rec.autos.simulators

N2002 and 28.8 modem

Mike

N2002 and 28.8 modem

by Mike » Sat, 27 Apr 2002 02:43:17

Anybody know how good playing N2002 online with a 28.8 modem would be?  I
read that you need something like 21 Kbps to play, but is it gonna be just
barely playable with that amount of bandwidth?
Mick

N2002 and 28.8 modem

by Mick » Sat, 27 Apr 2002 05:37:05

Mike,
 You need that much K "per car/player" to HOST a race.. If you have a stable
dialup connection, the 28.8 modem should be fine for JOINING races... I have a
56K modem, but have it turned down to 48,800.. and I don't have any problems..
And no one seems to have a problem with my car warping either.. Some say they
actually prefer using the old 28,800 Hardware modems.. (If they don't have
broadband of course)  Good Luck! Mick

> Anybody know how good playing N2002 online with a 28.8 modem would be?  I
> read that you need something like 21 Kbps to play, but is it gonna be just
> barely playable with that amount of bandwidth?

Biz

N2002 and 28.8 modem

by Biz » Sat, 27 Apr 2002 07:14:08

21K of bandwidth is all thats needed for joining any race, but it needs to be a good quality
connection, If you have high latency(pings) or lots of dropped packets, it will be bad.  Lately,
there seems to be a new group of hosts that are automatically discoing users on dial-up, it will be
worse now that the patch shows everyones ping and quality numbers...If they don't want dial-up users
in their races, why don't they just restrict the MLAT?  I get pings ranging from 167-194 for
probably 80% of the servers on sierra.com, and most have their MLAT set for 250-300, so I can
connect and race, until they decide to disco me...very frustrating.
--
Biz

"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
the....." - Ash


> Anybody know how good playing N2002 online with a 28.8 modem would be?  I
> read that you need something like 21 Kbps to play, but is it gonna be just
> barely playable with that amount of bandwidth?

George Major J

N2002 and 28.8 modem

by George Major J » Sat, 27 Apr 2002 12:18:10

It doesnt matter what speed people are connecting at, If someone has dsl
they are going get 21k just like everyone else, for papy sims speed does not
matter because everyone is basically connecting at 21k. Latency is what is
important, Any pure digital connection is better because the information if
recieved with a lot less packet loss (errors) The more errors the more
warping happens. 250ms or less if best for online racing. Imo Papy has the
best multiplayer code in the business. I can have great racing online, But
using a modem to play quake 3 is horrible for me.

M. Mai

N2002 and 28.8 modem

by M. Mai » Sat, 04 May 2002 20:38:26

lol

--
M. Main

www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com
Maturation makes liars of us all.



> It doesnt matter what speed people are connecting at, If someone has dsl
> they are going get 21k just like everyone else, for papy sims speed does
not
> matter because everyone is basically connecting at 21k. Latency is what is
> important, Any pure digital connection is better because the information
if
> recieved with a lot less packet loss (errors) The more errors the more
> warping happens. 250ms or less if best for online racing. Imo Papy has the
> best multiplayer code in the business. I can have great racing online, But
> using a modem to play quake 3 is horrible for me.


> > Anybody know how good playing N2002 online with a 28.8 modem would be?
I
> > read that you need something like 21 Kbps to play, but is it gonna be
just
> > barely playable with that amount of bandwidth?


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.