wrote:The best way to run the old games nowadays is to put together an old cheap pc from the online auction sites, install win98se with dos on that pc and play the games over there. problem solved. 😀
That's what people used to say about DOS games, and now we have DOSBox. I figure I'll just hold out another 5 years until Win9x games run great in emulators hehe.
Yeah, but emulating dos is a lot easier than to emulate and entire windows 9X environment with directx included. That's basically what the many virtualizers try to do, and none do a good job yet, not the free ones nor the commercial apps. Maybe it's because they're not oriented towards gaming. Maybe someone (the dosbox team?) should make a win9xbox. 😜
Win9x still sits on top of DOS, so if the emulation becomes accurate enough then it might be possible to eventually install and boot real Win9x inside of DOSBox.
wrote:Win9x still sits on top of DOS, so if the emulation becomes accurate enough then it might be possible to eventually install and boot real Win9x inside of DOSBox.
But at what speed? It already takes the latest system to run hi-res DOS games (1024x768, 800x600, etc) in DOSBOX, so I'm not too optmistic about Win9x.
On the other hand, Wine is already as fast as Windows, but isn't it a compatibility layer instead of true emulator?
Never thought this thread would be that long, but now, for something different.....
Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman.
wrote:But at what speed?
Faster than a kqemu-less qemu that's for sure. It'd also be having the benefit of a good opl emulator in it as well (which all win9x virtualizers i've seen and heard have poor opl) and very good input responsiveness.
The DX10 cards don't do 16-bit color dithering in 3D mode. So any games that are 16-bit only will look awful.
Not to mention that there are other serious bugs in nvidia 1xx.xx drivers that make most DX 5 and 6 games run at 1 fps. Still doesn't happen in Vista.
wrote:wrote:Win9x still sits on top of DOS, so if the emulation becomes accurate enough then it might be possible to eventually install and boot real Win9x inside of DOSBox.
But at what speed? It already takes the latest system to run hi-res DOS games (1024x768, 800x600, etc) in DOSBOX, so I'm not too optmistic about Win9x.
Again, I'm talking about several years down the road when computers have become even faster.
wrote:The DX10 cards don't do 16-bit color dithering in 3D mode. So any games that are 16-bit only will look awful.
If you're going to use real hardware acceleration in an emulator then it should be able to run in 32-bit color even if the game thinks it's running in 16-bit color.
I noticed today playing Neverhood in Windows 7 that I had to change desktop color to 16bit otherwise the graphics were messed up.....Unfortunately there isn't an option in compatibility mode to force 16bit color like there is for 256 color so the only options are to change to 16bit manually, find a utility to do so or run the games that require 16bit color in emulation.
There is this option in ACT 5.0
Not that I've seen. I've only seen "Force8bitcolor" which I believe is the same option in the compatibility tab which doesn't work.
...Unless your talking about Force6480x480x16 which I haven't tried but is hardly ideal.
That's the one.
You can also open up Screen Resolution, then click Advanced Settings, then List All Modes, then double-click the mode you want to set. The list should include every combination of resolution, color depth, and refresh rate supported by your hardware.
That's what I mean by changing manually but it's a PITA with Vista+ to do so. I believe I saw a command line utility for NT+ that would change resolution/color that would be ideal for those programs instead of clicking around through menus trying to find the option AND having to do so again when you are done with your game.
