Argh can't decide between this game, gears of war 2 and cod world at war...
Still haven't opened my 360 I got last week as I have yet to get any games for it.

Wow...tough decision. I say Gears first. But it depends on whether you are a bigger fan of the 'over the shoulder' third-person view or first-person.

COD: WaW or Gears would be my choice. WaW multi-player is fun as heck.

$60 is a bit steep for just 4 scenarios/levels.

Especially since the PC version can be had for $45.

I bought mine off Steam. I prefer mouse/keyboard for FPS. There are going to be tons of mods for it. Plus, Valve is good about adding free content later on for the the PC. I'm sure there will be more official campaigns and maps later on.

So far I've played through 3 of the campaigns on co-op. They have all been fun, and I think they will be fun on multiple playthroughs. The final stand on Dead Air was crazy. Somehow we all made it through the zombie waves, tanks, and a couple of us getting incapacitated. I thought I was going to get killed a couple times at the end. I love this game. Gonna try Blood Harvest tonight.

There are five levels per scenario, so 20 in total.

So is that 5 safe rooms? LOL

4 safe rooms and one final "invasion".

But each scenario is approximately 30 minutes, right? That's 2 hours - even if you factor in it's re-playability, that's way too short.

45-75 minutes, but that doesn't really negate your point.

I wanna play. No one wanted to play last night....

I want to play if Amazon would ship my damn game.

I'm supposed to get mine from Amazon tomorrow.

Each campaign, which each have 5 chapters, take about 1.5-2 hours. About 6-8 hours to play all four campaigns.

I gotta stop being cheap and plunk down the $60.

It's like, I'm ready to buy then I look at that damn $59.99 and I choke.

I think you're really exaggerating the times. Every review/impression I've read is that none of the scenarios take more than an hour, with most of them in the 30-45 minute range - even shorter on the easier difficulty levels, which is the way I like to play.

But my point is that after just buying games like Gears2, WaW, Resistance2, etc, etc, etc, all of them with considerable single-player games, co-op play and online, there is no fucking way on earth you're going to convince me that Left 4 Dead delivers 60 bucks worth of content. It sets a terrible precedence.

took us about an hour on normal for each...so 4hrs total.

So far them game is fun, but will get really old really quick. There are technically only 4 weapons (pistol, machine gun, shotgun, bombs) and only 4 or 5 different zombie types. It's a blast with 4 friends in co-op, but boring solo and the versus mode is trash.

And the truth is in the middle I guess, as I've played through a full scenario 3 times and it took me/us about 75 minutes each time. It's all in how quick you move I guess.

My 5 hours of playing last night alone was worth $60 to me. It's a multiplayer game. If I have people to play with, which I have a bunch of friends with the game already, then it's totally worth it for me. So to each his own I guess.

No, I'm really not exaggerating. I've played 3 of the campaigns on normal and they've each taken us about 1 1/2 hours to finish. I'm sure some people finish faster.

I find the game totally worth the $45 I paid on Steam. I don't see how it's a terrible precedent.

Were you playing with multiple people? How could you not have fun in trying to absolutely destroy your group of friends and keep them from getting to the safe house? I found the vs. stuff to be a blast!

What a girly man!

Im on the fence with this one. I do 99% of my playing online. How is the online play?

This game is designed for online. The single player experience is basically online with bots.

I played the demo this morning with a friend and ordered it off of Amazon right after. Amazon had it listed as out of stock but I just checked the status and it says being prepared for shipping so I'm hoping I'll have it by friday.

But I bench 2x my body-weight, so it all balances out.