Mixed or average reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 29
  2. Negative: 7 out of 29
  1. 48
    The ideas behind the game are solid, but the poor implementation too often leads to tedium or frustration.
  2. A counterintuitive control scheme, oddly balanced difficulty, obnoxiously repetitive combat, and a nearly useless camera in co-op mode. Eventually such problems become too numerous and too annoying to tolerate, turning what could have been a simple monster-killing romp into a scattered, clumsy mess.
  3. For those old school gamers who had a fondness for the classic Zombies Ate My Neighbors, Monster Madness will disappoint in almost every level. It’s a game that borders on fun but just doesn’t quite make the right impression with its repetitive action, framerate problems and barely there story.
  4. Overall, Monster Madness is a fairly decent gaming experience on its own, although when set alongside comparable titles like Dead Rising or even the decade old Zombies Ate My Neighbors, Monster Madness obviously doesn't reach its potential.
  5. It's well worth a look, but go into it knowing that it offers some problems that you thought that developers destroyed years ago. [June 2007, p.114]
  6. This is nineties videogame cliché; an unrelenting gangbang of tired mechanics presented in mostly derivative clothing. The script, dialogue and voice acting grasp for irony but only manage weak cliché.
  7. 45
    With three friends on a couch with you, this is a solid 7. Considering that friends and a couch don't come in the box, it's more of a 3. I'm going to compromise and call it a 4.5.
  8. Simple and effective hack-and-slasher that will entertain rather than amaze. [June 2007, p.84]
  9. 60
    While not great, Monster Madness is generally fun with its mix of solid monster design and colorful, animated graphics.
  10. Although it does have a couple of flaws like a temperamental camera and some slowdown, as well as controls that take a little getting used to, it's such a blast to play and very addictive once you get into it.
  11. While Monster Madness does much to scratch the co-op itch, and offers some titillating online modes, it sullies it with patchy execution and a series of poor design choices. [Sept 2007, p.93]
  12. The frantic overhead ghoul-slaying of "Gauntlet" worked thanks to simple controls and cunning level design. Monster Madness fumbles the first part of that formula by saddling you with a control scheme that's counterintuitive and overcomplicated. [June 2007, p.74]
  13. 70
    The iffy controls and problematic camera system do hinder the gameplay and the truly unforgiving checkpoint system could easily ruin it for most players, but those willing to look past these will find an enjoyable romp with some old-school flavor that most of today’s games lack ten fold.
  14. Only through a scarcity of decent alternatives could we ever truly recommend this, and that’s just about as backhanded as compliments get. [June 2007, p.113]
  15. It has a delightful old school feel about it that is reminiscent of The Chaos Engine or the aforementioned LucasArts gem, Zombies Ate My Neighbours, but if you're interested in gameplay over middling next-gen visuals, you'd be better off browsing eBay than dipping your toe in the very American world of Monster Madness.
  16. But rough edges aside, Artificial has buttoned up the game as well as can be expected given the amount of interactive objects they've peppered throughout the game. [May 2007, p.58]
  17. Monster Madness is a train wreck if you happen to be an only child or lack nearby friends. [June 2007, p.89]
  18. 35
    Monster Madness will make you tear your hair out in frustration before it bores you to death.
  19. Another failed idea is the ability to pick up items littering the different districts and use them as weapons. [June 2007, p.93]
  20. That price tag is the modern-day equivalent of hari-kiri, minus the blood and honour. Which is a real shame because, given how much fun Monster Madness proves to be when four of you are carving up critters, it deserves so much better. An extra mark when the price drops. [Issue 19, p.84]
  21. This would have been a great game for $39.99, but is very hard to recommend at $60. [July 2007, p.59]
  22. Indeed, while it’s not an abomination by any means, and can provide some mild entertainment (more so on multiplayer mode), it’s by no means worth more than a rent.
  23. Sub-standard stuff - its only redeeming feature is the very unlikely prospect of online fun. A bargain bin title.
  24. 65
    With a lengthy campaign and decent multiplayer, it is only a shame Monster Madness doesn’t play too particularly well but does add up to be an experience like no other.
  25. The addition of online co-op and Deathmatch modes maybe elevates Monster Madness above the bottom tier of Live Arcade titles, but at full price there will probably be so few people playing that it's unlikely to be a vibrant online community.
  26. If you have two or more gamers in your household that are interested in this style of game, it may be worth a weekend rental. If you’re looking for a game that’s fun single player, or online, you need to pass on this title.
  27. In single player the game feels a little monotonous and lonely so thankfully South Peak have catered for those of us that like a little cooperative play.
  28. Monster Madness could’ve been fun. It looks good enough to hold its own, and the general concept is pretty cool, but the execution just falls flat of the standards we should all hold for “next-gen” games.
  29. While it was never going to be a contender for Game of the Year, Monster Madness has failed to deliver in nearly every sense. It could have been worse, but by the same token it could have been a whole lot better.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 17 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 6
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 6
  3. Negative: 2 out of 6
  1. Nov 16, 2012
    Definitely a different type of fun action game with dozens of intelligently designed monsters, zombies, creatures and some interesting weapons and good venues :) Full Review »
  2. StanStill
    Feb 26, 2009
    This game was horrible.

    No thought was given to the first 15 minute game experience. Camera and level design is a great example of
    anti-vision for a 3rd person game. HUD elements are completely confusing. Combat is seemingly random and unsatisfying.

    And finally, dreadful, generic character design. This game was made by a team for themselves with no thought of the end player.
    Full Review »
  3. Zanto
    Sep 25, 2007
    1: E. A., stfu. You should not be allowed to reproduce or breath. We hope your thumbs get cut off, your penis shrunken even smaller than it is, and your 360 get Red ring of death. Thank you.

    2: This game is a must for all owners of a 360 who enjoy some good old fashioned top down arcade zombie killin'. The controls are good, the presentation is just awesome, and the overall game is just pure fun, whether it be single player or multi. It's hard as fuck, and lack of checkpoints at crucial moments are bothersome, but it's still a great game.
    Full Review »