons: A special that explores Ned Flanders’ fundamentalist Christianity, Lisa’s soul-searching Buddhism, Apu’s faithful Hinduism, Krusty’s Jewish upbringing and other beliefs in The Simpsons.

They already have themed DVD releases for Hollywood tributes and religious beliefs, so they wouldn’t have to look very hard to compile these specials.

Groening and the rest of FOX could further break down the subcultures, sociology and psychology of Springfield, even to go so far as to analyze the use of Pavlov’s Theory or the Infinite Monkey Theorem in the show. Heck, they could run a full hour of Homer’s annoyed grunts and still get ratings.

T

he trick here is to appeal to all fans at once. A casual fan who hasn’t seen every episode might watch anything on a Simpsons channel, but someone with Comic Book Guy-level Simpsons fandom might skip newer episodes in favour of “The Lemon Tree” or “22 Short Films About Springfield.”

The Simpsons might be enough to lure viewers in, but at some point, that collection of episodes could rerun itself out. If FOX seriously intends to launch a Simpsons channel, prepare some documentary-style shows filled with interviews and history that will appeal to Frink-type nerds, Wiggum-type simpletons and the Simpson-type typical American family.

---

Too Long, Didn’t Beat: The Bane of Video Games

WARNING: This article contains spoilers related to Red Dead Redemption. Read at your own risk.

In the last few years, I’ve found myself struggling to finish a lot of video games. I first blamed it on a lack of free time, but when I found the time to play games, I realized that I was not entirely at fault.

Last week, video game news site Kotaku confirmed my realization. They cited a report by social gaming network Raptr, finding that only 10% of gamers finish the game they are playing. What happened to beating the final boss? To saving the princess? To actually beating the game?

Turns out, people are just giving up. Why? Because current games are way too long.

The Offenders

Back before the internet went mainstream, if you wanted to find out how a game ended, you had to reach it yourself. You couldn’t trust your friends–they’d make up an ending to make you think they’d beaten the game.

Now, any frustrated teenager can go to YouTube and watch the closing cutscenes of any video game, and that’s what the 90% who don’t finish are doing.

Rockstar is notorious for making such outrageously long video games as Grand Theft Auto IV, L.A. Noire and Red Dead Redemption.

GTA IV was a pain in the ass to beat, but it is considered a landmark video game of the next generation consoles. If you own it, you have to beat it, but prepare to spend a good 30 hours getting through the main story missions.

The same high regard can’t be said for Red Dead Redemption–while it is a solid Rockstar title with strong gameplay, it had no payoff. Completing GTA IV gave me a sense of accomplishment, but Red Dead Redemption ended on a low and disappointing note.

In the course of the game, I put up with the captures of Javier Escuella and Bill Williamson being stepping stones to Dutch van der Linde. I put up with Dutch’s cliché and unfulfilling suicide. (Why couldn’t I lasso him mid-fall? Or better yet, start a duel and shoot his smug mug off of the mountain?) I put up with the underhanded government agents and needy townsfolk and monotonous farmwork missions preventing me from cutting to the chase.

I put up with all of that only for the legendary John Marston–who slayed the Old West for some 25 hours of gameplay–to be killed by an ambush by a backstabbing U.S. government.

So, for all the gamers who bought Red Dead Redemption, and for the 10% who made it all the way through, you take away the gunslinging protagonist who they’ve grown accustomed to? Just like that?

The main character can’t die! If they were to carry on with their government ambush, it should’ve ended in a high stakes shoot-out and a ride into the sunset.

To me, the ending was weak and unrewarding, but what made it more unrewarding is the fact that I invested so much time reaching it. If I could beat Red Dead Redemption in 10 hours, maybe I wouldn’t have been so let down, because I would’ve wasted 10 hours and not 25.

The Solution

There are some sandbox-style games that kept my attention all the way through. I’m a sucker for gangster flicks, and by association, games based on gangster flicks. I beat The Godfather for PS2 to 100% completion, and I spent three solid weeks doing the same for Scarface: The World is Yours.

Select Games by Average Time to Beat Grand Theft Auto IV 41 hours Red Dead Redemption 27 hours L.A. Noire 23 hours Dragon Age: Origins 60 hours Assassin’s Creed II 26 hours Borderlands 34 hours inFAMOUS 2 16 hours Metal Gear Solid 4 18 hours Final Fantasy XIII 68 hours The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion 120 hours Stats via HowLongToBeat

That was when I worked 20 hours a week.

Now I attend university full-time, work part-time and try to maintain a social life. That doesn’t leave much time to roam the streets of Liberty City or the deserts of New Austin to find strangers or hunt wildlife.

Developers and publishers need to make moderately lengthy games–games that aren’t 40-hour epics, but also can’t be beaten during a one-week rental. And still long enough to justify a $50 to $70 price tag.

A game can’t be overtly long for the sake of. It has to offer the gamer a reason to keep playing. Publishers seem to think couch potatoes will stay on the couch if they include a laundry list of optional achievements and trophies, or if they release premium downloadable content.

The truth is, most gamers don’t care about achievements and trophies. There are communities of gamers dedicated to earning as many achievements and trophies as possible, but most ignore the virtual pissing contest.

As for DLC, Rockstar released two expansions for GTA IV—The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony–and RDR‘s zombie-killing spinoff, Undead Nightmare. They have already put out an extensive collection of downloadable content for L.A. Noire, which is sure to increase the overall gameplay by at least another aggravating 10 hours.

But if a game is good, it doesn’t need DLC, achievements and trophies to entice gamers. They’ll buy the content and earn the accomplishments because they like the game, not for bragging rights.

Assassin’s Creed II was worth staying up past 1:00 a.m. nightly to get one stealth-killed soldier closer to another codec.

Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune was worth playing through four times on different difficulties just to hear the ding of the platinum trophy.

Interactive Drama’s Heavy Rain boasts a 72% completion rate because it’s a high-quality, top-notch, totally original game. It has a powerful, compelling story arc leading to four alternate endings, driven by emotionally connected characters over a solid musical score.

It’s art–the core of all video games–and it’s more important than dragging on the storyline of yet another needlessly long game.

---