A medium-speed wired connection could easily be better than a high-speed WiFi connection for that. When downloading things from the eShop however, the connection speed becomes more important.
Not really. If your medium speed internet is still too slow for online, then high speed wifi is still going to be better. Besides, I've had better results from wireless, because that's the majority of what everyone is using online, anyway.
It depends on what type of screen you are using, too. If your HDTV is laggy by 10ms, internet speed isn't even the main subject anymore.
Why would the TV update latency be of any concern regarding the connection speed? The TV isn't serially connected to any console AFAIK.
Also, why would it be better if everyone are using half-duplex connections, specially in small-package situations like games? Do you mean that it's better that all get dropped packages during gaming rather than just some of the players?
Well, it really depends on type of latency you want. I've played via ethernet on Xbox One, and all the wireless players ended up having the advantage. My latency was faster, so they knew where I was on the map sooner than I knew where they were. It's literally just a difference between where you are in the game; 3 steps forward or 3 steps back, because when the connection goes through, you physically see the data on screen, which is why HDTV lag is also part of the discussion.
Say, for example, that I shoot a bullet in CoD via wifi, and the lag was 3ms, but that was a reaction to what I saw in the first place, which is why I brought up HDTV lag. The other scenario would be the shot reaching within 1ms via ethernet, but that would also still depend on type of connection other players are using, your HDTV, their HDTV.
So, in the end, you could have an 8ms HDTV over wifi and react sooner than an ethernet user with a 16ms HDTV. Even if you have an ethernet connection with a low lag HDTV, an online gamer with wifi and a low lag HDTV could still have the advantage, because you were there before them, so they see you sooner.
thank u for ur answer so the difference is only the package...right? it would be nice if someone that use the old one share is experience. for ex in terms of speed, etc
I got mine fairly soon after the Wii U's launch but I'm almost 100% certain that I have the one "for Wii" rather than the one with the new package. The idea that the adapter was ever USB 1 is just one of these myths I think. It just doesn't make sense that they'd release a product with USB 1.1 when USB 2.0 let them use the full 100Mbps rather than be limited to 10MBps, was cheap and had been on the market for a good 6 years.
Some playlists: Top All Time Songs, Top Last Year
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"
Forums
Topic: So I ordered a Wii Lan adapter for Wii U, cause wireless is horrible.
Posts 41 to 42 of 42
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.