VOGONS


The Wrapper Collection Project

Topic actions

Reply 160 of 195, by RaVeN-05

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

http://www.worknd.ru/
working now, i suggest make mirror for files.

Its really works great, all you need is delete all a3d.dll and a3dapi.dll on your hard drive, i meand on windows folder and make sure it not appear again, install a3d-live.exe
an any game folder delete a3d.dll & a3dapi.dll, so game use a3d-live files.

It work with a3d 3.0 even greatly =0!

https://hexenworld.org/forum/index.php (Heretic's & HeXen's forum)
https://www.youtube.com/user/whitemagicraven
https://go.twitch.tv/whitemagicraventv

Reply 161 of 195, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Going to start looking through this thread and organizing. Built Mesa3D 7.5.1 with LegacyExtender today and it works on Windows 95!

Re: DOSBox Compilation Guides

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 162 of 195, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Does anyone have access to RAD Game Tools Pixomatic SDK?

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 163 of 195, by Stiletto

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
DosFreak wrote:

wow!

"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen

Stiletto

Reply 164 of 195, by Stiletto

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

dxvk:
Wraps DX11 to Vulkan.
https://github.com/doitsujin/dxvk
A few screenshots: https://github.com/doitsujin/dxvk/wiki

Provides a Vulkan-based compatibility layer for DXGI and D3D11, which may be used to run 3D applications on Linux using Wine. DXVK aims to provide support for D3D11, feature level 11_0.

"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen

Stiletto

Reply 166 of 195, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Already compiled Mesa3D drivers
https://github.com/pal1000/mesa-dist-win

TODO
Thread cleanup
Win the lottery, retire and do fulfilling projects like the wrapper collection 🤣

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 168 of 195, by Stiletto

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
stranno wrote:

GOG's Diablo uses a new DirectDraw3 to Direct3D9 wrapper, and it looks like it has been done (at least the UI) by Zeus.

I didn't figure Gamecollector was collecting DirectX SDKs for his or her health (Old DX SDKs ) 🤣

If someone is inclined to separate it from the pack and test it with other games, be my guest. My concern would be that it only implements what Diablo needs or is restricted to Diablo usage, but that hasn't stopped us before...

Man , we need to update some of the collections in this project...

"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen

Stiletto

Reply 169 of 195, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Currently in the process of moving and then right after will be in another country for a month but after I get back plan to start working on projects like this again.

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 171 of 195, by RaVeN-05

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

ATI 3D Rage Wrapper, and S3D emulation exist, unfortunatelly nothing else, probably.

https://hexenworld.org/forum/index.php (Heretic's & HeXen's forum)
https://www.youtube.com/user/whitemagicraven
https://go.twitch.tv/whitemagicraventv

Reply 172 of 195, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

On the backend-side, now SDL2 is getting a SDL1.2 wrapper (SDL1.2 API -> SDL2)

https://www.patreon.com/posts/project-sdl12-25321792

DOSBox's resistance to the "upgrade" is what mainly inspired it though 🤣 but also the old rotting Loki ports.

apsosig.png

Reply 174 of 195, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
leileilol wrote:

On the backend-side, now SDL2 is getting a SDL1.2 wrapper (SDL1.2 API -> SDL2)

https://www.patreon.com/posts/project-sdl12-25321792

DOSBox's resistance to the "upgrade" is what mainly inspired it though 🤣 but also the old rotting Loki ports.

My response to the article:
If DOSBox only supported D3D9+ and Windows 10, The latest MacOS for Metal, and OpenGL 3 on the latest ver of Linux then there wouldn't be any issue but DOSBox can run on alot more than that (Awesome!) but SDL2 cannot. Obviously that can't go on forever or can it?! but the nice thing is the code is there so we can have DOSBox with SDL 1.2 and DOSBox with SDL2 so not sure why people are crying so much except of course for there being no official ver of DOSBox with SDL2 as of yet. The SDL2 devs shouldn't have been so lazy in the first place. I wonder how long SDL2 will support Windows XP? Wouldn't it be ridiculous if you couldn't run DOSBox on that? 90% of the Internet: "Nah, that shit is old just throw it in the trash"

"One of the other benefits in modernizing applications is that old, software-rendered games now get pushed to the GPU."

About that... I've had issues with SDL2 programs that don't render compared to their SDL1.2 versions so that's not necessarily a positive.. Video driver issue most certainly but nothing I can do about it.

Still waiting for the bitching and moaning about not being able to run Windows XP inside DOSBox. I'm sure that's coming.

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 175 of 195, by Kisai

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
DosFreak wrote:
My response to the article: If DOSBox only supported D3D9+ and Windows 10, The latest MacOS for Metal, and OpenGL 3 on the lates […]
Show full quote
leileilol wrote:

On the backend-side, now SDL2 is getting a SDL1.2 wrapper (SDL1.2 API -> SDL2)

https://www.patreon.com/posts/project-sdl12-25321792

DOSBox's resistance to the "upgrade" is what mainly inspired it though 🤣 but also the old rotting Loki ports.

My response to the article:
If DOSBox only supported D3D9+ and Windows 10, The latest MacOS for Metal, and OpenGL 3 on the latest ver of Linux then there wouldn't be any issue but DOSBox can run on alot more than that (Awesome!) but SDL2 cannot. Obviously that can't go on forever or can it?! but the nice thing is the code is there so we can have DOSBox with SDL 1.2 and DOSBox with SDL2 so not sure why people are crying so much except of course for there being no official ver of DOSBox with SDL2 as of yet. The SDL2 devs shouldn't have been so lazy in the first place. I wonder how long SDL2 will support Windows XP? Wouldn't it be ridiculous if you couldn't run DOSBox on that? 90% of the Internet: "Nah, that shit is old just throw it in the trash"

"One of the other benefits in modernizing applications is that old, software-rendered games now get pushed to the GPU."

About that... I've had issues with SDL2 programs that don't render compared to their SDL1.2 versions so that's not necessarily a positive.. Video driver issue most certainly but nothing I can do about it.

Still waiting for the bitching and moaning about not being able to run Windows XP inside DOSBox. I'm sure that's coming.

Or 64-bit binaries since some platforms (eg MacOS X, Win10)

Considering that there's been SDL2 builds of DOSBOX for years ( DosBox-0.74-ES (SDL2) ), the resistance to updating, or at least making build switches for it seems equally as lazy. With SDL 2.0.9 they finally solved a problem that was created out of the SDL dev's own laziness, render batching ( https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_i … Batching-System ) . That was seven months ago. Previous builds of DOSBOX 0.74 with SDL2 function fine under 4K monitors but suffer under SDL 1.2 because of changes that hit cpu-bound limits in software rendering. (see ECE build's pp patch.) I don't think render batching would speed anything up with DOSBOX because all emulators that I'm aware of treat the emulated "screen" as a software surface anyway, and that's a small source of render lag. So it might be worth benchmarking those patches again.

A 1.2 wrapper for 2, just creates an additional source of latency. The smart thing that they should have done in the first place would have been to rip the bandaid off, and put the build switches in SDL to support or not support the 1.2 API and depreciated things like the real CD audio/playback controls. That way if a dev really wants to support an old feature that new machines do not have, they have to build the SDL2 library with that functionality. Rather than the reverse situation where software built against 1.2 is suffering from severe bitrot, and playing on HiDPI screens requires tinkering with application compatibility and GPU driver settings.

DOSBOX should not feature bloat into supporting hardware that is best addressed with Virtualbox/VMWare/QEMU/XEN. Hell, it really should not have been enabled to run any version of Windows at all. Win 3.1/3.11/95/95OSR2/98/98SE/ME should have been addressed by the WINE project. Really it's the 3DFX support in an unofficial patch that drives Win95 demand. Anything else that works is a bonus. In fact you can leverage DOSBOX with the Fluidsynth support to add a "software synth" as "hardware" to the Win95 environment, and not have the processing penality you would if you installed something like s-yxg50 in it. since you could have FluidSynth use a patch bank that is larger than system ram.

Reply 176 of 195, by Truth Unknown

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

So apparently DSOAL that uses OpenAL-Soft is still being developed, and it seems to support up to EAX 4.0 with the EFX functions of OpenAL.
https://repo.or.cz/dsound-openal.git
There are some some binaries, this is how I came across the existence of it in the first place, there is a mod on Nexus Mods for having HRTF for Oblivion that's built on DSOAL. It seems to work with FEAR, which I think uses EAX 4.0.
https://www.nexusmods.com/oblivion/mods/48872

Reply 177 of 195, by lowenz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Truth Unknown wrote:
So apparently DSOAL that uses OpenAL-Soft is still being developed, and it seems to support up to EAX 4.0 with the EFX functions […]
Show full quote

So apparently DSOAL that uses OpenAL-Soft is still being developed, and it seems to support up to EAX 4.0 with the EFX functions of OpenAL.
https://repo.or.cz/dsound-openal.git
There are some some binaries, this is how I came across the existence of it in the first place, there is a mod on Nexus Mods for having HRTF for Oblivion that's built on DSOAL. It seems to work with FEAR, which I think uses EAX 4.0.
https://www.nexusmods.com/oblivion/mods/48872

1.31a -> https://www.nexusmods.com/newvegas/mods/65094?tab=files

Working NICE in FEAR, Far Cry, Halo CE.....just remember this: https://www.indirectsound.com/registryIssues.html

Reply 179 of 195, by Truth Unknown

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Found another source for builds in a guide for Halo Custom Edition, https://opencarnage.net/index.php?/topic/7383 … updated-050619/ The link is number 11 in that first post or http://vaporeon.io/hosted/dsoal-builds/ . This one seems more bare-bones since the one on Nexus Mods is a bit excessive, since the dsound.dll and dsoal-aldrv.dll files are what's only required and the optional ini can be configured with the configuration tool from openal-soft's binaries https://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html . Without the config, it seems the included renamed openal-soft dll will try to match your speaker setup unless you modified your openal-soft's global configuration.

That's a good reminder since system DLLs are definitely tougher to wrap nowadays with some applications from security changes in windows and hard-coding from some programmers.