*spin-off* Wireless Vs Wired

[Acert93]

Anyhow, I am not going to recommend to anyone to spend more money for an inferior experience, even if it is a 10% difference most won't notice. Likewise I won't recommend a display with a 30ms latency when you can get a similar quality display with a 0-16ms latency display latency.

Ironically I find pixel "refresh" rate an interesting parallel. A lot of people never noticed ghosting when they were on manufacturer rated displays in the 16ms+ range, and yet there are people who can see it sub-8ms. Just because someone is not intune with something doesn't mean it isn't percievable; and it is another story regarding to the degree of impact it has on users.

No one is denying that 8-16ms difference in pixel refresh isn't noticable.

Replays showing where a user saw a target and where they were in regards to the netcode & how the server received their response is always quite interesting to say the least...

 

[corduroygt]

wireless is great and works just as well as a wired connection. Until your neighbor decides to have some microwave popcorn. But if you're in a single family home with a decent lot, wifi is rock solid.

 

[ShadowRunner]

Its just the same as the BD vs DD argument, at the end it comes down to performance vs convenience.

For me Wireless works fine and i cant tell the difference between it and the wired setup i had before, until someone turns the microwave on that is! The convenience of wireless has more wieght to it than the negatives for many though. Wired is undoubtably superior in terms of performance even if only by a little depending on environment but the wieght of performance vs convenience is what matters and everyone will weigh things differently.

It is most certainly the case, as it is with BD vs DD, that having the option of both is the best. Even if you have your console at home wired it is still great to have a wireless dongle available should you want to take it around a friends or something.