I rue the day I chose PS3 over Xbox 360!

vega

#1

This goes way back to the inception of SFIV. I still remember the way things played out as if it were yesterday. The decision to purchase SFIV for PS3 instead of 360 is probably one of my biggest regrets of my SFIV life. To make matters worse, I was an Xbox advocate because from the beginning, I respected the direction Microsoft were taking in regards to online support. I owned the original Xbox (I owned a PS2 that I rarely used…ended up giving it away), and purchased an Xbox 360 shortly after it launched. I thoroughly enjoyed Xbox experience and new that the online community were thriving in comparison to Sony. Yet despite all of my “fanboyism” for Xbox, when it came to making a decision on which platform to purchase SFIV on, I chose PS3.

Before mentioning why I made that decision, I’d like to point out that the only reason I even owned a PS3 is because I managed to get it at a ridiculous discount. Another reason I purchased the PS3 was because almost all of my friends were Sony loyalists. I guess it was after having glorious and fond memories of PS2. As hard as I tried to convince them that the Xbox 360 online experience was superior in comparison to Sony, the subscription fee pretty much placed a nail in the coffin, and any hopes in convincing them to purchase an Xbox 360 quickly died.

I’ve always loved fighting games because a good friend of mine also enjoyed it, and together we would challenge ourselves to get better. So when SFIV was announced, we were both extremely excited and couldn’t wait to tear into the new game engine and mechanics. The only problem was (and a major problem at that) that my friend did not have Xbox360. Not to make this story longer than it already is, after a VERY long and heated internal debate, I bit the bullet and decided that the years I spent playing fighting games with my friend trumped my belief that the Xbox 360 online experience would be superior.

Shortly after I purchased SFIV, I invested in an arcade stick. Now that I think of it, it was my fight stick investment that shut the door to any future fighting game purchases for Xbox. My stick was not only an investment, but it also signified a commitment to a platform I truly never really loved. To add insult to injury, remember that good friend of mine that loved to play fighting games? Well…he never really got into SFIV. Although he played from time to time, due to his lack of enthusiasm, my skill level surpassed him by a large margin after awhile. He actually prefers MvC3…go figure.

Anyway, I’m sorry for the long story but this is actually suppose to be a rant, so I’ll conclude with just that.

What lead me to make this post was my experience with PSN yesterday that pretty resurfaced this long regret that I’ve dealt with all this time. I’ve learned to accept my decsion for the most part but yesterdays experience was too much.

For the past several months I’ve been playing SSFIVae on PC exclusively, and the connection is simply amazing!! I only wish more people played on PC. Yesterday I plugged in my PS3 and decided to play a few rounds for old time sake.

I MUST SAY…The online connection for PSN compared to GFWL is absolutely TRASH!! How trash you may ask?? SO TRASH that I was unable to punish a blocked ex.ST, with a 3 FRAME JAB!!! Mind you, I’m playing a connection that has green bars!! MY jaw hit the freaking ground!! I couldn’t believe how bad it was. It didn’t happen once, or twice, it happened 3 TIMES in one game!! The only way that I could punish it was to mash jab.

That was only one of many nonpunishable examples. In all, my experience was filled with constant smh moments. I was so disappointed in what I was experiencing that I was left wondering…WHY DIDN’T I BUY AN XBOX VERSION??? SIGH…


#2

Are you playing on wi-fi? PS3 has notoriously shitty wi-fi, so I’d recommend trying hard-wired. You’ll be amazed by the difference.


#3

Wi-fi is notorious for being shitty…doesn’t matter what device you’re using it on.


#4

Wired, with really fast internet connection.


#5

WiFi is faster than wired in theory (and soon to be reality). The problem is that the PS3’s WiFi card is shitty, and WiFi is more vulnerable to interference.

WiFi travels at the speed of light where ethernet travels at the speed of electricity. Over short distances this is insignificant, but the further from your router you’re located the better WiFi will perform over ethernet. This combined with the fact that the WiFi on PS3 will max out at 54mbps vs the ethernet port at 1000mbps explains why WiFi is slower in this circumstance. Even the PS4 WiFi maxes out at 600mbps. This is coming to an end soon though. WiGig (wireless ac) is due out this year and its data rate is 7gbps. Any device running on WiGig will be superior to anything running on ethernet. In addition, those old TV station signals are going to be used to broadcast “WiFi” up to around 100km so expect those to pop up some time in the next year or so as well.


#6

Wireless isn’t inferior just because it’s 54 mbps. What makes it so inferior is physical objects blocking it and interference. Because of that, it tends to drop a lot more packets. Wired will probably always be better because you don’t get that kind of interference. Even if the speed is much higher on WiGig, it will still fall victim to packet dropping and lag spikes from interference :frowning:

Even if they pick a new frequency spectrum it will still have other interference to deal with. There is no way around that I’m afraid, unless they broadcast a type of radio wave that passes through objects and other broadcast frequencies without hindrance.


#7

pc master race


#8

i started off on the pc then moved to the ps3 hoping to find more players online. i was also disappointed with the lag also but was able to sell my ps3 on craigslist for $180. i bought it on black friday a year prior to that for 200 so it wasn’t too bad a loss. i think you could still find buyers or someone to trade for a 360 and you’ll be just in time for usf4.


#9

This entire experience has made me question my playing experience all these years. I’ve never been to a tournament or local scene (although I live in NYC) because I thought online experience was adequate. I thought the pro players were exaggerating, and having an elitist mentality whenever they laughed at the online experience. But after witnessing the dramatic differences in connection between PC & PS3, I actually see their point.

The issue here is that unless you’ve experience better (connection via PC, or local play), you are blind to just how bad the experience is on PSN.

I’m a realist, I knew that online play wouldn’t be perfect and I’ve accepted the occasional dropped inputs and lag spikes. But after experiencing better, Playstation’s connection problems have become glaringly apparent.

I was planning on purchasing USFIV for PS3 first, then once available, for the PC. Not anymore. I’m gonna hold out for the PC version.


#10

The PS3 is awful for Capcom fighting games, it’s true. I’ll never forgive it for making me suffer using an Xbox for SFIV.

But at least you don’t have to deal with the Xbox for everything apart from SFIV…


#11

well wireless is all about trade offs. High frequencies pass through objects easier but come at the cost of range. Low frequencies bounce off objects easily but have a much longer range. WiFi has a pretty short range though. Unless you live in an apartment complex or in the middle of a city where houses touch, or in a high rise condo, interference is minimal, and even in those situations Interference is still minimal (just less minimal) due to frequency hopping. However, if you live near a transmission site, you run the real risk of having interference as a problem. You have to remember that interference with wireless weakens with distance just like the main signal does. And each device has filters that remove interference specifically. Unless interference is stronger than the original signal then it’s nothing to worry about. The intensity of a signal (including interference) diminishes based on the inverse square of the distance of the source of the signal.

There’s not just one factor (interference) that applies to the inferior data transmission rate of wireless over wired. Interference plays a minor role in this circumstance. It will still be inferior if you’re out in the middle of nowhere with zero interference. This is because the PS3 WifI card is based on wireless g (at best). The maximum data transmission rate is 54Mbps. You rarely ever achieve the maximum data transmission rate anyway. The quality of the filters, multiplexers, and modulators on the transmitters (as well as the initial power of the signal) as well as the quality of the filters, demodulators, and demultiplexers on the receiver play a major role. The main factor is distance though, because the power weakens by the inverse square of the distance. One can put in a repeater (bridge) to boost the signal but that adds another step since the repeater has to receive the signal, then retransmit it taking more time. More repeaters = more delay. This is true of wired or wireless. Any time you want to compare data transmission rates on different mediums you need to look first at the maximum rate as that’s the top factor. 2nd would be transmitted and received signal speed, 3rd would be transmitted and received signal strength, 4th would be quality of transmission and reception. Yes all are important, but the reality of wireless is that interference is typically minimal as we’ve implemented dozens of ways to reduce it and make it a minimal factor.

All variables being equal, wireless will always be superior to wired because the speed of light is always going to be faster than the speed of electricity.


#12

It’s also worth noting that the more devices you have connected to the router, the slower each’s connection will be because packets will need to be sorted to more destinations and from more sources. WiFi on PS3 will be superior if it’s only sharing the router with 1 other device, than if you have 3 PCs, 5 smartphones, 2 laptops, a 360, and a PS3 connected… wired or wireless… unless you set the PS3 to have priority on packets above everything else of course.

But yeah if you want to get better transmission rates on PS3 wireless, use a bridge then just go wired to the bridge, though if you can use less than 30 feet of cat5 to connect the PS3 to the router, you’re better off quality wise going wired. Over 50 and you’re better off going wireless. between 30 and 50, it’s a grey area that depends on too many factors to really make a big deal about.


#13

Yeah the PS3 is pretty bad. Though I’ve heard that 360 is better than PC in terms of connection. Iono because I’ve never played it on PC. Nothing beats offline though and from my experience PS3 is superior offline. 360 has a tendency to slow down on SF4 in the middle of some of my combos.


#14

PS3 has two frames of input delay, locally. I never noticed slow down on 360.


#15

I play on PC only. I played locally for the first time yesterday.

Online is a goddamn lie.

Period.

I’m not gonna front and say it’s completely useless… play all the online you want, learn your matchups… but get your ass offline. Do it at least once.


#16

Yeah I really notice it when I go into training room against dan or honda and do jHP, HP, cMP, EX FBA. I notice it around the time the standing fierce is connecting. There’s a few other times I notice it too but that was the first one I noticed on day 1 on 360. I dunno if it affects input but it definitely affects visual. PS3 is far more consistent from my experience offline.

Also “2 frames of input delay” is a bit of an inaccurate/incomplete description. Every game has input delay because the moment you press the button will always come before the moment the action occurs on screen. It’s never instantaneous because instantaneous is impossible.


#17

he means 2 frames of input delay over Xbox and arcade.

Wireless still sucks even if you live in a house in a suburban neighborhood. There is a ton of interference everywhere, even in small towns. Wired will always be better for that reason.


#18

In order for there to be interference, there must be a source of interference. In order for that interference to be significant, it needs to have close to, or greater than the same amount of power the intended received signal has at the received point, AND it needs to be at the same frequency or at a bare minimum a harmonic of the frequency of the intended signal. Otherwise it gets filtered out, both at the TX and RX ends. If interference was THAT big of an issue that was currently unresolved, no one would ever be using wireless for anything at all because no one would ever receive any data at the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.

Prime analogy. You go to a tournament. There’s tons of people there talking. Filters enable those other people to be muted. You combine that with giving the guy you want to hear a megaphone, and the only time you’re going to get a problem is when 2 people with Megaphones talk at the same time. The guy with the megaphone is analogous to the transmitter. The thing is that the 2 guys with megaphones are separated so far away that you’re not going to be able to hear both at the same time anyway. Yes there’s still 2k people in the room talking but if you cannot hear them it doesn’t mean anything.

Like I said, the ONLY times interference will play a role in wireless communications is when the interfering signal has more power at the RX end than the main signal, or if your filters are not working properly. And even that is only at the basic level wireless communications. At advanced level wireless communications you can put 2 (or more) wireless routers right next to each other with no problem due to frequency hopping. Routers will check a frequency in the band to see if it’s unoccupied and use that frequency automatically.

It’s the same way that everyone on a cell phone can talk at the same time in a crowded place without jamming each other out. Everyone uses a different channel. Of course once the channels fill up that’s another story, but there’s way to deal with that too. That’s where CDMA, TDMA, SDMA, FDMA, and SSMA all come into play but I’m not going to break all those down.

The point is, this isn’t the 90’s where wireless networks were just beginning to become mainstream. Other than solar flares, damn near most interference is predictable, and therefore avoidable. The reason your wired connection is better on PS3 than on wireless is because the PS3 ethernet port is able to handle a higher data transfer rate than the wireless receiver/transmitter on the PS3. Put a bridge onto your ethernet port and bypass the internal WiFi card and that difference is now removed. It’s just a matter of what takes longer, the electrical signal to travel along the cable from the router to the PS3 ethernet port, or the wireless signal being transmitted from the router, received by the bridge, and transmitted through the ethernet cable to the ethernet port on the PS3. At some point the delay from the bridge will be less than the delay though your cat5 cable. If your wireless sucks, it’s because of your router, your WiFi card, or your internet connection. Interference plays almost zero role, regardless of how “much” there is. If interference really is your issue, then whatever you’re receiving the WiFi to is at an equal distance to, or closer to 10 different routers other than your own (or you have it next to a microwave, or a bunch of wireless security cameras or cordless phones, etc). Or your router, or Wifi card is faulty anyway.

Besides, most routers nowadays are dual band. If 2.4GHz is being heavily interfered with, then swap over to the 5GHz band. There’s 21 channels in that and you won’t have to deal with most of the common crap that floods the 2.4GHz range anyway.


#19

Either way, it’s a matter of fact that the PS3 version of this game (all games?) has two frames of local input delay. This has been tested thoroughly at least twice over the years. I can dig up the links if you need it.


#20

Not all games, but for sure the recent Capcom fighters.