Infinite warfare OPTIC fiber and Throttle

[ColonicBoom]

I feel I shouldn't be penalized by someone else's design threshold to make an even playing field for others with lower bandwidth

 

they FEEL didn't work for THEM

 

I guess I'm done with this forum.  

 

You're not penalised, it's about ping NOT bandwidth (unless the bandwidth is so low you can't get online).

They FEEL it didn't work because it DOESN'T.

Oh no, don't be like that, pleeeeeease don't go! Nobody meant to make you sad.

 

 

Thats a pretty long run for a placebo.  I throttle every thing I play and play on since 1999, PC, PS3, PS4, XBOX360 and XBOX ONE.  Statements backed by what? Cause someone told you?  Or a week long test. LOL

 

What's LOL about that?

You're the one that's been throttling for 17 years, LOL.

 

 

Throttling will lead to dropping frames, so you appear to others as teleporting. Which is why you shouldn't do it. 

 

Yes, if you throttle far enough it will hit the fan and get messy.

But as long as you don't throttle too far it won't cause any negative effects.

It won't cause any positive effects either though.

 

 

I play all online MP titles with 97% sliders, compared to many on 70% I hardly consider that I throttle

 

No, that's not throttling, not in the sense that people are disagreeing about here anyway.

 

 

 

A big distinction needs to be made between setting Anti-Flood to combat buffer-bloat VS throttling in the mistaken belief that you will be punished for having higher bandwidth. I'm amazed that people still think this.

[b00stg0d]

There is no distinction. You cannot define good or bad by percentages. If you say 70% is great for you on 100/10Mbps connection and Timmy down the road says equally 70% is also great for him with 15 Mbps adsl and 512kbps upload, then by definition you both "throttled." You dropped your network available bandwidth overall to approx. 70/7 Mbps he on the other hand dropped to 10.75Mbos and 384kbps so now he's within a 100kbps of my target baseline so is he a throttling bad guy same end result as my service, it's called packet shaping via QoS. Just because I don't want my data packet spreading inside a larger than needed overhead that does and will cause fluctuations most see as lag doesn't make me a cheater or shitty player.

Prove that I am losing/dropping frames. Provide technical data that any player throttling and maintaining low latency without any packet loss is losing frames and causing anyone else harm.

 

Also, prove it doesn't work. It does work that's why I've done it for years. It probably doesn't work for you because of your I ability to harness it.

 

Practice saying this... it doesn't work for me. Saying things like it doesn't work is ridiculous. Just cause you read it on the Internet doesn't make it true. And trying it for a week without understanding it proves one thing.

[frustrated]

I say have a coffee, and realise its just a game and concentrate on important things in life, honestly you want stress come play Destiny you guys would pull your hair out, as there is no dedi server and its all pvp .I'm speaking only my own opinion on this thread, and its all a bit to negative, some are only trying to help, like Boom or Zen .

I'm only saying, not causing a debate, I've got work to do but damn all this over a beta, Destiny has had p2p for years and its a deal with it attitude, yes its not great but it is what it is.

[ColonicBoom]

There is no distinction. You cannot define good or bad by percentages. If you say 70% is great for you on 100/10Mbps connection and Timmy down the road says equally 70% is also great for him with 15 Mbps adsl and 512kbps upload, then by definition you both "throttled." You dropped your network available bandwidth overall to approx. 70/7 Mbps he on the other hand dropped to 10.75Mbos and 384kbps so now he's within a 100kbps of my target baseline so is he a throttling bad guy same end result as my service, it's called packet shaping via QoS. Just because I don't want my data packet spreading inside a larger than needed overhead that does and will cause fluctuations most see as lag doesn't make me a cheater or shitty player.

Prove that I am losing/dropping frames. Provide technical data that any player throttling and maintaining low latency without any packet loss is losing frames and causing anyone else harm.

 

Also, prove it doesn't work. It does work that's why I've done it for years. It probably doesn't work for you because of your I ability to harness it.

 

Practice saying this... it doesn't work for me. Saying things like it doesn't work is ridiculous. Just cause you read it on the Internet doesn't make it true. And trying it for a week without understanding it proves one thing.

 

 

Maybe you're mixing my posts in this thread up with somebody else.

 

I said that I tested 'hard throttling' (as a way to circumvent 'lag compensation') and that it doesn't work.

I'm saying that hard throttling does NOT affect your ping (which is what lag compensation is based around).

I'm saying that if you throttle too far it will cause you to drop packets and will generally mess up your game (there's a minimum bandwidth to play online after all).

 

Yes, there is an obvious distinction between the two.

Some people are talking about creating a buffer to stop other users on your network from creating lag spikes.

Others are talking about throttling so hard that the game SUPPOSEDLY thinks you have bad internet and thus gives you favourable outcomes in gunfights.

The first is exactly the point of the Anti-Flood settings.

The second is attempting to manipulate the game (but it doesn't work).

I really don't care if you want to throttle to 200kb, it doesn't affect me in the slightest, I give less than half a shit if you do.

 

 

I never said 'good' or 'bad' in this thread anyway.

I didn't call you or anyone else a cheater or a shitty player.

Nor did I say that I consider it cheating or naughty, so you can unbunch your panties.

I also didn't say that you were dropping frames or causing anyone else any harm.

If you read my post that you actually replied to, you will see that I said "as long as you don't throttle too far then it won't cause any negative effects".

Those are my exact words.

 

I will say that you're shitty at typing though and you have a shitty angsty angry attitude.

You come across as an impotent youtube commenter, like a very little man that's angry at the world because everyone is bigger than you.

You come across as a little dick that gets angry online because you got bullied and you're too weak and pathetic to do anything in the outside world.

 

Yes, I read on the internet that throttling works against lag compensation so I tested it. I proved to myself that throttling doesn't affect lag compensation.

That's how testing hypotheses* works, didn't you do science at gutter-rat remedial school?

Just because you've been doing it for 17 years doesn't make it true. It just means that you're too stupid to have realised yet.

 

 

Practice saying this:

I can't read properly. I shouldn't accuse people without reading their posts properly. I shouldn't be rude to people for no reason. If I'm going to call someone out then I must make sure that I say it to the right person. I must not start arguments with people that are obviously more intelligent than me because they will make me look foolish. When I rage type people can see that I'm weak. I pretend I'm strong and clever but really I'm pathetic. I'm crying on the inside.

 

 

*hypothesis = theory, by the way. 

[Zennon]

Just as a note to proceedings I have been playing the beta 75mb down 16 up (since the moving of the fibre cables has stopped cross talk yay) and it played really sweet.

 

Is it mostly really good players? yes.

 

Is the TTD quick? Yes but so my TTK.

[b00stg0d]

Maybe you're mixing my posts in this thread up with somebody else.

 

I said that I tested 'hard throttling' (as a way to circumvent 'lag compensation') and that it doesn't work.

I'm saying that hard throttling does NOT affect your ping (which is what lag compensation is based around).

I'm saying that if you throttle too far it will cause you to drop packets and will generally mess up your game (there's a minimum bandwidth to play online after all).

 

Yes, there is an obvious distinction between the two.

Some people are talking about creating a buffer to stop other users on your network from creating lag spikes.

Others are talking about throttling so hard that the game SUPPOSEDLY thinks you have bad internet and thus gives you favourable outcomes in gunfights.

The first is exactly the point of the Anti-Flood settings.

The second is attempting to manipulate the game (but it doesn't work).

I really don't care if you want to throttle to 200kb, it doesn't affect me in the slightest, I give less than half a shit if you do.

 

 

I never said 'good' or 'bad' in this thread anyway.

I didn't call you or anyone else a cheater or a shitty player.

Nor did I say that I consider it cheating or naughty, so you can unbunch your panties.

I also didn't say that you were dropping frames or causing anyone else any harm.

If you read my post that you actually replied to, you will see that I said "as long as you don't throttle too far then it won't cause any negative effects".

Those are my exact words.

 

I will say that you're shitty at typing though and you have a shitty angsty angry attitude.

You come across as an impotent youtube commenter, like a very little man that's angry at the world because everyone is bigger than you.

You come across as a little dick that gets angry online because you got bullied and you're too weak and pathetic to do anything in the outside world.

 

Yes, I read on the internet that throttling works against lag compensation so I tested it. I proved to myself that throttling doesn't affect lag compensation.

That's how testing hypotheses* works, didn't you do science at gutter-rat remedial school?

Just because you've been doing it for 17 years doesn't make it true. It just means that you're too stupid to have realised yet.

 

 

Practice saying this:

I can't read properly. I shouldn't accuse people without reading their posts properly. I shouldn't be rude to people for no reason. If I'm going to call someone out then I must make sure that I say it to the right person. I must not start arguments with people that are obviously more intelligent than me because they will make me look foolish. When I rage type people can see that I'm weak. I pretend I'm strong and clever but really I'm pathetic. I'm crying on the inside.

 

 

*hypothesis = theory, by the way. 

I think you took offense to something said to someone else who clearly made the statements early on and are now bumbling it up with the fact that I quoted your message.  You should reread and take your own advice.  Now since I posted my opinion and someone got butthurt you feel the need to insult.  I can LOL at these statements because that's how I feel when I see ignorance so blatantly typed out in such a beautiful manner.  

In my world when someone blurts out free psychotherapy advice it's more of a reflection of their own needs and a subconscious admission of their own shortcomings. 

 

Either way.

Point 1:  It works for me and has for 17 years... how stupid of me using QoS to my advantage, those damn packet shaping coder/engineers....

Point 2:  I'm not on here everyday complaining of how inconsistent my game play is, I'm ALWAYS top of the leaderboards. 

Point 3:  I never insulted you, I called out a person for blatantly stating that someone is ______ for throttling.

Point 4:  I also stated the OP was wrong in stating the Duma was gabage so don't group me in with someone complaining about the product.

Point 5:  You don't know me. If you want to call names and play internet ninja or counselor go troll some preteen board.

Point 6:  A7,,,  We get it, you're the best player in the world!!!  WOOT WOOT!!!  jk, I appreciate the skills, as well I am jealous of your proximity to the dedi

Point 7:  You have a nice fucking day now!!!    (insert bo3 voiceover for humor)

 

No hard feeling ladies.

[ColonicBoom]

I think you took offense to something said to someone else who clearly made the statements early on and are now bumbling it up with the fact that I quoted your message.  You should reread and take your own advice.  Now since I posted my opinion and someone got butthurt you feel the need to insult.  I can LOL at these statements because that's how I feel when I see ignorance so blatantly typed out in such a beautiful manner.  

In my world when someone blurts out free psychotherapy advice it's more of a reflection of their own needs and a subconscious admission of their own shortcomings. 

 

Either way.

Point 1:  It works for me and has for 17 years... how stupid of me using QoS to my advantage, those damn packet shaping coder/engineers....

Point 2:  I'm not on here everyday complaining of how inconsistent my game play is, I'm ALWAYS top of the leaderboards. 

Point 3:  I never insulted you, I called out a person for blatantly stating that someone is ______ for throttling.

Point 4:  I also stated the OP was wrong in stating the Duma was gabage so don't group me in with someone complaining about the product.

Point 5:  You don't know me. If you want to call names and play internet ninja or counselor go troll some preteen board.

Point 6:  A7,,,  We get it, you're the best player in the world!!!  WOOT WOOT!!!  jk, I appreciate the skills, as well I am jealous of your proximity to the dedi

Point 7:  You have a nice fucking day now!!!    (insert bo3 voiceover for humor)

 

No hard feeling ladies.

 

Oh right, I though you were talking to me - your post started off talking to me so I assumed it was all directed at me.

I didn't take offence but this has gotten out of hand as throttle threads always do.

 

In response to your points.

1. Nope. It doesn't affect lag compensation, not at all. You're a silly-boots.

2. Congratulations on topping the leaderboards, I expect you'll be getting a call from the President soon.

3. Apologies, I thought you were talking to me. Please try to be more clear in future.

4. Good, always nice to see someone sticking up for the Duma rather than bashing. I didn't group you, you're in a league of your own.

5. You're right, I don't know you. But I have a good idea of what you're about.

6. A7Legit is annoyingly good. Anyone that can only die once in IW beta is doing something right! (or everything right). But he never has a bad word to say about anyone even if they give him shit, the man is mellow. And people will defend him if you say mean things.

7. I will, thank you. You have a lovely day too my friend.

 

I am ignorant but not in this instance. And I'm touched that you appreciate the eloquence.

I'm not qualified to offer psychotherapy but I'm glad I helped you with your problem.

 

I accept your apology of course.

[RL317]

In the months prior to getting my Netduma, where I never used any form of QoS at all, I noticed that my connection performed fine if nothing else used my line. If we had TV streaming/YouTube/some kind of download on the go, it would all go to sh*t. I think it's safe to say this was bufferbloat doing its thing, causing spikes of even thousands of milliseconds on download and up to 500ms on upload (this is when I was on cable. It performed well during Ghosts, where connections were marvellous overall, although there was frequent jitter on the line).

 

When I got my Netduma and kept bandwidth at 100% (I was on 100/6 at the time), tests would obviously show that massive bufferbloat, though if I played while nothing else used the line obviously there was no issue. If I reduced bandwidth to 97% on the sliders, I averaged <5ms bloat on both download and upload, though that jitter was still there because it was an inconsistent cable line.

 

If I reduced past a certain point (say 10% on both sliders), I would see bufferbloat actually return to the default high spikes. In game there was no positive difference at all. If anything it made CoD games seem... choppier?

 

Here's my theory on the whole throttling myth. Somebody tried throttling one day, and noticed games were playing smoother than usual if their house was busy and many devices were using the line. They were seeing the benefits of reducing bufferbloat to negligible levels. This person tells a friend who goes a bit further (into kilobits, say), and now he thinks having lower bandwidth makes CoD play better. He's getting the benefits of QoS, but he once heard the term "lag compensation" (a term I'm sure 98% of gamers would fail to define correctly), put 2 and 2 together to make 14, a bit of Chinese whispers takes place in the general gaming community, certain clickbait moneywh0re-type YouTubers make a few videos and suddenly everyone thinks "ohhhhh I have super sick high 'speed' internet, I'm being punished and my low 'speed' enemy is being 'compensated' for his lag".

 

Bandwidth has nothing to do with latency, but if you drop your bandwidth low enough it's going to become fully under load more easily. Soon enough you could drop it to the point where simply gaming with no other devices using the line is going to cause excess lag spikes just because that tiny bit of bandwidth you have available to use is being fully used up, so to speak. This would fit in with what I've noticed when dropping bandwidth below a certain point: bufferbloat climbing back up rather than dropping.

 

So for the most part, what we have is a generous helping of placebo, confusion regarding certain terms and the effect of throttling on connections, and a while lot of ignorance. Cue thousands of angry 12 year olds screaming about getting "lag comped" because they have a "high speed" connection.

 

In short, if you throttle to a couple of hundred kilobits thinking it makes playing CoD better, you're actually doing yourself harm. You're just going to end up possibly worsening your own connection, as well as forcing other people to deal with the effects of that. If you have any kind of networking knowledge and still continue to throttle to that point despite this, you must just be an idiot/troll, and you're probably one of the reasons lobbies are such a mess in recent CoDs where things should be improving all the time.

 

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

 

As far as IW goes, I have no words. It's a mess. I'm not on that cable line anymore, as I've since moved to a fibre provider that gives me an incredibly responsive and stable line, yet apparently everyone's ahead of me, everyone kills in a couple of frames (or one [literally] at times), everyone has veteran bot accuracy and reactions, and everyone has Stopping Power and Juggernaut. Or, you could look at the fact that people aren't taking damage, slower killing guns and inferior accuracy are dominating, and somehow everything is different in your world compared to theres. In your world you could be seeing everything as close to real time as possible (<one frame latency monitor, incredible connection) with fast reactions, snapping to people on near maximum sensitivity like it's unfair, with a faster killing gun and quickdraw, engaging the enemy way before they've even started firing, but you'll fall over instantly to 7 shots dealt by a suppressed SMG while you've easily landed 7 or 8 shots on target in your world with an NV4 or Kbar. You watch the killcam and it shows you in "deer in headlights mode" gawping at thin air, when in reality you're already sweat jump snapping on to them and railing bullets into their chest, but they get 2 seconds to slow drag on to target, draw circles around you with their potato 4 sens aim and melt you without taking damage. What's really weird is how time to kill is clearly slower than any other IW game to date (some ARs need 5 shots to kill up close!), but time to die is like being forced on to the California AW dedi while you live in the UK just because you don't have dead average stats, and apparently don't deserve a good connection. It's like going up against an aimbotter hipfiring a P-06, only they're skipping around with a 400ms ping.

 

BO3 was bad enough for me (combine no hit reg with EU servers being flooded with unkillable 0.6KD wizards from the middle east, and blatant being behind the action, with audible and visible delays on hitmarkers despite maintaining a constant <10ms latency to the server) meaning I've left so many games this year I've got a negative win/loss, but IW is something else. It's all just a pack of lies. My guess is it's something like a combination of using the AW engine (or so I've heard) with suboptimal ping based matchmaking, laggers being dumped into your lobbies (just like BO3, I'm seeing endless Saudis/Kuwaitis/Qataris/Iraqis who DON'T DIE) and, if BO3 is anything to go by, wonky tick rate again.

 

I went back to Ghosts this week. 3200 people playing, player hosts only, smooth as butter. Running into some out of region players (not as many as in BO3) but they just couldn't compete. Just to rub it in about my torturous experience on BO3 and IW, I late joined a TDM against a couple of tryhards (who admittedly were good) from Saudi Arabia. I started out 0-1 to one who I didn't react to in time, and at the end of the game I was 29-1 calling in a KEM on them. They couldn't win a gunfight against me. Hit detection was fantastic all game, I felt confident and I could trust my ability and shot. What happens in BO3 or IW when someone's lagging? Well I could be on 6ms ping but MY hitmarkers on them will be delayed. They'll shoot me around corners before I've seen them. They'll have what I call anti aim assist over them. I could shoot dead centre and not get any hits. I could react to them the frame I see them with a superior weapon for the range I'm at and die before I could actually do anything about it.

 

I didn't plan to play IW or preorder for that game specifically, but a friend got me a beta code so I thought I'd try it. After the disappointment regarding many of Infinity Ward's choices in Ghosts (though I went back after 6 month's hell on Advanced Lagfare), I was hoping at least those amazing connections Ghosts had would remain. It looks like that won't be the case at all, so I'm glad I stuck to my guns and didn't preorder. MWR isn't worth £80, that's for sure smh.

[b00stg0d]

In the months prior to getting my Netduma, where I never used any form of QoS at all, I noticed that my connection performed fine if nothing else used my line. If we had TV streaming/YouTube/some kind of download on the go, it would all go to sh*t. I think it's safe to say this was bufferbloat doing its thing, causing spikes of even thousands of milliseconds on download and up to 500ms on upload (this is when I was on cable. It performed well during Ghosts, where connections were marvellous overall, although there was frequent jitter on the line).

 

When I got my Netduma and kept bandwidth at 100% (I was on 100/6 at the time), tests would obviously show that massive bufferbloat, though if I played while nothing else used the line obviously there was no issue. If I reduced bandwidth to 97% on the sliders, I averaged <5ms bloat on both download and upload, though that jitter was still there because it was an inconsistent cable line.

 

If I reduced past a certain point (say 10% on both sliders), I would see bufferbloat actually return to the default high spikes. In game there was no positive difference at all. If anything it made CoD games seem... choppier?

 

Here's my theory on the whole throttling myth. Somebody tried throttling one day, and noticed games were playing smoother than usual if their house was busy and many devices were using the line. They were seeing the benefits of reducing bufferbloat to negligible levels. This person tells a friend who goes a bit further (into kilobits, say), and now he thinks having lower bandwidth makes CoD play better. He's getting the benefits of QoS, but he once heard the term "lag compensation" (a term I'm sure 98% of gamers would fail to define correctly), put 2 and 2 together to make 14, a bit of Chinese whispers takes place in the general gaming community, certain clickbait moneywh0re-type YouTubers make a few videos and suddenly everyone thinks "ohhhhh I have super sick high 'speed' internet, I'm being punished and my low 'speed' enemy is being 'compensated' for his lag".

 

Bandwidth has nothing to do with latency, but if you drop your bandwidth low enough it's going to become fully under load more easily. Soon enough you could drop it to the point where simply gaming with no other devices using the line is going to cause excess lag spikes just because that tiny bit of bandwidth you have available to use is being fully used up, so to speak. This would fit in with what I've noticed when dropping bandwidth below a certain point: bufferbloat climbing back up rather than dropping.

 

So for the most part, what we have is a generous helping of placebo, confusion regarding certain terms and the effect of throttling on connections, and a while lot of ignorance. Cue thousands of angry 12 year olds screaming about getting "lag comped" because they have a "high speed" connection.

 

In short, if you throttle to a couple of hundred kilobits thinking it makes playing CoD better, you're actually doing yourself harm. You're just going to end up possibly worsening your own connection, as well as forcing other people to deal with the effects of that. If you have any kind of networking knowledge and still continue to throttle to that point despite this, you must just be an idiot/troll, and you're probably one of the reasons lobbies are such a mess in recent CoDs where things should be improving all the time.

 

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

 

As far as IW goes, I have no words. It's a mess. I'm not on that cable line anymore, as I've since moved to a fibre provider that gives me an incredibly responsive and stable line, yet apparently everyone's ahead of me, everyone kills in a couple of frames (or one [literally] at times), everyone has veteran bot accuracy and reactions, and everyone has Stopping Power and Juggernaut. Or, you could look at the fact that people aren't taking damage, slower killing guns and inferior accuracy are dominating, and somehow everything is different in your world compared to theres. In your world you could be seeing everything as close to real time as possible (<one frame latency monitor, incredible connection) with fast reactions, snapping to people on near maximum sensitivity like it's unfair, with a faster killing gun and quickdraw, engaging the enemy way before they've even started firing, but you'll fall over instantly to 7 shots dealt by a suppressed SMG while you've easily landed 7 or 8 shots on target in your world with an NV4 or Kbar. You watch the killcam and it shows you in "deer in headlights mode" gawping at thin air, when in reality you're already sweat jump snapping on to them and railing bullets into their chest, but they get 2 seconds to slow drag on to target, draw circles around you with their potato 4 sens aim and melt you without taking damage. What's really weird is how time to kill is clearly slower than any other IW game to date (some ARs need 5 shots to kill up close!), but time to die is like being forced on to the California AW dedi while you live in the UK just because you don't have dead average stats, and apparently don't deserve a good connection. It's like going up against an aimbotter hipfiring a P-06, only they're skipping around with a 400ms ping.

 

BO3 was bad enough for me (combine no hit reg with EU servers being flooded with unkillable 0.6KD wizards from the middle east, and blatant being behind the action, with audible and visible delays on hitmarkers despite maintaining a constant <10ms latency to the server) meaning I've left so many games this year I've got a negative win/loss, but IW is something else. It's all just a pack of lies. My guess is it's something like a combination of using the AW engine (or so I've heard) with suboptimal ping based matchmaking, laggers being dumped into your lobbies (just like BO3, I'm seeing endless Saudis/Kuwaitis/Qataris/Iraqis who DON'T DIE) and, if BO3 is anything to go by, wonky tick rate again.

 

I went back to Ghosts this week. 3200 people playing, player hosts only, smooth as butter. Running into some out of region players (not as many as in BO3) but they just couldn't compete. Just to rub it in about my torturous experience on BO3 and IW, I late joined a TDM against a couple of tryhards (who admittedly were good) from Saudi Arabia. I started out 0-1 to one who I didn't react to in time, and at the end of the game I was 29-1 calling in a KEM on them. They couldn't win a gunfight against me. Hit detection was fantastic all game, I felt confident and I could trust my ability and shot. What happens in BO3 or IW when someone's lagging? Well I could be on 6ms ping but MY hitmarkers on them will be delayed. They'll shoot me around corners before I've seen them. They'll have what I call anti aim assist over them. I could shoot dead centre and not get any hits. I could react to them the frame I see them with a superior weapon for the range I'm at and die before I could actually do anything about it.

 

I didn't plan to play IW or preorder for that game specifically, but a friend got me a beta code so I thought I'd try it. After the disappointment regarding many of Infinity Ward's choices in Ghosts (though I went back after 6 month's hell on Advanced Lagfare), I was hoping at least those amazing connections Ghosts had would remain. It looks like that won't be the case at all, so I'm glad I stuck to my guns and didn't preorder. MWR isn't worth £80, that's for sure smh.

Sounds plausible minus for the fact that you are under the impression that throttling= entire connection.  Anyone here that believes, that I believe my game plays better when I throttle my entire network down to kpbs is either reading wrong, has comprehension issues, or I'm really doing  piss poor job of explaining myself.  I am simply selecting a device by IP or MAC address and prioritizing it's traffic above all others on my network with a rule.  Then I am selectively/actively applying a bandwidth max rule. For those single devices. Period.  The rest of my network has plenty of bandwidth 150-165Mbpsdown and 18-22Mbps up albeit at a lower priority than my gaming device(s).  

 

Also, I don't understand someone saying in on breath  bandwidth doesn't equal ping or effect lag comp.  OK then why are we worrying about if I "throttle" my bandwidth?

 

This is not directed at you per say. Just in general.  But I do think it's bullshit to troll a forum and outright call people an idiot.  To me that points back to you being the idiot.  

In the words of those "12 year olds"  wanna 1v1 me?  LOL

 

I guess it's going to be a never ending line of bullshit.  I would just lock this thread.  I'm tired of reading absurdities.  I mean seriously?  In the months before getting my netduma... before I ever used any form of QoS at all....  geez Mr. Khan tell us more of what I don't know lol or why I'm an idiot.  Spell it out for me please.  I can't seem to understand.... LOL unreal.  

 

Cool post though. 

[ColonicBoom]

These posts are getting so long we're going to crash the server eventually!

 

We'll never reach a consensus as we all 'know' we're right.

And we probably are all right and also all wrong, because I'm not sure we're all talking about the same things anyway.

But nobody is doing anyone any harm so it doesn't matter anyway.

 

Let's settle this like gamers...

We'll agree to disagree, get into a lobby and shoot each other in the face while yelling wrong 'uns down the mic.

[frustrated]

Its a beta, i take no notice of connections, when the game itself comes out, we will be as smooth as banana pancakes, with kiwi fruit

[BENORMOUS]

Its a beta, i take no notice of connections, when the game itself comes out, we will be as smooth as banana pancakes, with kiwi fruit

I'm affraid I'm not convinced lol

[Slipknot31286sic6]

Bo3 Beta was same way. I'm sure IW will be better in hardcore once released

[BENORMOUS]

Bo3 Beta was same way. I'm sure IW will be better in hardcore once released

it was obviously different for many of us,I remember the beta being a dream to play,the only issue I remember with bo3 was the moderate nat issue the hit detection was great for most the wknd then they released the game and well you know the rest lol

[nffcbaz72]

I loved the bo3 beta, it's what made me buy it. I wasn't going to get another cod, but tried iw, phew, think it saved me £80.

[b00stg0d]

Bo3 had it's issues sure enough but at least the content was original.  IW is just a re-skinned AW with a bungled storyline that to me doesn't translate well with multiplayer.  I mean for gods sake if you say you're going space and make the players skins look like aliens and storm troopers then why in gods green earth would you make the maps look like cities and farmers markets from the 90's?  Even the space station maps are dated looking.  Nothing new or spectacular about them.  The maps do look ok in my opinion but do not fit the player skins at all.  As most reviews report, looks like they were making one thing and at last minute put this together to look and feel like Bo3 cause daddy activision said so.  My next year will be spent playing MW, BO3, BF1, and GTA.  And that's if they didn't bastardize MW with the bits of AW.  

[A7Legit]

I have been and continue to be upon the opinion that this beta (which is final) was not the game InfinityWard were working on for years.

 

The backlash from the campaign reveal trailer forced them to go with something else and this is what we got as a last minute copy and paste job...

 

The game is too unpolished and a mess to be a game anyone can say they worked 3 years on.

 

Plus this beta is final, all that will change is the way the gun's work (stats included) & netcode.

[b00stg0d]

I have been and continue to be upon the opinion that this beta (which is final) was not the game InfinityWard were working on for years.

 

The backlash from the campaign reveal trailer forced them to go with something else and this is what we got as a last minute copy and paste job...

 

The game is too unpolished and a mess to be a game anyone can say they worked 3 years on.

 

Plus this beta is final, all that will change is the way the gun's work (stats included) & netcode.

I totally agree.

[Zennon]

Well with all this hate there should be less of the e-penis waving this year?

[b00stg0d]

Well with all this hate there should be less of the e-penis waving this year?

Bro... some of us just like to waive it around.  

[secretface]

I would like to thank all of you for this wonderful read. It truly was entertaining! 

[ColonicBoom]

I have been and continue to be upon the opinion that this beta (which is final) was not the game InfinityWard were working on for years.

 

The backlash from the campaign reveal trailer forced them to go with something else and this is what we got as a last minute copy and paste job...

 

The game is too unpolished and a mess to be a game anyone can say they worked 3 years on.

 

Plus this beta is final, all that will change is the way the gun's work (stats included) & netcode.

 

God, I hope they put some footsteps in.

I've never understood why some devs think totally silent footsteps is a good idea.

I don't mind if it's just a last second 'warning' footsteps sound but no sound at all is just annoying.

 

So do you think they've made it less 'spacey' than they were intending originally?

And ended up with some kind of hybrid BO3 ginger stepchild of a game?

[ColonicBoom]

if you say you're going space and make the players skins look like aliens and storm troopers then why in gods green earth would you make the maps look like cities and farmers markets from the 90's?  Even the space station maps are dated looking.  

 

lol, farmers market.

But now I think about it, that is weird actually.

 

But BF1 looks beautiful compared to it's beta, I'm praying they had the graphics turned down for IW beta too.

[A7Legit]

Well with all this hate there should be less of the e-penis waving this year?

How do you mean?

[A7Legit]

God, I hope they put some footsteps in.

I've never understood why some devs think totally silent footsteps is a good idea.

I don't mind if it's just a last second 'warning' footsteps sound but no sound at all is just annoying.

 

So do you think they've made it less 'spacey' than they were intending originally?

And ended up with some kind of hybrid BO3 ginger stepchild of a game?

I can hear the enemy when changing the sound profile from headphones to small speakers, even at night I don't use my Fidelio X2 headphones (they're open headphones and leak sound) and can still hear with that profile on lesser headsets, if you buy the game make that the first change.

 

I can't say anything with certainty of course but they had some months to make changes since the backlash, so they went with something like BO3 but less polished.

 

I believe this game was more like AW than anything before, it would have suited a space theme much more and I really believe this COD would have been more space orientated, think how Ghosts opening campaign mission was when they were in space...