Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
 ·Comcast
| The other two?
Spam and porn.
I'm wondering how much bandwidth will actually be left for gaming by 2008. 
Current games don't use much bandwidth (many can still be played over dialup). I'm don't expect much to change in 4 years.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. |
|
Monster Rain
Premium
join:2002-08-03
USA
| said by Morac  :
Spam and porn.
I'm wondering how much bandwidth will actually be left for gaming by 2008.
Plenty. Just make sure you have a good ISP.
--
Let he who is without sin throweth the first rock... and I shall smoketh it. |
|
Zunger
join:2003-08-24
Fayetteville, AR
| reply to Morac
games are changing, just to take an example, BF2 says it supports up to 128 players. While the games are getting better on there load / what takes to play them (dont take this a literal way) obviously you will need ALOT of bandwidth to play this. I cant see anyone with slower then full isdn (dialup & 64k isdn) being able to play more of the newer games by the end of this 4th year. |
|
N10Cities
SILENCE I Keel You
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Roland, OK
clubs:
·Cox HSI
 ·World Lynx
| reply to Morac
said by Morac :
Spam and porn.
I'm wondering how much bandwidth will actually be left for gaming by 2008.
Current games don't use much bandwidth (many can still be played over dialup). I'm don't expect much to change in 4 years.
Now maybe the telcos can use all that dark fiber in the ground that is currently unused and was buried during the dot-com boom/bust. |
|
Alcoholic Nonymous
@golden.net | reply to Monster Rain
We're talking about backbone bandwidth, not your personal connection. If the net infrastructure gets congested, the best ISP in the world won't help you. |
|
jdmurray
Premium
join:2001-03-02
Huntington Beach, CA
clubs: | reply to Morac
It's not just how much bandwidth a network games uses. It's also how many people are playing the game at any one time. |
|
AthlGrond
Premium,MVM
join:2002-04-25
Aurora, CO
·Comcast
| said by jdmurray :
It's not just how much bandwidth a network games uses. It's also how many people are playing the game at any one time.
Huh?
Isn't it a fraction of total bandwidth usage, not a fraction of internet users?
As I see it the number of people is not really important, it's how much bandwidth they are using in total that is important. |
|
jdmurray
Premium
join:2001-03-02
Huntington Beach, CA
clubs:
·DSL EXTREME
| said by AthlGrond :
As I see it the number of people is not really important, it's how much bandwidth they are using in total that is important.
Each user playing a specific game will eat up a certain amount of bandwidth. The formula for the total amount of bandwidth used by a specific game would be:
BandwithUsedByASingleGamingClient * NumberOfActiveGamingClients
The number of people playing (i.e. active gaming clients) is very important. |
|
unliterate
join:2002-12-23
Arlington, VA
| that formula isnt always going to work. for some games, the more clients in the game the more bandwidth each individual client uses. and btw ive seen ut2k4 onslaught take up to 15k/s download (checked through the games netstat console command) which couldnt be played on dialup. |
|
jdmurray
Premium
join:2001-03-02
Huntington Beach, CA
clubs:
·DSL EXTREME
| To account for this increased usage of bandwidth you would simply multiply by an additional factor based on the total number of gaming clients attached to a server.
This isn't rocket science, people. Network traffic usage is quantifiable and bandwidth usage can be accurately predicted, even with scenarios that have many variables. |
|
AthlGrond
Premium,MVM
join:2002-04-25
Aurora, CO | Can't we just go by the total bandwidth usage?
I know you want to make a formula and all, but it seems rather pointless...
 |
|
