I’m going to go right to the description the developer (MadFox) provided on this one, as it has to be read to be believed:
“Break is an interactive allegory for the fall of communism and the reunification of Germany. Using the state-of-the-art Blockington Blockworth™ engine, assume the mantle of a glorious oblong warrior and crush the Marxists with your balls.”
Anything with that description just *has* to be checked out. It turns out “Break.” is (unsurprisingly) a Breakout-inspired game, but it’s a good one. Actually, it’s more properly an Arkanoid-inspired game as there are power-ups (as well as a score multiplier, I don’t recall that feature in Arkanoid).
Levels are nice, controls are tight, animation is buttery smooth, and there are the aforementioned power-ups and score multiplier. It’s not revolutionary, but it’s fun and well crafted, and has probably the single-best description I have read (out of thousands of descriptions) in the Xbox Indie Games Catalogue. Worth 80 Microsoft Points, in my opinion, but I’m a sucker for dry wit.
(And yes, there is a period at the end of the official title when looking for it on the Dashboard.)
Writings of Mass Deduction 
So you actually read the description of the game? I made a post on the dev forums about that and to my surprise, no one reads them, or they read it last after looking at the boxart and screenshots and possible video. It’s the last thing anyone checks out and I figured that’s how it is with the common consumer.
Yes, I read the descriptions of games pretty routinely. I’m surprised to learn that others don’t! Good box art might tempt me to delve further, but if so it’s only tempting me to read the description. So my order would be box art first, description second, and finally screenshots third.