I am no Jeff Gerstmann. Nor am I Carrie Gouskos (who doesn't want to talk about points).

Though I have more Burnout Revenge achievements than either of them, the sum of all points comes down to me paling in comparison.

I enjoyed Burnout. It really is the racing game for the rest of us. PGR3 was a simulation for those who like simulations. I still don't like it, but the points accumulation is rather straightforward. I'd like to see the points incentive help me to find other rewarding experiences.

My father purchased GRAW, but I played it. I played it for the points. I always complained at game night when the guys wanted to play Ghost Recon instead of Halo 2, Crimson Skies, or any of their racing games. I learned to resent the tactical shooter. Now I wake up "the morning after" to find I have embraced it. All it took was the promise of a few points.

Do I still resent tactical shooters? Yes.

Does that make me a hypocrite for playing them. . . for the points? Personally, I would say yes. Especially when I consider how voraciously I have opposed their insertion into my regular game night library.

Who knows what other undesirable 360 game I'll play . . . for the points. The hypocrisy would just be too much if I were to one day awake and find them in my 360 queue.

Depending on what side of the fence you are on, you could call it enlightenment or backsliding to step down from the moral high ground I've constructed. Ultimately, it is a difficult decision to make. Some games just shouldn't be rewarded with hard-earned dollars (or whatever currency you use). Others, offer initially revolting experiences, but provide hours of enjoyment I would have otherwise ignored.

Chances are, it is only a matter of time before the achievement comparison betrays me. I can only hope none of my friends are paying attention.