DSL question..

XPoGoX · Post by **XPoGoX** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:02 pm

For online gaming does your upload speed matter at all/.
I have 1131kbs down and 314kbs up
would that be suitable for gaming?

Post by **|darc|** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:06 pm

Yes, your upload speed does matter.

Those speeds are suitable for gaming.

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:00 am

Could I get away with 512/128 on say... XBconnect?

mikelomax · Post by **mikelomax** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 8:24 am

Skynet wrote:Could I get away with 512/128 on say... XBconnect?

Well if you can't then I would hate to know what it's sending and recieving that would demand more than that.

Post by **|darc|** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:14 am

Skynet wrote:Could I get away with 512/128 on say... XBconnect?

Yes. 128 is minimum

Disheveled DrFreeze · Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:41 am

iirc, i played xbox live on 384/64, wich went OK (didnt try 16 player DM games back then, but it worked) and now im on 768/128, wich works great

the main thing you need upload for is hosting, keep in mind the host needs to transmit all information to every client, and acts as a hub in the network, so needs to upload all voice and player data, where as a client only needs enough up to up hisown voice, and his own player data

and pogo, that connection will do very very nicely for xbox live, you might not be able to host a laggless 16 player game, but who needs to anyway?

XPoGoX · Post by **XPoGoX** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:33 pm

yea im not even looking to host games, just wanted know know if it was worth it to even pick up xbox live.

Gmc · Post by **Gmc** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 4:13 pm

You'll be more than fine with that speed.

Disheveled DrFreeze · Post by **Disheveled DrFreeze** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 4:15 pm

hell yeah, if you have games like rainbow six or halo 2, get it, there a a lot more online games, but the only ones ive played much are rb6, rb6ba and halo2

i also liked mech assault, and im really looking forward to MA2

TheWanderer · Post by **TheWanderer** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 7:56 pm

Halo 2 pretty much sucks ass with 16 players. Bungie needs to optimise the damn thing better; I played 32 player UT2004 matches at faster speeds oftentimes. And UT2004 arguably looks nicer than Halo 2.

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:02 am

Thanks guys. Am looking at DSL soon and 512 will cost about $60 (we get screwed bad here) a month, just wonderring how it'd run online with Xbox

BlackAura · Post by **BlackAura** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:31 am

Thanks guys. Am looking at DSL soon and 512 will cost about $60 (we get screwed bad here)

Think yourself lucky if you can get it at all. We tried six months ago. After around six months of Telstra saying "we'll do it later", they finally admitted the truth. Our local exchange has the capability to supply 80 DSL connections, all of which have been full for over a year, and they have no plans to upgrade the exchange further. On top of that, there's a high probability that Telstra either used pair gain or RIMs when they were laying the phone lines (to cut costs - even though both technologies only came into use after DSL started to become popular, and they knew that either of them would prevent people from getting any kind of DSL), there is no cable (neither the land developers of Telstra wanted to pay for it), and no wireless internet either. So, we're likely to be stuck with dial-up for at least another year, quite probably longer.

DAMN YOU TELSTRA!

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:36 am

Ouch. That does suck. I hope I don't find out something like that when I go to get mine hooked up

Although if worst comes to worst I could go cable, be more expensive though

Vchat20 · Post by **Vchat20** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:30 am

personally, id go with cable myself. they tend to have faster speeds than DSL imo. and in my area, we can get 3000/380 from our cable company for $40 a month, but to get the same speed on DSL, we have to pay $90. $40 on dsl gets us 512/128.

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 2:11 am

I would go with cable, but the setup and the monthly costs, in the end, aren't worth it.

Sure I could afford it, but I'd be struggling to get everything paid. I'm pretty sure for something decent I'd be looking at $100 or so a month. But then again... I may look at the costs and see what can be done.

Vchat20 · Post by **Vchat20** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 2:17 am

also, forgot to mention, DSl often requires an annual contract. this screwed us. cable in most cases (depends on your provider) usually doesnt require any time-based contracts.

Gmc · Post by **Gmc** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 2:25 am

Vchat20 wrote:also, forgot to mention, DSl often requires an annual contract. this screwed us. cable in most cases (depends on your provider) usually doesnt require any time-based contracts.

Thats not usually the case.

Why would they get an engineer out to set up your house with cable only so you could cancel after a month? doesnt make sense to me, as the company would have probably spent more money setting your house up with cable than what they've made from you using their service.

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:10 am

I agree Gmc. I think contracts here are 24months for cable. Yet DSL has no minumum contract (depending on ISP), however if you cancel within 6months you will have to pay a $60 fee or so. Which is understandable