and so it begins...

Well the dreamcast proved that dialup is an adequate, but frustrating experience.  ChuChu rocket was practically unplayable.  Football was good.  Quake sucked, honestly.  

And I\'m not sure about the lazy dev theory.  ID has probably the best net code out there.  You comapare it to Epic\'s and there\'s a big difference in latency.  The fact is that narrowband connections cannot handle games that require split-second timing and twitch reflexes (FPS, ChuChu)--it can\'t keep up with the packets.

That\'s why SOCOM is BB only.  It wouldn\'t be possible on dialup.

Quote me on this: Sony\'s online service will not be free forever.  Not that it\'s free now (add-ons).  Running a server isn\'t free, so as long as there are people playing a game, it\'s costing them money.  If three years from now someone is still playing SOCOM on Sony\'s servers, how much money are they going to have made from that individual?  It\'s not smart business.

The PC industry can get away with it because users can setup PCs and make their own servers.  The PS2 obviously cannot do that.  Despite what anyone says here, Sony wants to make money just as badly as MS does.  They will charge.

How much of the internet is going to a pay system?  How many free internet email services have gone to a pay system.  How many fansites have closed or put up a desperation paypal donation plea?  The internet is changing, and Sony will change with it.

What\'s going to happen then when people have to pay for a dial up gaming service after having bought an add-on(s)?  I hope everyone here will be as outraged as they are about MS\'s charged service.

I guess time will tell.

I don\'t think it was a smart move on MS part not to include a dial up option for online.  I remember way back when Sony was insistent BB was the wave of the future and the Network adapter was gonna bd BB only.

Then a few months later it finally hit them NOT EVERYONE HAS BROADBAND and besides most of the gamers are under 17 anyways and their pareants probably wouldn\'t spring for a cable/dsl connection at $30-40 a month anywayz. So I\'ll happily buy my adapter once it comes out this month and get the living crap beat out of me in every online game and have fun doing it:D

And I\'m glad that I won\'t have to play on a server that is getting lagged to hell by a LPB.  

I too think it was a hasty move by MS to go BB only.  If I made the decision, I\'d offer a dialup service too, but it\'s not my dime and I\'m glad MS had tha balls to go big.

From my play experience on the PC, from everything from Diablo, to Halflife and everything in between, I hated playing with LPBs.  If the server isn\'t shit, they are whining about their connection or about the unfairness of it all or how they\'d be the best player on the server if they had a 150 ping or they\'d spam the chat window with "****ing ping" or "lag kill you pu55y" or "why don\'t you go on a BB only server asshole" or "I was typing you asshole".

Sigh.  It ruins the experience.  It really does.  And that\'s not even considering the lag.  Call me elitest, but I hate dial up players, they have my sympathy--they really do--but they don\'t belong on the same server as I am.  I understand that many people can\'t afford or don\'t have access to BB, but that doesn\'t change the fact that it sucks to be a LPB and it sucks to play with them.

For my part, I don\'t give a damn if MS makes money, I don\'t care if PS2 will have more online players.  There will be enough people playing XBL (not even counting the dozen or so of my buddies that are dying for it) for me to enjoy it.  You only need 10 to have a great CTF game.

Which service will be better, which company is evil, which console is better, I don\'t care, really.  All I know is that I\'ll soon have Unreal, Mechassault and SOCOM and I\'ll be shaming all you bozos and your weak skillz.  

And I\'m glad that I won\'t have to play on a server that is getting lagged to hell by a LPB.

i hope you dont think this is true

a server is NOT limited by its lowest connection point

thats like saying you plug a 100mbit card into a gbit network and everything will slow down

u think you wont see 150 pings on xbox live?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I\'m glad that I won\'t have to play on a server that is getting lagged to hell by a LPB.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Bah!  You know what I mean!


I probably will see a lot of 150, and that\'s perfectly fine and playable.

not its not

ping is directly realitive to hops

VERY FEW people can or want to comtenplate this

nothing can save you if yer 10 hops away from the server

150 ping = dropped packets

that is not what i was implying, take the dreamcast for example remember QUAKE. It only supported 4 players. Why? cause anymore would of cause serious issues with lag, - NVIDIA256

Actually, I think the four player restriction had a lot less to do with latency.. but was also caused by hardware limitations. Q3A is a BEAUTIFUL game.. the amount of textures and high poly archetecture is amazing.. the difference between it and Unreal Tournament is like night and day. Yet.. depending on the map.. UT could support up to 8 simutanious players in the same game with lag compairable to Quakes. (Personally, I always thought UT lagged alot less.. even with a full game). Alien Front Online is another title which allows up to 8 players in the same game. It\'s a fast paced arcade shooter.. and surprisingly lagged very little when you consider they were also shooting 5 second bursts of voice communication along the same pipeline. Granted, with Broadband.. the voice communication would have been cleaned up a LOT.. but that was really the only area that lag was blatantly apperant. Only once.. MAYBE twice a night I would notice lag in-game.. but otherwise.. it ran smooth as silk. (Although I\'m sure the lag was there and in full force.. the game covered for it VERY nicely)

Really, the only games that NEED broadband are twitch games. FPS\'s, Racers\'s.. anything that requires high framerates and fast reflexes. If you slow the action down a notch.. then you can program the game to cover for lag. For example.. PSO has almost no noticable instances of lag. The few times it does happen.. it\'s something nominal like your text not appearing for a few seconds or an item that you picked up still being on the ground for a few seconds. And you\'d be surprised how really unoptimised the game is to accomodate for lag. Once you get on v.2 and start battling.. or playing soccer.. then it becomes blatantly apperant. In a normal game, in the lobby, or in C-Mode.. it\'s transperant.

The numbers of players per game in PSO isn\'t limited by 56k bandwith either.. but again.. it\'s the hardware limitations. With four players there\'s several instances of severe slowdown.. expecially in the Ruins when surrounded by a lot of enemies and FO\'s casting techs. Whereas 20 people can stand around and chat in the lobby with little noticable instance of lag or slowdown.. only 4 people can play an actual game. In fact.. GSers have found a way to "pack" more people into a lobby than the servers are supposed to allow causing severe slowdown in the game.

I still think MS should have allowed for a 56k option on the Xbox. Would it really have been too hard to segregate the servers.. make a few of them accessable only to high speed connections while confining 56k users to the general servers? Seems to be a much better solution than simply cutting out most of the market.

Once again, if a 56k lags the other players, its purely cause of the company that coded it..

Obviously those problems were in PC online gaming in its infancy.
I played Everquest on a 56k for months, and it was fine.. its all about how it was coded.

Of course with a MMORPG there is a central server, which is part of the reason why it does not matter.
Which leads me to to a question

I have a question. When they say that TMB is restricted to 2 players for 56k users and 6(?) players for Broadband, is that referring to just the host\'s connection? Can a person on broadband host the game, and then 5 other 56k users connect to it? Or will those two different connection types be completely segregated?

If a BB person is hosting, its likely 6 players. If a 56k is hosting then its likely 2 players. While i\'m not 100% sure this is the most likely based on my experience in PC online gaming

If anything, the person with 56k might have a slight disadvantage (other players bouncing around), however its certainly better then not being able to play at all. But even then, if the game is writen right it should not have a problem unless the 56k connection is really bad.

yes it would have been too hard for them

m$ wanted to focus on gimmicks with thier xbox

its thier selling tactic

thier saying "look what we have!"

without saying "its not really that much better, but we hope youll pay more..."

EDIT: wait a sec..

Here is the original logo with slogan


See the hidden message?
it was there all along!

Thank you for putting your work of art in multiple threads...

You\'re an idiot and an ass Chrono...

I played with 150 ping often and it was fine.  Sure it\'s not optimal, but it\'s better than 56k.  And BB isn\'t a gimmick, it\'s not sacrificing anything, it\'s about offering the best solution, it\'s not pacifying the masses.  It\'s about the best that gaming can be.

Hye, you\'re all about high standards when it is convienent to your argument, when it\'s not, it magically becomes a gimmick.. Puzzling...

Another thing I wonder in a game like TMB if you\'re on BB and there\'s another player on 56k would that guy end up a sitting duck if he gets lagged? Even in any type of onlne game like Madden or whatever?

Why are you a mod watchdog? your breaking the rules of the forum. Of course watchgod can\'t do anything wrong

Constructive insults are welcome, but please try to work them into your reply to the subject. In other words, don\'t make a new post just to make a clever insult. This takes the thread off topic and usually never gets back on track.

Not to mention

Name calling isn\'t prohibited in here, but again, don\'t make a new post for it. Either work it into your post or don\'t reply at all. Keep it sensible and retain some some class for yourself. Use wit and sarcasm like mm.

Your a very sorry mod Watchdog

EDIT:

And to make my post that much more mature then yours watchgod:

I played with 150 ping often and it was fine. Sure it\'s not optimal, but it\'s better than 56k. And BB isn\'t a gimmick, it\'s not sacrificing anything, it\'s about offering the best solution, it\'s not pacifying the masses. It\'s about the best that gaming can be.

Exactly how will being only BB help the xbox?
tell me please, cause if the ps2 segregates BB and 56k what is the difference seriously?
the only difference I see is, one says Microsoft on the box, the other says sony.. Fanboy, yep, aparently if you can call me a ass I can call you whatever I damn well please, fanboy

I didn\'t break either of those rules, my post was constructive, and fact based; I doubt anyone here will refute the label I gave you.  

How many of your posts have been constructive?  How many posts have you made recently with only your clever Photoshop work?  Hmm.  Yes, good question, why am I a mod and you, with twice the post count, have been over-looked...There must be some kind of mistake. :rolleyes:

BB only will help the xbox because it is only one thing for the devs to consider. If it\'s online, it\'s BB only.  With PS2, many games will go to the lowest common denominator (56k) and they will suffer for it.  With xbox, they don\'t have that option.  It\'s go big or go home.  Many devs will try to mix the two, and the games will suffer.  

It\'s the PC syndrome all over again.