• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Official Xbox One Thread

Page 131 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
purbeast0 said:
well yeah if you aren't into fighters and don't like playing with arcade sticks, then it's definitely not for you.
Click to expand...

I have a custom arcade stick for street fighter and other fighters now. That was around $200 once complete with multi console mod and swapped buttons and stuff. I just do not think I am prepared to spend another $150 or more on an arcade stick when the only game it will be used for is killer instinct. I haven't heard about any other fighters coming out for the new console(s). If I could somehow use my current stick that would be great but unless there ends up being tons of fighting games on the ps4 and/or xb1 I doubt I will be spending the cash on one for them.
 
Anubis said:
its good yes but at what cost? if you still have to pay for your TWC sub and the XBL gold price, you are paying an extrat fee per year to change the channels with your hand

that seems kinda stupid IMO
Click to expand...

Not really because XBL Gold is about $3/mo if you get your cards when they are on sale at Amazon, versus paying $10 or more a month for an HD cable box from your cable provider. It'd actually save you money over renting the cable box and give you all the XBL access for $7 less a month.
 
cmdrdredd said:
You still need the cable box to pass through the signal though unless you have uverse.
Click to expand...

You need a cable box if you want ALL of your channels. Time Warner and Verizon FiOS have apps that offer most of the popular ones (I assume contracts prevent them from making their entire lineup available).

HDMI passthrough of the cable box is a fallback, not a first class solution. IPTV is supposed to save us from cable box hell.
 
dagamer34 said:
You need a cable box if you want ALL of your channels. Time Warner and Verizon FiOS have apps that offer most of the popular ones (I assume contracts prevent them from making their entire lineup available).

HDMI passthrough of the cable box is a fallback, not a first class solution. IPTV is supposed to save us from cable box hell.
Click to expand...

The post I was referencing was referencing another post tht acknowledged Time Warner was going to make 300 channels of live TV available through through the 360. You know they aren't going to leave that functionality out of the new console.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/28/xbox-360-twc-tv-app/

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/ent-time-warner

In a landmark deal announcement for Xbox 360 and Time Warner Cable customers, we’re excited to share a new partnership that will deliver up to 300 of the most popular live TV channels to Xbox 360 for Xbox Live Gold members.
Click to expand...
 
dagamer34 said:
You need a cable box if you want ALL of your channels. Time Warner and Verizon FiOS have apps that offer most of the popular ones (I assume contracts prevent them from making their entire lineup available).

HDMI passthrough of the cable box is a fallback, not a first class solution. IPTV is supposed to save us from cable box hell.
Click to expand...

Have you used IPTV? It is horrible...laggy, the menu is slow to refresh, buggy...uverse is terrible. If uverse is the future of TV I don't want it.
 
Last edited:
cmdrdredd said:
Have you used IPTV? It is horrible...laggy, the menu is slow to refresh, buggy...uverse is terrible. If uverse is the future of TV I don't want it.
Click to expand...
When i first open the Uverse app it does take alittle long but after that have never had any lag or jitters
 
Drako said:
I like the comment about "making the female character extra sexy" 😀
Click to expand...

Those silly Dead or Alive fans! 😉

Although, one of the things that I remember about the original Killer Instinct is Orchid's oddly shaped bosom. Now watch as purbeast tells me that was just a SNES anomaly too! :'(
 
I loved the original KI much more than KI2. I don't know what it was about KI2 but it just didn't have the same appeal to me. It's been so many years since I've played it too, but damn it was fun when it came out.
 
Nintendesert said:
I loved the original KI much more than KI2. I don't know what it was about KI2 but it just didn't have the same appeal to me. It's been so many years since I've played it too, but damn it was fun when it came out.
Click to expand...

yup most ki fans like part 1 a lot more than 2. 2 changed quite a bit and it just felt different. but to be honest ki has not aged very well imo.
 
My first experience with KI was in an arcade local to me back in 1994 and I had never seen it before. I was accustomed to MK2 at the time and had gotten out of my Super Street Fighter II phase. It was the newest game they got and The lines were super long. I got killed on it cause I was used to slower and more methodical MK2 which I was really good at at the time. When it came to SNES I bought it to play with my friend so we could learn some of the timing for the arcades. Too bad KI2 released only a year later and rendered all out practice worthless thanks to needing to learn a parry system, remember which special moves ruled out others in the "paper,rock,scissors" style. Not to mention leaning all the new combos that were possible via linked throws and whatnot. It was a lot to learn and we thought MK3 would be the game to play. Turns out MK3 wasn't as good as we had hoped and since we had not spent time on KI2 we were not competitive. We just had no fun playing it. Never did play KI Gold at home.

So it wasn't until around 1999 that a friend and I discovered Street Fighter 3 and reintroduced outselves to fighting games.

Looking back on it I wonder if it would have been worth it to never touch MK3 and focus on KI2 instead. Part of me feels that certain skills from KI2 translated into Street Fighter later. I didn't play much Soul Calibur (which started getting popular a couple years later)until it was released at home. 3D fighting games were always too difficult for me to do well in at the arcades.
 
Last edited:
cmdrdredd said:
Have you used IPTV? It is horrible...laggy, the menu is slow to refresh, buggy...uverse is terrible. If uverse is the future of TV I don't want it.
Click to expand...

ATT's implementation of IPTV is terrible, not IPTV. I haven't heard any complaints about Googles IPTV.

Its because the last mile for most all Uverse customers is still copper, plus distances to the nearest VRAD also hurt bandwidth. If ATT ever decided to lay the last mile of fiber, thus greatly improving their infrastructure, Uverse would be alot better. Instead they are sticking with their decaying copper last mile and using bonded pairs to hopefully hit higher bandwidth(they have been promising this for ~3 years now).

I will not move to an area that only has ATT Uverse as an option because it is substandard at most everything compared to most cable companies(there are some exceptions), and especially compared to FIOS or Google Fiber. ATT is just trying to milk its aging infrastructure and is rapidly getting left in the dust. Hopefully Google can start building out faster that would give everyone a swift kick in the butt, as well as drive prices down.

Google 1gbit/iptv costs $120 a month. 300/100 FIOS with tv costs ~$300.
 
Last edited:
Wreckem said:
ATT's implementation of IPTV is terrible, not IPTV.

Its because the last mile for most all Uverse customers is still copper, plus distances to the nearest VRAD also hurt bandwidth. I haven't heard any complaints about Googles IPTV. If ATT ever decided to lay the last mile of fiber, thus greatly improving their infrastructure, Uverse would be alot better. Instead they are sticking with their decaying copper last mile and using bonded pairs to hopefully hit higher bandwidth.

I will not move to an area that only has ATT Uverse as an option because it is substandard at most everything compared to most cable companies, and especially compared to FIOS or Google Fiber.
Click to expand...

I see. That makes sense... ATT phone service here also sucks. After switching to Comcast...not one problem in 7 years.
 
Wreckem said:
ATT's implementation of IPTV is terrible, not IPTV. I haven't heard any complaints about Googles IPTV.

Its because the last mile for most all Uverse customers is still copper, plus distances to the nearest VRAD also hurt bandwidth. If ATT ever decided to lay the last mile of fiber, thus greatly improving their infrastructure, Uverse would be alot better. Instead they are sticking with their decaying copper last mile and using bonded pairs to hopefully hit higher bandwidth.

I will not move to an area that only has ATT Uverse as an option because it is substandard at most everything compared to most cable companies(there are some exceptions), and especially compared to FIOS or Google Fiber. ATT is just trying to milk its aging infrastructure and is rapidly getting left in the dust. Hopefully Google can start building out faster that would give everyone a swifth kick in the butt.
Click to expand...

This is really only true in homes that have shitty installs. A good pair from the VRAD to the house, as well as a distance under 3000 feet and the right RG/modem, pretty much avoids all problems. Bonded pair installs at this time are only for customers beyond around 3200 feet from VRAD.

All that matters is a good last mile pair, and a good tech install. I'll say this though, compared to Comcast, ATT net speeds and on demand are crap. It's cheaper though so you get what you pay for.

/OT
 
chimaxi83 said:
This is really only true in homes that have shitty installs. A good pair from the VRAD to the house, as well as a distance under 3000 feet and the right RG/modem, pretty much avoids all problems. Bonded pair installs at this time are only for customers beyond around 3200 feet from VRAD.

All that matters is a good last mile pair, and a good tech install. I'll say this though, compared to Comcast, ATT net speeds and on demand are crap. It's cheaper though so you get what you pay for.

/OT
Click to expand...

When I refer to bonded pairs, I am referring to their long promised and allegedly(atleast in DFW) soon to be available bandwidth update, with 24/3 going to 30/3 and a higher 45/5 offered. With later updates(with the us of vectoring) to 75/10. All while most of their competitors already offer over 100+/15+ and can expand with even faster speeds, while AT&T is going to max out their capabilities on their copper last mile at about ~100/25 if they ever even get that far.

As for being cheaper its marginally cheaper than FIOS, but fios is way faster, 75/35 vs 24/3, and that is not taking into account Uverse's IPTV bandwidth usage which can drop 24/3 to as low as 6mbps. That said if you also have AT&T wireless Uverse can be substantially cheaper.

I really wish Google would make a shot across the bow of Verizon by rolling out Google Fiber in a market that has FiOS. Verizon execs don't believe they will, just like they don't think their is a demand for 1Gbps internet. If Google came to a FiOS area, Verizon would have to match Google or lose customers. Thus it would drive down prices while increasing bandwidth.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top