Would you get Call of Duty World at War or Battlefield Bad Company?

[dukethepcdr]

I'm looking to get a good shooter this year and I'm torn between Call of Duty World at War and Battlefield Bad Company. I've rented both at Blockbuster, so I have an idea of what each is like. On the one hand, I like the humor and vehicles in Bad Company. On the other hand, I like how cinematic Call of Duty is. Also, World at War is one of the few WWII games set in the Pacific Theater that isn't awful. If you were to get just one of them, which would you get?

Also if I were to get World at War, which of the many versions should I get (it's out for every current gen console)? I have a 360, Wii, DS and computer. I'd like another good shooter for my Wii, but is it good enough on the Wii to get it for that console vs getting it on 360 or PC?

 

[D_987]

Get World at War on the 360 or PC.

 

[Singing Gremlin]

I'd go with World at War. Bad company is good, but there are far better Battlefield games out there, if with less humour.

 

[Novajam]

Hmmm. I'm not so sure.

I rented COD5 a few weeks back and was rather disappointed. It seemed the only weapons you ever really needed were the flamethrower and a bolt rifle. It also felt a little to me like COD4 gone sickly. However the Russian army sections were cool as anything.

I haven't tried BF:BC properly yet. I played the demo a lot, liked that, but there isn't a rental copy at my local Blockbuster and I'm not sure if it's worth my money yet, so I'm sorta waiting for a price drop.

If you like multiplayer, I've heard BF:BC is a lot of fun, but in my (admittedly, limeted) experience COD5 multiplayer felt copied from COD4 to a fault, with modern weapons switched out for WW2 ones and the ability to mount machine-guns on low walls.

EDIT: I've realised that this wouldn't help you come to a decision at all. Sorry.

 

[Theo Samaritan]

I wouldn't get either. I'd get COD4 if you don't have it already.

 

[NeedAUserName]

I rented both, BF:BC first, and foolishly compared it with COD4. And so found it disappointing, but the only thing COD5 has going for it is the Russian Levels, a Flamethrower, and Zombie Nazis.

 

[Fatalis67]

Get Bad Company, blowing all the shit up never gets old. COD5 was a disappointment, made by a crappy development team trying to ride on the success of a much better team that knows how to make games.

 

[TMAN10112]

I would say COD:WAW, if you liked any of the COD games befor you will probably love this one.

 

[Dudemeister]

COD: WAW.
Even if you don't like it as much as COD 4, it's still far better than Bad Company.

 

[Nivag the Owl]

Battlefield by a long-shot.

 

[Zippy1313]

Battlefield because it is cheaper.

 

[Dubiousduke]

Battlefield... Funny, and great multiplayer.

 

[b4dsmllz]

battlefield, its cooler just for the shear level of destruction you can cause

 

[xitel]

Wow, this seems like a pretty even split here. Personally I would say that Battlefield is a better choice, but that's because I have a personal hatred for WWII games.