Best VoIP for gaming?

Hi all.

I've been used to Ventrilo for quite a while now and have recently joined a clan for BF3 that uses Mumble, and I'm unsure which one I'd rather stick with.

Obviously I could just use play around with both and find out which one is best for me, but if I were to change what the whole clan were using, I'd have to make sure it was generally the better one for everybody.

So, including TS3 also, which one would you guys say was the better? I've searched around and seen so many different opinions but I trust all yous to know.

Cheers :)

TS is the best for groups.

Mumble owns both ventrilo and teamspeak when it comes down to latency, and that is rather important when it comes to gaming.

Hands down the best one is Dolby Axon. It went free this year. Everyone can make their own chat rooms, invite and promote members. It has the HIGHEST QUALITY voice chat and surround sound rooms. Amazing organization and more.

I don't know why anyone would still use TS or Vent over this as the sound quality is awful compared to this. I can't go back to TS or Vent anymore.

https://axon.dolby.com/

(sorry adding a link is not working, just copy and paste)

Hands down the best one is Dolby Axon. It went free this year. Everyone can make their own chat rooms, invite and promote members. It has the HIGHEST QUALITY voice chat and surround sound rooms. Amazing organization and more.

I don't know why anyone would still use TS or Vent over this as the sound quality is awful compared to this. I can't go back to TS or Vent anymore.

https://axon.dolby.com/

(sorry adding a link is not working, just copy and paste)

Blueflame0424

Sounds good. Shall give it a try.

This is not too relevent as you are mentioning groups, but I personally love Steam chat. They somewhat recently started up the same codec that Skype uses. I think the quality is great and I always use it with my friends. I do not know how many people you can hold in one chat room, but I have heard it is a fairly high number. I feel at times like me and my buds are the only ones that use it :( But I like it better than TS/Vent/Skype. I have not tried the others mentioned in this post.

Yeah for me skype is good enough.doanm

This is not too relevent as you are mentioning groups, but I personally love Steam chat. They somewhat recently started up the same codec that Skype uses. I think the quality is great and I always use it with my friends. I do not know how many people you can hold in one chat room, but I have heard it is a fairly high number. I feel at times like me and my buds are the only ones that use it :( But I like it better than TS/Vent/Skype. I have not tried the others mentioned in this post.

trijity

My buddies and I used Skype. We only have like 10 people in the call max at a time so Vent or TS would be overkill. I didn't realize Steam had their own chat. May have to check it out. :)

whatever client you use is irrelevant, as what codec the server uses is what determines the sound quality. My buddy's Ventrilo server has unmatched quality with whatever codec he uses is great, and a mumble server I frequent has a much poorer sound quality.

Why all the vent hate? I love vent.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Skype is great, but not for gaming. Skype is optimized for best sound quality and video, and uses a combination of TCP and UDP to get it across. Downside is that it uses a lot of bandwidth. Gaming Voip software like AXON and Mumble concentrate more on releasing as much bandwidth as possible for the actual game, while still keeping a reasonable quality of sound and lag.doanm

Bandwidth being that it eats up latency.

Used TS, Ventrilo and Mumble. I like Vent better, mainly because it's not a resource hog.

Me and my guildmates on World of Warcraft use Raidcall. I like it.

Dolby Axon gives access for 50 people per room but you can be in multiple rooms with hot keys to chat in each one at the same time

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Bandwidth has nothing to do with how many GB u have x month. I was talking about latency for the actual gaming. For something like an MMO, Skype is fine.... but for faster paced games (specially if ur connection is super fast), then Mumble or Dolby Axon is better.doanm

Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.

It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.

[QUOTE="doanm"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] Bandwidth has nothing to do with how many GB u have x month. I was talking about latency for the actual gaming. For something like an MMO, Skype is fine.... but for faster paced games (specially if ur connection is super fast), then Mumble or Dolby Axon is better.GummiRaccoon

Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.

It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="doanm"] Then just say latency dude. I'm used to bandwidth referring to the speed of transfer as opposed to delay despite them being mutual. Whenever I see people talk about bandwidth they usually are talking about concerns over their monthly cap. Also so far from playing L4d2, SC2, Magicka, AoE2, serious sam etc, my group of friends don't notice anything and there have never been any kind of issue that would adversely affect our games. But whatever, that's just me, don't read too much into it. FelipeInside

Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.

It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.

No, they have cache.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.

It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.

GummiRaccoon

No, they have cache.

Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]Calling your data cap bandwidth is like calling your harddrive RAM.It is perfectly reasonable to have latency concerns because something is eating all your bandwidth.doanm

Because it is perfectly rational for him to complain about something taking up too much bandwidth because it causes an increase in latency.

He said the skype was too much of a bandwidth hog. You then respond with data caps, then jump over him for not saying latency instead.

But you are the one that messed up the communication by assuming that bandwidth meant data cap and not that it used too much bandwidth so it caused an increase in latency.

There was no reason for you to correct him because he, not you, was using terms correctly.

Because it is perfectly rational for him to complain about something taking up too much bandwidth because it causes an increase in latency. Yes it is(have I implied otherwise and if so care to point it out?), however it was not made clear that latency was the specific issue. Latency is after all not the only issue brought up when it comes to high bandwidth usage after all, there is also the issue that it will result in filling up the data cap faster(an issue people actually have considering that there are places with low data caps). Something I've seen many people consistently refer to simply as bandwidth. Hell for all I care he could have been referring to packet loss as well but I don't see that discussed very often. He said the skype was too much of a bandwidth hog. You then respond with data caps, then jump over him for not saying latency instead. Dude, people in general have actually referred to data cap as their bandwidth. Especially here in Canada Hell not just from normal people but also from ISPs. Case in point: http://teksavvy.com/en/res-internet.asp http://www.bell.ca/Bell_Internet/Products/Essential_Plus?promo=true I know that bandwidth as data cap is false, but its a falsity that people just use regardless. Hell on this board i have consistently seen data cap being referred to plenty of times as bandwidth. Yeah its technically wrong but its nothing I blame them for, since its pretty much a term spread by media types and ISP's themselves to refer to bandwidth as data cap. Its an error but not enough to make a huge fuss over so I just let it slide when people refer to bandwidth in that way and just reasonably assume that at this point when people talk bandwidth they talk data cap. But you are the one that messed up the communication by assuming that bandwidth meant data cap and not that it used too much bandwidth so it caused an increase in latency. A very reasonable and valid assumption at that. What else would you expect when people (even on this board) keep referring to a monthly data cap as bandwidth? Is it a disruption? Yes. Does it invalidate the need to call for clarity on what specific issue he is referring to and that he actually mean't bandwidth in the correct way as opposed to the common use of the term? No. There was no reason for you to correct him because he, not you, was using terms correctly. Evidence that I was correcting him as opposed to simply wanting clarity?doanm

I guess in canada you don't really understand how the internet works, which makes sense since it's all backwoods there.

I guess in canada you don't really understand how the internet works, which makes sense since it's all backwoods there.

GummiRaccoon

In one ear, out the other.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

I guess in canada you don't really understand how the internet works, which makes sense since it's all backwoods there.

doanm

In one ear, out the other.

Then just say latency dude

doanm

There is no other way to interprete that other than you telling him he was using a term wrong and you were correcting him. Which you were and which he wasn't.

I am sorry that you are embarrassed that you don't know what you are talking about, get over it and start understanding terms as they are used properly.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

There is no other way to interprete that other than you telling him he was using a term wrong and you were correcting him. Which you were and which he wasn't.

Thats a hell of a spin doctor dude. And a really bad misinterpretation on your end. So I might as well ask again then. What part of that makes you think i was correcting him as opposed to just wanting clarity?

I am sorry that you are embarrassed that you don't know what you are talking about, get over it and start understanding terms as they are used properly.

No your not. And also get over the fact that mis-interpretations occur due to faulty semantics.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

There is no other way to interprete that other than you telling him he was using a term wrong and you were correcting him. Which you were and which he wasn't.

doanm

Thats a hell of a spin doctor dude. And a really bad misinterpretation on your end. So I might as well ask again then. What part of that makes you think i was correcting him as opposed to just wanting clarity?

I am sorry that you are embarrassed that you don't know what you are talking about, get over it and start understanding terms as they are used properly.

No your not. And also get over the fact that mis-interpretations occur due to faulty semantics.

I am sorry that someone when they don't understand what people are talking about, feels the need to go around correcting people. How is it not you correcting him by you telling him to use a different term?

Him "I dont like skype because it uses too much bandwidth"

you "Bla bla bandwidth (actually referring to monthly data cap"

Him "uh I mean the bandwidth it takes ruins my latency"

You "Just say latency dude"

You don't need to correct him people don't say "I don't like skype as it causes there to be a latency increase" They say "It uses to much bandwidth (which is the cause of the problem)" which means that it increases their latency which is the symptom of the problem of it using too much bandwidth.

Next time know what you are talking about before you go around correcting someone, and that is exactly what you did when you told him to stop using the proper term for what he was describing, skype using too much bandwidth to be used along with other programs.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

I am sorry that someone when they don't understand what people are talking about, feels the need to go around correcting people.

In one ear out the other. Seriously your just hearing what you want to hear at this point.

How is it not you correcting him by you telling him to use a different term?

Its me wanting to be more specific and hence more clear as to what particular issue would arise from bandwidth congestion.

Him "I dont like skype because it uses too much bandwidth"

you "Bla bla bandwidth (actually referring to monthly data cap"

Him "uh I mean the bandwidth it takes ruins my latency"

You "Just say latency dude"

Yeah, see below.

You don't need to correct him people don't say "I don't like skype as it causes there to be a latency increase" They say "It uses to much bandwidth (which is the cause of the problem)" which means that it increases their latency which is the symptom of the problem of it using too much bandwidth.

I also did previously point out that there are other issues that can arise other than latency did I not?

Next time know what you are talking about before you go around correcting someone, and that is exactly what you did when you told him to stop using the proper term for what he was describing, skype using too much bandwidth to be used along with other programs.

In one ear out the other. Still assuming i'm correcting people as opposed to an issue with clarity? Because last time I checked, yeah there wasn't anything wrong with whatFelipeInside said but generally speaking I do prefer that latency was his big issue with it. Nothing wrong with that last time i checked.

'a lot of asinine irrelevent things'

doanm

1) stop messing up the quotes, if you don't know how to do it properly, don't do it.

2) The problem is the bandwidth. The extra bandwidth it uses over other VOIP programs causes latency issues, but the underlying issues is the bandwidth.

3) So yes, the problem is bandwidth, but you do not understand what bandwidth means which is why you keep on arguing.

4) You don't know what any of the terms you use mean.

5) So don't tell other people to say latency when it is the bandwidth.

6) Bandwidth is not data cap.

[QUOTE="doanm"] 'a lot of asinine irrelevent things'

GummiRaccoon

^You know your spin doctoring when.......

1) stop messing up the quotes, if you don't know how to do it properly, don't do it.

Thats an issue of the faults of the boards forum software. I prefer multi quoting. Something that this site is allergic to. So no. I'll just bold bits and pieces until i can finally use [ QUOTE ] [ /QUOTE ] to my hearts content again.

2) The problem is the bandwidth. The extra bandwidth it uses over other VOIP programs causes latency issues, but the underlying issues is the bandwidth.

Proof that i'm disputing otherwise. Where is it?

3) So yes, the problem is bandwidth, but you do not understand what bandwidth means which is why you keep on arguing.

Bandwidth is the measure of how much data can be transfered per second. Andno I just keep arguing because you are either just being deliberately facetious in terms of comprehension ability or just plain delusional. Hopefully its the former because at least it means that you've got some form of mental faculty left.

4) You don't know what any of the terms you use mean.

You haven't actually read anything i typed on this board haven't you?

5) So don't tell other people to say latency when it is the bandwidth.

Again, i already mentioned that there are more to bandwidth issues then just latency did I not?

6) Bandwidth is not data cap.

Now I know you definitely haven't read anything that I said.

You "Yeah for me skype is good enough."

Him "Skype is great, but not for gaming." And then goes into why it is a bandwidth hog (that causes latency issues)

You "Bandwidth is a non issue for me seeing how my provider gives me 300 gb per month." (Clearly misunderstanding what he meant even though he explained it in detail)

Him "Bandwidth has nothing to do with how many GB u have x month.I was talking about latency for the actual gaming. " Explaining again, why bandwidth hogs cause latency problems)

You "Then just say latency dude" (you then explain why you misunderstood, and but it was clearly your fault not his but you want him to change what he is doing)

I then chime in saying that your mistake is like peoples grandmas mistaking ram for harddrives and vice versa.

You then kept saying that the things you said aren't things you said saying I don't read anything you write, but what you write is all incorrect.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

You "Bandwidth is a non issue for me seeing how my provider gives me 300 gb per month." (Clearly misunderstanding what he meant even though he explained it in detail)

If it was in great detail, it would have mentioned issues in latency. He cleared that up later though so it was all good.

Him "Bandwidth has nothing to do with how many GB u have x month.I was talking about latency for the actual gaming. " Explaining again, why bandwidth hogs cause latency problems)

And he was right of course, but it was at this point there was clarity that could be had earlier if he just outright said latency.

You "Then just say latency dude" (you then explain why you misunderstood, and but it was clearly your fault not his but you want him to change what he is doing)

backpedaling on the whole "correcting him" thing then? You also left out the rest of it saying that i'm used to the common terminology despite it being incorrect. Something that many people are used to in fact.

I then chime in saying that your mistake is like peoples grandmas mistaking ram for harddrives and vice versa.

Except its not just peoples grandmas who make mistakes like that. Its damn near everybody else on the internet. Its to the bloody point that when I see people say bandwidth they honestly mean data cap. Whenever I see that, I just play along with the bloody adoption of the term despite how incorrect it is.

You then kept saying that the things you said aren't things you said saying I don't read anything you write, but what you write is all incorrect.

And again with the mis comprehension. How is that me trying to say that the things I said aren't the things I said? It's me communicating my reasoning as to why I assumed he meant data cap (or as most people call the bloody thing "bandwidth")

So clearly its not a case that you didn't read it. It's a case of miscomprhension. That's worse then I thought. Once or twice is fine. But at this level? Now your just being willfully ignorant. Something that you have actually consistently demonstrated.

You "Bandwidth is a non issue for me seeing how my provider gives me 300 gb per month." (Clearly misunderstanding what he meant even though he explained it in detail)

If it was in great detail, it would have mentioned issues in latency. He cleared that up later though so it was all good.

Him "Bandwidth has nothing to do with how many GB u have x month.I was talking about latency for the actual gaming. " Explaining again, why bandwidth hogs cause latency problems)

And he was right of course, but it was at this point there was clarity that could be had earlier if he just outright said latency.

You "Then just say latency dude" (you then explain why you misunderstood, and but it was clearly your fault not his but you want him to change what he is doing)

backpedaling on the whole "correcting him" thing then? You also left out the rest of it saying that i'm used to the common terminology despite it being incorrect. Something that many people are used to in fact.

I then chime in saying that your mistake is like peoples grandmas mistaking ram for harddrives and vice versa.

Except its not just peoples grandmas who make mistakes like that. Its damn near everybody else on the internet. Its to the bloody point that when I see people say bandwidth they honestly mean data cap. Whenever I see that, I just play along with the bloody adoption of the term despite how incorrect it is.

You then kept saying that the things you said aren't things you said saying I don't read anything you write, but what you write is all incorrect.

And again with the mis comprehension. How is that me trying to say that the things I said aren't the things I said? It's me communicating my reasoning as to why I assumed he meant data cap (or as most people call the bloody thing "bandwidth")

So clearly its not a case that you didn't read it. It's a case of miscomprhension. That's worse then I thought. Once or twice is fine. But at this level? Now your just being willfully ignorant. Something that you have actually consistently demonstrated.

doanm

No, you are just being incredibly dense.

The "Just say latency dude" is you correcting him. I don't even see how that you can argue that is anything else. That's not asking for clarification, as you don't ask anything, you are giving him a command.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

No, you are just being incredibly dense.

You can say that all you want, but unlike me, you've consistently demonstrated the need to simply sidestep the points i make. Careful who you call dense before performing a self evaluation.

The "Just say latency dude" is you correcting him.

You repeating that its a correction does not make it so.

I don't even see how that you can argue that is anything else.

Too bad because thats what it is. Something that isn't me correcting him.

And I don't even see how any rational mind can come to the conclusion that, that was me correcting him especially when I acknowledge that he made no actual error.

That's not asking for clarification, as you don't ask anything, you are giving him a command.

Wanting clarity =/= asking for clarification. You don't need to ask for clarity to want clarity.

No, you are just being incredibly dense.

You can say that all you want, but unlike me, you've consistently demonstrated the need to simply sidestep the points i make. Careful who you call dense before performing a self evaluation.

The "Just say latency dude" is you correcting him.

You repeating that its a correction does not make it so.

I don't even see how that you can argue that is anything else.

Too bad because thats what it is. Something that isn't me correcting him.

And I don't even see how any rational mind can come to the conclusion that, that was me correcting him especially when I acknowledge that he made no actual error.

That's not asking for clarification, as you don't ask anything, you are giving him a command.

Wanting clarity =/= asking for clarification. You don't need to ask for clarity to want clarity.

doanm

Then why tell him to change his behavior if that is not your intention? Telling him to use a different term is not you asking for clarification. the only thing I can come up with to explain why you don't understand any of the things you are saying is that you are brand new to english.

Here is an example of asking for clarification:

What do you mean by x?

Here is an example of wanting clarification.

I wonder what you mean by x.

Here is an example of correcting someone:

Just say x instead.