VOGONS

Common searches


Reply 200 of 212, by Peter Swinkels

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-04, 08:08:
CRT monitor only 10 pounds, you must be kidding. Try lifting up my 19" Dell Trinitron crt if you want. I've never ever been zapp […]
Show full quote
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-03, 14:47:
Be that as it may, with older computers you were stuck with pretty much the options offered by the hardware. Trust me I haven't […]
Show full quote
Jo22 wrote on 2021-07-03, 14:38:
Well said, I think. […]
Show full quote

Well said, I think.

This has been said a thousand times, but..
Some games were indeed as good looking/playable as we remember.
However, todays hardware is still not able to properly replicate the looks and feels of back then.
It's just not CRT vs LCD, but also other little details.
Say, the palette, blur and other analogue properties of a real CGA card's composite output; the lossy connection itself; etc.
But speaking of monitors.. I still haven't seen an modern replica of a B/W TV set, it's RF connection or an amber/green monitor that's authentic.
It seems that math alone can't replicate the chaotic glow of a phosphor screen,
or that our modern technology isn't ready yet (how ironic).
Anyways, that's a bit off-topic, I'm afraid. What I mean to say - even the screenshots shown in this thread/topic, don't do justice.
They will always be a bit different from the physical setup that each of us used to use.

Be that as it may, with older computers you were stuck with pretty much the options offered by the hardware. Trust me I haven't forgotten the many times where my computer was either a bit too fast or too slow or I didn't have the right hardware to fully enjoy a game. Today's computer screens and software may not be able to fully replicate the experience of a CRT and personally there isn't much I remember about such screens I would miss. Software emulation, especially DOSBox ironically allows me to do stuff I would have needed mulitple physical computers for, that is emulating set-ups each best suited to a specific game. And just to bring up hardware again, never ever in my life do I want to see a mouse with a trackball again or a serial port connector. Urgh. Did you enjoy strained eyes, being zapped by static electricity or having a 10 pound monitor taking up valuable deskspace when you lovingly speak of obsolete screen technology?

Yeah, seeing an old computer in a musuem or something is amusing. Not worth the details for enjoying older games imho however. It's the same as how I really don't understand how people could seriously long for a grammaphone player... And the special quality the music has when played on it.

I have no idea whether that is imagined or real, or whether it really can't be emulated.

CRT monitor only 10 pounds, you must be kidding. Try lifting up my 19" Dell Trinitron crt if you want. I've never ever been zapped from a crt. I personally love the hands on tactility of working on old kit. Something you cannot get from emulation. Serial, lpt etc ports were pretty standard for a long long time and are not a problem at all if you actually know what you are doing. I have no problem at all using ball mice on my XT-Turbo, Zenith 286LP Plus, other x86 systems or my Acorn A410, A4000s or RiscPCs or Amiga A600s and Mac SE systems. They work and work well as intended. Just like my 1976 Honda CB550H Super Sport motorcycle. They can still accomplish exactly what they were designed to do 20 plus years later.

Also with new tech continually being made for the older stuff, XT bios hdd, CF adapters, new sound cards etc they are bound to last a bit longer.

Let's get back on topic. What is your favorite game used on a 486? Where you even born when they were put on the market?

Alright, I was a bit on the conservative side, I have seen and dealt with CRT's that were heavier. Hah, try some older/low end model - you could hear the thing crackle with static electricity and even feel it if you weren't careful. Personally I don't want to have to deal with older stuff. A few exceptions are for a hobby or when I must. If I have the time, energy and other resources that is. And alright, so you have an older motorcycle that still does its job fine. It's very nice you have the time and skill to maintain it. Perhaps others don't?

Back on topic? Okay, while not specifically for the 80486 - one game that comes to mind is Leisure Suit Larry 1 VGA (the 1990 remake) - It's not the most beautiful in graphical terms, but it's a riot if you're in the mood to appreciate its brand of humor. I believe Leisure Suit Larry 7 - Love For Sail is specifically for the 80486. It also has better graphics imho. It's humor is a bit less cartoony but definitively not for everyone.

Reply 201 of 212, by Shreddoc

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-04, 07:30:
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-03, 20:40:
It's called "kicking Boris Johnson in the nuts". […]
Show full quote
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-03, 20:17:

"I mean, shall we really talk about how much of Europe's population is currently obsessed with swinging one's leg at a sack of air?"- Haha, I must have missed something. What is this trend called?

It's called "kicking Boris Johnson in the nuts".

No it isn't, I jest. It's the game known as football. An old pasttime whose few simple mechanics (and clunky interface) lie over a vast wealth of complex possibilities and enjoyment, in the same way that old simple Tetris is merely "(the vast worlds of) geometry and calculus combined". Age, simplicity, technical trappings, these are two-edged swords, they can cut both ways, but alone are rarely the basis for superiority.

For example, 18th century violinist Niccolo Paganini was (by all accounts and evidence) technically superior to almost all musicians even to this day. What he created was more complex, more technical, more detailed, faster, than 99.9..% of individual musicians will ever be able to play. (Funny that, isn't it - a very old thing, which was 'tecAlmost all shrivel in comparisson to a well made modern gamehnically' superior to most new things : showing how age and technicality are not inevitably correlated.) That aside aside, how well do you think Paganini is doing in the charts these days against simple, plodding, strum-a-few-chords-and-warble Ed Sheeran?? How much enjoyment does the average human gain from the latter vs the former? Just one example of how technicals are rarely the primary factor in artistic endeavours (where computer gaming also resides).

🤣 - In short everything has it’s ups and downs and nothing is inherently superior or inferior. Age and technicality are not related per se.

Exactly. So your earlier statement "Almost all [old games] shrivel in comparisson to a well made modern game" is similarly true when inversed: "Almost all modern games shrivel in comparison to a well made old game".

Which we can simplify down to the overall truism: "most games seem average, when compared to an outstanding game". And yes, that is true! 😉 Good point!

Last edited by Shreddoc on 2021-07-04, 20:48. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 202 of 212, by Caluser2000

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-04, 20:38:
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-04, 07:30:
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-03, 20:40:

It's called "kicking Boris Johnson in the nuts".

No it isn't, I jest. It's the game known as football. An old pasttime whose few simple mechanics (and clunky interface) lie over a vast wealth of complex possibilities and enjoyment, in the same way that old simple Tetris is merely "(the vast worlds of) geometry and calculus combined". Age, simplicity, technical trappings, these are two-edged swords, they can cut both ways, but alone are rarely the basis for superiority.

For example, 18th century violinist Niccolo Paganini was (by all accounts and evidence) technically superior to almost all musicians even to this day. What he created was more complex, more technical, more detailed, faster, than 99.9..% of individual musicians will ever be able to play. (Funny that, isn't it - a very old thing, which was 'tecAlmost all shrivel in comparisson to a well made modern gamehnically' superior to most new things : showing how age and technicality are not inevitably correlated.) That aside aside, how well do you think Paganini is doing in the charts these days against simple, plodding, strum-a-few-chords-and-warble Ed Sheeran?? How much enjoyment does the average human gain from the latter vs the former? Just one example of how technicals are rarely the primary factor in artistic endeavours (where computer gaming also resides).

🤣 - In short everything has it’s ups and downs and nothing is inherently superior or inferior. Age and technicality are not related per se.

Exactly. So your earlier statement "Almost all [old games] shrivel in comparisson to a well made modern game" is equally true when inversed: "Almost all modern games shrivel in comparison to a well made old game".

Which we can simplify down to the overall truism: "most games seem average, when compared to an outstanding game". And yes, that is true! 😉 Good point!

I whole heartedly concur sir..😉

And it needs repeating.

There's a glitch in the matrix.
A founding member of the 286 appreciation society.
Apparently 32-bit is dead and nobody likes P4s.
Of course, as always, I'm open to correction...😉

Reply 203 of 212, by Peter Swinkels

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-04, 20:45:
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-04, 20:38:
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-04, 07:30:

🤣 - In short everything has it’s ups and downs and nothing is inherently superior or inferior. Age and technicality are not related per se.

Exactly. So your earlier statement "Almost all [old games] shrivel in comparisson to a well made modern game" is equally true when inversed: "Almost all modern games shrivel in comparison to a well made old game".

Which we can simplify down to the overall truism: "most games seem average, when compared to an outstanding game". And yes, that is true! 😉 Good point!

I whole heartedly concur sir..😉

And it needs repeating.

Well, I am glad we all appear to be together in some form of agreement right now. Yay?

A well made old game that despite its utilitarian tech could give many a gamer a run for their money? Especially at its higher difficulty settings? A game that rivals modern games in a smooth and responsive interface where if you are skilled enough you can make the character you control pull off some pretty amazing acrobatics? A game that could make you rage-quit for how non-stop hard it makes the players' lives? Try playing IBM's Alley Cat (1983), not just for shits and giggles. Really try to progress as far as you can with little reward for your effort. Except for a few extra lives, which you will need to continue. That, and an increasing score.

I sometimes played it for laughs, it is pretty good at pulling off funny death scenes when you screw up. Otherwise, I would play something else where my effort appeared to be worth more than mostly just an increasing difficulty setting. Yes, I am lazy that way, I guess. 😀

Last edited by Peter Swinkels on 2021-07-12, 12:51. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 204 of 212, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

The cyber sphere breakout-style game that runs well on a 486. It's a fairly recent game compared to the others listed, but I still think it qualifies 😀

cybersphere_3.png

https://www.myabandonware.com/game/cybersphere-a1x

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHj1vVGwac0

Reply 206 of 212, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-12, 13:01:

Yeah, I think Cybersphere qualifies, looks and sounds nice for a DOS game. 😀 I see noone mention the original two DOOM episodes.

Because they run like ass on 486 PCs except DX4s. I played Doom 1 on an DX33 and loved it, but let's be honest, it plays like ass.

Retronautics: A digital gallery of my retro computers, hardware and projects.

Reply 207 of 212, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
appiah4 wrote on 2021-07-12, 14:06:
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-12, 13:01:

Yeah, I think Cybersphere qualifies, looks and sounds nice for a DOS game. 😀 I see noone mention the original two DOOM episodes.

Because they run like ass on 486 PCs except DX4s. I played Doom 1 on an DX33 and loved it, but let's be honest, it plays like ass.

Nah, it runs well on a VLB DX2-66.

Reply 208 of 212, by Peter Swinkels

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Anders- wrote on 2021-07-12, 14:37:
appiah4 wrote on 2021-07-12, 14:06:
Peter Swinkels wrote on 2021-07-12, 13:01:

Yeah, I think Cybersphere qualifies, looks and sounds nice for a DOS game. 😀 I see noone mention the original two DOOM episodes.

Because they run like ass on 486 PCs except DX4s. I played Doom 1 on an DX33 and loved it, but let's be honest, it plays like ass.

Nah, it runs well on a VLB DX2-66.

I remember it running fine on a 80486 DX 50 mhz I used to play the game on. This was during breaks at school. Perhaps I was so glad I had the luxury of playing shoot ‘em up games at school I didn’t care whether or not it ran smoothly.

Or, I didn’t know better, I had to use even older pcs before that.

Reply 209 of 212, by Shreddoc

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Partly depends on your other hardware. A modest 486 CPU (~40-50Mhz) with a $100-at-the-time VLB card would run Doom fine*, iirc. Versus say, the same 486 with a 1MB Trident ISA card.

Evidence : Up to ~400% framerate difference between the lowest and highest cards.

*for a given value of "fine" - standards and expectations then were not what they are now, in our modern hugescreen 100hz+ ultra-resolution raytracing wonderland of $2000 GPUs.

Reply 210 of 212, by Caluser2000

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-12, 21:00:

Partly depends on your other hardware. A modest 486 CPU (~40-50Mhz) with a $100-at-the-time VLB card would run Doom fine*, iirc. Versus say, the same 486 with a 1MB Trident ISA card.

Evidence : Up to ~400% framerate difference between the lowest and highest cards.

*for a given value of "fine" - standards and expectations then were not what they are now, in our modern hugescreen 100hz+ ultra-resolution raytracing wonderland of $2000 GPUs.

Shivers are they that much. I must remember not to buy one. Got given this G-Force thingy with my free Core 2 Duo system. It fans a huge fan. We all need fans of some sort I suppose...😉

There's a glitch in the matrix.
A founding member of the 286 appreciation society.
Apparently 32-bit is dead and nobody likes P4s.
Of course, as always, I'm open to correction...😉

Reply 211 of 212, by Shreddoc

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-07-12, 21:38:
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-07-12, 21:00:

Partly depends on your other hardware. A modest 486 CPU (~40-50Mhz) with a $100-at-the-time VLB card would run Doom fine*, iirc. Versus say, the same 486 with a 1MB Trident ISA card.

Evidence : Up to ~400% framerate difference between the lowest and highest cards.

*for a given value of "fine" - standards and expectations then were not what they are now, in our modern hugescreen 100hz+ ultra-resolution raytracing wonderland of $2000 GPUs.

Shivers are they that much. I must remember not to buy one. Got given this G-Force thingy with my free Core 2 Duo system. It fans a huge fan. We all need fans of some sort I suppose...😉

I was being conservative, in an attempt not to shock anybody. 😉

They're actually $3000+ at the top end. Yup. Utterly, utterly, nuts crazy.

Reply 212 of 212, by Peter Swinkels

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Come to think of it, the CPU and video card aren’t the only important things. After getting to hear a few of my old favorites using a soundcard I wish our old 80386 had had one. A lot of games would have been even more fun to play.