Atari5200 #1 Posted November 23, 2007 (edited) enough said, in your opinions, which is the better of the 2 games? Edited November 23, 2007 by Atari5200 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManShowBoy #2 Posted November 24, 2007 What do you like better, singleplayer or multiplayer? I'd get Bioshock if you like just playing the singleplayer campaign. I hear CoD4 has an excellent singleplayer mode but it's way on the short side...like under 5hrs. Not really worth the price right now unless you enjoy playing the game online. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gabriel #3 Posted November 24, 2007 No opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MetalSlime23 #4 Posted November 24, 2007 How about neither? I don't really care for either of those games. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Helmet #5 Posted November 24, 2007 COD 4 looks awesome. I love the COD games and I'm really not much of a fps fan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NE146 #6 Posted November 24, 2007 For those 2 choices I'd say COD4. However my true answer would be make your wife buy you Super Mario Galaxy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert #7 Posted November 24, 2007 I've never played any of the Call of Duty games. Are they good single player games or do you really need to play online with others to fully enjoy them? ..Al Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Helmet #8 Posted November 24, 2007 I never play them online and still really enjoy them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red 5 #9 Posted November 24, 2007 Played them both all the way through. Bioshock was unique and still my pick for Game of the Year. (I will not be playing Mario Galaxy yet as I had to save at least ONE game for xmas. So that may change.) The thing is this... Call of Duty 4 is incredibly short (for the solo campaign.) That said, it is without a doubt the most exciting, jaw dropping, adrenaline rush you will ever have for the five or six hours it takes to get through it. Even the mission after the credits was absolutely brilliant. It is one of the few games I will play again. Bioshock is a masterpiece. The RPG elements of upgrading different powers is really intuitive and a lot of fun. The Big Daddies could be the greatest enemies in a game in a decade. The environments are like nothing you have ever seen before. Even the stupid pipe mini-game is addicting. In other words, if Call of Duty 4 was about 4 or 5 hours longer, it would be the no brainer choice. If (and that's a huge if) they could have found a way to keep up the pace of amazing levels and nonstop excitement with constant surprises. Go for Bioshock, but whatever you do, at least rent Call of Duty 4. (unless you are into the online play, then COD beats Bioshock as Bioshock has no online play.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NE146 #10 Posted November 25, 2007 I've never played any of the Call of Duty games. Are they good single player games or do you really need to play online with others to fully enjoy them? ..Al Al, I'm definitely not a FPS kind of guy. And I enjoy COD4 and play it. The single player is pretty fun and the multiplayer (aka "virtual paintball" done right) makes the game. I say if you have any doubt, you should at least rent it. But imho it's currently the best 360 game out there now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atari5200 #11 Posted November 26, 2007 For those 2 choices I'd say COD4. However my true answer would be make your wife buy you Super Mario Galaxy Going to go with Bioshock and as far as SMG...er no thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites