What PS3 Game Should I Buy?

[Thunder Dan]

I only have 2 games, and need to get another one. I know basically nothing about what good games there are out there.

Which one is the best? What should I buy?

[PM5K]

Probably would help to know which two you already have.

If both of them are Resistance and MGS4 I can't recommend much.

Maybe Little Big Planet...

[Thunder Dan]

Probably would help to know which two you already have.

If both of them are Resistance and MGS4 I can't recommend much.

Maybe Little Big Planet...

College Football and GTA4

[Cry Havoc]

Other - Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.

[Thunder Dan]

Other - Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.

so that is better than the new one?

[Cry Havoc]

so that is better than the new one?

I think so, and most people I have talked to agree with me. CoD4 is just better looking, better playing, and more balanced. Although WaW is by no means a bad game, CoD4 is still the standard of the "new" multiplayer FPS game.

If you're looking for a single player experience, go with Fallout 3. Otherwise, CoD4 all the way.

[Thunder Dan]

I think so, and most people I have talked to agree with me. CoD4 is just better looking, better playing, and more balanced. Although WaW is by no means a bad game, CoD4 is still the standard of the "new" multiplayer FPS game.

If you're looking for a single player experience, go with Fallout 3. Otherwise, CoD4 all the way.

with call of duty do you have to team up with other people to play it? I go online and play games, but I don't really have the time to sit down for 3 hours and lay out strategy and stuff

[BlackSwordsMan]

cod 4 is way better than WAW
but if I had to choose up there fall out 3

[mardigan]

Bioshock or Deadspace.

[dirk4mvp]

with call of duty do you have to team up with other people to play it? I go online and play games, but I don't really have the time to sit down for 3 hours and lay out strategy and stuff

There's a free for all mode. And 4 is way better than waw.

[baseline bum]

My picks would be:

1) Bioshock
2) Call of Duty 4

Those are the two best games released in the last 10 years.

[baseline bum]

with call of duty do you have to team up with other people to play it? I go online and play games, but I don't really have the time to sit down for 3 hours and lay out strategy and stuff

Single-player is amazing on COD4. If you have your PS3 hooked up to an HDTV or a computer monitor, COD4 is also spectacular graphically.

Bioshock is especially amazing with a good stereo setup on your system.

[CuckingFunt]

with call of duty do you have to team up with other people to play it? I go online and play games, but I don't really have the time to sit down for 3 hours and lay out strategy and stuff

I loved the CoD4 single player campaign. It's pretty short, and the bulk of replay appeal is in the multi-player features, but I'm not a big online player and would still recommend the le.

[SAtown]

with call of duty do you have to team up with other people to play it? I go online and play games, but I don't really have the time to sit down for 3 hours and lay out strategy and stuff

CoD 4 online is easy to just pick up and play. It's a little difficult at first because most people have millions of hours of experience and better weapons because of their rank, but it's really addicting. Teaming up with people (matchmaking) is fast, and the games start in no time. There's really no strategy involved, as s just use the grenade launcher to get 2:1 kill ratios (they use their 2 grenades and they're useless after that). Just run and shoot people

Another game I'd recommend is MLB the SHOW. I'm not a baseball fan at all, never been, but fluidity and depth of the game is incredible. It's probably the only sports game that's worth the $50-$60 bucks since NFL 2k on dreamcast (NFL2k5 was a whopping $19.99)

[Thunder Dan]

CoD 4 online is easy to just pick up and play. It's a little difficult at first because most people have millions of hours of experience and better weapons because of their rank, but it's really addicting. Teaming up with people (matchmaking) is fast, and the games start in no time. There's really no strategy involved, as s just use the grenade launcher to get 2:1 kill ratios (they use their 2 grenades and they're useless after that). Just run and shoot people

Another game I'd recommend is MLB the SHOW. I'm not a baseball fan at all, never been, but fluidity and depth of the game is incredible. It's probably the only sports game that's worth the $50-$60 bucks since NFL 2k on dreamcast (NFL2k5 was a whopping $19.99)

I think I'm going to pick up COD4 on the recommendations. thanks everyone

[baseline bum]

I think I'm going to pick up COD4 on the recommendations. thanks everyone

You won't be disappointed.

[Mixability]

FYI: If you're looking for some cheap games and other stuff, I have some items I want to unload.

See the first post in this thread for a rough list of what I have to offer.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118575

[manufor3]

mlb the show is addicting

[z0sa]

eh, I'd definitely say waw is > cod4. the sudden drop from 100,000+ players online in cod4 to 30,000 or less as compared to waw's 200,000+ players most of the time a few months now after the game was released proves this. Those out there saying cod4 is way better are on crack. WaW might not be a huge leap forward for CoD-kind, but the debate isn't about originality, it's about the fun factor. Besides, considering how everyone loves 4, why would they drastically alter the next installment just because eras changed. There's a whole game-full of new guns which shoot more realistically than 4, there's more nades and no perks were deleted afaik, the maps have more detail/are generally larger including tanks on some, single player has co-op and speaking of which let's not forget nazi zombies. waw > mw in pretty much every facet IMO.

but cod 4 is a great pickup as well, I would say it more depends on your preference of period than anything because both games are terrific.

[Thunder Dan]

eh, I'd definitely say waw is > cod4. the sudden drop from 100,000+ players online in cod4 to 30,000 or less as compared to waw's 200,000+ players most of the time a few months now after the game was released proves this. Those out there saying cod4 is way better are on crack. WaW might not be a huge leap forward for CoD-kind, but the debate isn't about originality, it's about the fun factor. Besides, considering how everyone loves 4, why would they drastically alter the next installment just because eras changed. There's a whole game-full of new guns which shoot more realistically than 4, there's more nades and no perks were deleted afaik, the maps have more detail/are generally larger including tanks on some, single player has co-op and speaking of which let's not forget nazi zombies. waw > mw in pretty much every facet IMO.

but cod 4 is a great pickup as well, I would say it more depends on your preference of period than anything because both games are terrific.

Call of Duty WAW is WW2 era right? and 4 is more recent right?

[z0sa]

Call of Duty WAW is WW2 era right? and 4 is more recent right?

4 is "Modern Warfare": you got the usual you'll see in any modern themed game like m16, ak47, mp5, etc.

World at War is ww2: you get the most popular weapons from the main ww2 powers like USA, Germany, Japan, etc.

They both play remarkably similar despite having 2 different developers, but in general, all the physics/gun related in WaW is better than 4. Additionally, the maps of WaW are in a different league from the generally symmetrical and bland layouts of most CoD 4 maps.

[Cry Havoc]

Those out there saying cod4 is way better are on crack.

Or they have differing opinions. Like those found here:

http://cod4source.com/call-of-duty-4...rd-or-treyarch

or the votes here:

http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/13...ults&msg=voted

or this poll:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=127578

Or the various review sites that state that WaW is awesome, but not quite at the level of CoD4.

In fact, if you can find a single poll or review that states that WaW is clearly better than 4, I would be very surprised and stand corrected.

4 is "Modern Warfare": you got the usual you'll see in any modern themed game like m16, ak47, mp5, etc.

World at War is ww2: you get the most popular weapons from the main ww2 powers like USA, Germany, Japan, etc.

Also, you've got it backwards. World War 2 is the "usual ". Modern Warfare is actually a new take on the FPS genre.

[balli]

Yeah, the general consensus is that 4 is the better game. If you like WaW more, cool, but to suggest there's something wrong with the clear majority who prefer 4, is asinine.

And the physics are not better in WaW. I'm not positive since I don't own the game, but I'm pretty sure I read something about Treyarch being too simple to wrap their heads around incorporating 4's rag-doll physics into WaW.

Furthermore, I know, based on the Beta that Treyarch didn't do nearly as good a job with the weaponry details. Particularly with the pistols which are over-powered, pop-up too fast and too close to the screen and aren't nearly as natural or as good looking as those found in 4.

Neverminding the amount of detail 4 put into their other guns, which was not replicated as well in WaW.

Thunder Dan- I would just say this if you haven't gone out and gotten a game yet. Don't even begin to second guess your decision to get 4. WaW might be great, but you need to own cod 4. Havoc is right, it's a generational masterpiece. WaW is a knockoff. Oh and by the way, z0sa suggested nobody's playing it? As we speak, on the live network, there are 143,123 people playing cod 4.

[Evan]

resistance 2 is awesome online and Resident Evil 5 comes out Friday which I have already pre-ordered.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

CoD4