🚀 go-pugleaf

  I would think that the servers on an internet connection would be just
fine.  The actual connection to the ISP is what would time-out a multi-play
connection.  Lag causation is from congested routers and colliding packets,
not necessarily your modem; this is true of mismatching data-line
throughput.  I.e., A person with a high speed connection and high bandwidth
ISP (isdn, cable modem, t1-3 line) could easily become lagged out by a
person connected to AOL or Earthlink (fist hand experience of this one).  On
your end, everything can look fine but on the server, you're already dead.
Had this happen before many times.
  LAN connections are definitely protocol and CPU dependent on throughput.
I.e., back at a company I used to work at, our lab had Ultra-SPARC stations
running Solaris 2.5, while the test-lab had SPARCII stations running an
older version of Solaris (1.1.2 or something like that).  We played a
network game on 10Mbit ethernet that used token ring as the protocol (what
can I say?  Old network).  With token ring, having the faster computer
ALWAYS favors you (should you have the faster computer).  With bus
processing protocols (like old IPX) it was more probabalistic despite CPU
speed... (sort of evens out the resources).  You could always get the
sysadmin to raise your priority level (in token ring) and smoke everyone
despite your CPU speed.  In IPX or TCP/IP, I think you're pretty much
screwed;  very probabalistic (which is a big term meaning you'll probably
get on, right now, but if not you'll connect later)  Silly...
  So basically, in LAN multi-play mode, it helps to have a fast computer and
a fast NIC.  On Internet connections, your best bet is to have a fast
connection (cable modem (sometimes not fast), ISDN, or T1-3 line) and be
connected to a high-bandwidth server on which you play your game (which also
effectively eliminates your 28.8K Earthlink user).
Matt McMahon wrote in message <78dmgk$aqo$1...@winter.news.rcn.net>...
>I've been in SIN games where I have had absolutley no lag, and others were
>complaining it was unplayable.... So it's definatly not an all or none type
>server.
>
>
>J�rg van der Vlies wrote in message ...
>>
>>Danny Broos schrieb in Nachricht <78c5vl$beh$1...@reader2.wxs.nl>...
>>>
>>>J�rg van der Vlies heeft geschreven in bericht ...
>>>>
>>>>Danny Broos schrieb in Nachricht <78aq0d$j14$1...@reader1.wxs.nl>...
>>>>>You're right! When you can run it with this system, the graphics will
>>look
>>>>>like shit. Yeah even with a TNT. Never thought you would have to turn
>>your
>>>>>TNT in a 320x240 res, huh?
>>>>>Use a pentium 350 for minimal (or a 300. THE 300A o/c to 450 :-))
>>>>>128 Mb ram, a 32x cd-rom.
>>>>>Maybe it isn't that it cannot be played on a slower pc, it would
>slowdown
>>>>>everything on the net for the guys who have a good pc!!
>>>>This is not true! Quake uses a game engine which is independent of time.
>>It
>>>>all depends on the performance of the server. I and a few neighbours
>tried
>>>>it...someone had a 486-DX2-66 in the net and it did't harm our Pentium
>>>>MMX-PCs
>>>>
>>>>J�rg
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Oh, never knew that... So when some assholes try to run it with their
28k8
>>>modems my ISDN won't be effected? So not like with some other games (good
>>>example is SIN)
>>Hmmmm, 28k8 is a little bit too slow. My experience I showed above was
only
>>proven on a 10MBit-Network. But I have got ISDN, too. And I didn't notice
>>any side effects usually caused by slow connections...
>>
>>J�rg
>>
>
>