<p>I love Chicago--absolutely everything about it. I love its environment, the students, the happiness, and the list goes on. I recently told some people about my acceptance to Chicago and they were elated and immediately told me I should go to Chicago over Chicago.</p>
<p>The thing is--I haven't visited Chicago yet. I can totally see myself liking it too. But I'm afraid, I don't want to give up what might be an amazing experience at Chicago, for a very workaholic lifestyle at Chicago. IM JUST CONFUSED. Does Chicago have anything similar to Chicago? Or is the "where fun goes to die" phrase overdone?</p>
<p>Of course, I love Chicago--I mean I applied there. But I always get second doubts when I compare it to Chicago. Chicago has always been that "it" school and now things have changed.</p>
<p>My parents and everyone I know want me to go to Chicago, but I'm very torn; I think I should, instead, go to Chicago. Any thoughts?</p>
<p>Yeah well you can’t go wrong with chicago, but then again you can. You should stand back, look at the school and ask yourself: do i want to consider decisions from an ignorant point of view provided by pamplets or do i want to consider other,more experienced/knowledgeable individuals on College Confidential and their testimonies?</p>
<p>Well I go to the city a lot(Chicago) because I live right outside it, and as long as you have a free day every now and then you’ll be able to do everything you want. Its not like there is so much to do and not enough time in the day. Navy Pier, Cubs game, walk down Michigan Ave. during Christmas. You will have time to do stuff and its worth it, just take a day off every now and then.</p>
<p>That’s precisely where I’m having some trouble. Both of them seem to have fairly similar definitions, so any help pointing out the differences would be great!</p>
<p>Both are good schools, but Chicago is a bit overrated. If I were you, I’d stick with Chicago. You can get a more direct education at Chicago than Chicago.</p>