Grackus

Just got my pc together....

x2 4800+, 8800gts (320mb), 2gb DDR2 800 (pc6400)

Playing at 1440x900

I know it's not high-end but how do you think these games will run on my pc and what do you think is the better game?

Vikingod

They will both run fine.

Personally, I'd go with Bioshock, it's the better of the two. Crysis isn't bad, but it's no where near as good as Bioshock, imo.

__________________

IEMC

Bioshock sucked.

Crysis is just all around fun.

Play Bioshock (initals are BS, makes sense :P) if you like a good story, tons of repetitive bosses, and boring game play.

Play Crysis if you like replayability, great strategy chances, and an all around great game.

__________________
aka Mr. Fax Sender

OmegaRED

I've basically got the same system as you and would recommend Bioshock over Crysis. They're both great games but Bioshock is more of an enjoyable experience and won't leave you cursing your video card for not being powerful enough to maintain a smooth framerate.

It might be unfathomable for some people to do but Crysis is a game that might be better to put on the shelf for a year or two then come back to once the video cards available decimate it. A lot of people did this with Far Cry and I'm sure they enjoyed the game in its full glory rather than on lower visual quality settings.

__________________

BlueMak

Though I hate to say it, Bioshock is a very good game. Crysis is an average game with very good graphics. Take your pick.

__________________

"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,
You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis

Grackus

I kind of thought about that. Maybe waiting a while...next year or so after I do my next update.

I played a Bioshock demo on my 360 but it seemed like a game better played on pc.

I'm really in the mood for a new Thief game...those were the days I tell ya!!

Vikingod

Check out Assassins Creed if you get a chance, its pretty enjoyable.

__________________

Tipstaff

Bioshock gets my vote too. While Crysis looks great, is fun to play, if you are any good at FPS games you will beat it pretty damn quick. It took me a few days (pacing myself, couple hours a day), but a friend of mine went through it in a day. Bioshock, on the other hand, has so much atmosphere to it that you want to take it slow just so that you can soak it all in (the story, that is.. not the water). Bioshock, for me, was overall more enjoyable.

BTW, if you go with Bioshock, be sure to updated it to (Edit) 1.1 as there a couple extra plasmids in there that didn't make it into the final version of the game.

__________________

Markius

i havent played crysis yet (not worth it on my current pc) but i will put in a good word for bioshock, supurb game imo.

__________________
DriverHeavens Aussie...

"Lifes tragedy is that we get old too soon and wise too late"

Zardon

Bioshock. Ive beaten both and I thought crysis was a distinctly average game, much poorer than farcry really.

LHC

I say BioShock, though I've never played Crysis. I don't really plan on playing Crysis because I've heard it's not that great of a game, and.. well, it's made by EA

__________________

dipstick

Bioshock without a doubt. Probably the best $30 you can spend on a game today

tcman

I have played both games. My opinion about the games:

Bioshock:
+ good and interesting story-line;
+ great atmosphere;
+ alot to explore and alot things to do, much like System Shock and Deus Ex;
+ nice graphics (but after seeing Crysis it becomes standard);
+ the game is pretty long (well, much longer than Crysis).
+ nice (gameplay) interaction between fire, ice, electricity and water
- the game is not that hard;
- game activation annoyance (require internet connection);


Crysis:
+ Superb graphics (after some tweaks it looks even better); very big environment;
+ plays alot like Far Cry (could be a disadvantage for people who didn't like Far Cry);
+ nice innovative nano suit/weapon/gun implementation;
+ controllable vehicles;
+ impressive physics implementation;
- High system requirements;
- The game is very short;
- could not use gun/weapons under water, just like Farcry;
- the suite is sometimes useless; specific "super power" depleting too fast; you die almost as fast as in Farcry while the latter the main character does not have a nano suite; hope for a patch for balancing the suite or adding upgradability of the suite;

I think Bioshock is a better game and have a more polished gameplay (not that Crysis is a bad game) and in your case Bioshock will run very smooth on your system while Crysis could run just okay with some settings mostly on mid and some on high (the shader option which makes the game look much better than on mid) with probably 20-30 fps. Latter levels in the game the framerates will be even lower.

Just Learnin'

Bioshock was a game that made time disappear for me, it kept my interest and made me want to keep playing. Crysis made me wonder what all the hype was about and I played it just to be done with it.

__________________
Mentally confused and prone to wandering.....

MIG-31

Bioshock for sure I can't offer any more than what has already been said in the replies above.My usual is to play it on easy to get to know the game,then crank up the difficulty level for the replay...it gives me a advantage in some ways.

Crysis is good but is perhaps a little repetitive,to me this shortens the replay value....May be better if you can get a used copy or wait till it drops in price.

__________________