Gemini000 wrote:

It would help if someone could take pictures of Jazz Jackrabbit running on a CRT monitor in real DOS so that the screen size can be compared between both the main menus and the gameplay.

Here you go 😀 (it's the shareware version, but resolutions should be the same I guess...)

(try not to mind the blur, moiré and wrong white balance)

Also look at round objects like the sun, or ammo pickups: they're supposed to be round, but look slightly oval in your video.

bonus desktop wallpaper

Gemini000 wrote:

That... doesn't make any sense. No one had a widescreen monitor back when this game was new, so making a game do that would result in black bars at the top and bottom of the picture and people would complain that the game wasn't filling the whole screen. 😜

Thanks for the response, that seems to explain the discrepancy reported in Great Hierophant's article (i.e. where aspect ratio correction only seems appropriate some of the time). It likely also explains the odd res/Hz switch-up, since it seems the odd res/Hz was used to force black bars on top/bottom.

BTW, Great Hierophant, you still need to clean up that third aspect ratio article to have linefeeds after each image displayed. Without them the text layout is all mucked up.

jwt27 wrote:

Gemini000 wrote:

It would help if someone could take pictures of Jazz Jackrabbit running on a CRT monitor in real DOS so that the screen size can be compared between both the main menus and the gameplay.

Here you go :) (it's the shareware version, but resolutions should be the same I guess...)

:O

Hunh... you know... seeing it like that, I wonder if dropping the sync rate from 70 to 60 was simply a "quick fix" approach to making the pixel aspect 1:1 on regular monitors, and the missing vertical line at the bottom is simply a side effect of this?

I'll add some information about this in a moment on the video page on my website. Thanks for checking that out, jwt! :)

I never saw a DOS game which gave up screen space like that. Though I it is understandable, since 320x200 with rectangular pixels is just one of those annoying IBM legacies, like the 640kB barrier. IBM VGA BIOS Mode 13h 320x200 also does not allow pageflipping, as it cannot access 256kB or more of the video memory. One of the reasons devs tortured themselves with planar mode X instead.

A small remark on the Star Control episode: I used to build fortifications to get additional ship moves (not sure, need to check..) and block enemy moves. Colonies also benefit moves, but mainly they allow one to restock the crew level of battle damaged ships. One Exception: "Since Syreen are barred from recruiting from colonies, they resort to seizing volunteers from colony worlds which they conquer."
Still hoping the 'Ur-Quan masters' will one day include this game mode.

On my monitor, the in-game does appear in widescreen similar to jwt27's photo. The menu screens do not, since they use 320x200 and should fill the screen. Also, its hard to see, but the main menu (with the swirl patterns), does use a blue border color. I will adjust my article and try to get those alignment working properly

Ancient DOS Games Filler #41 - Final Weeks of Season 3 is online!

I've also posted some news-type stuff in addition to these details straight to the front page of my website: http://www.pixelships.com

Between getting my website updated and now I've discovered that my connectivity issues are extending to pretty much everything video-related. Even Blip playback at HD is not working properly and is only getting a throughput VERY similar to what I'm getting from YouTube, which is sketchy... yet bandwidth testers are telling me my bandwidth is perfectly OK.

I'm gonna have to look into this and figure out if my ISP is doing something or if maybe Flash is REALLY messed up with its latest versions or what. I'll keep you all posted on what I find out. :P

I suppose Blip.tv doesn't support 720p /60Hz, which would make the in-game footage less choppy.

Great Hierophant wrote:

I suppose Blip.tv doesn't support 720p /60Hz, which would make the in-game footage less choppy.

Is there any video host that supports 60 fps? That would interest me.

DOS games run at 70 Hz anyway so you would get choppiness either way. Capturing at 70 Hz is also a challenge.

philscomputerlab wrote:

Great Hierophant wrote:

I suppose Blip.tv doesn't support 720p /60Hz, which would make the in-game footage less choppy.

Is there any video host that supports 60 fps? That would interest me.

DOS games run at 70 Hz anyway so you would get choppiness either way. Capturing at 70 Hz is also a challenge.

I read that Vimeo supports 60fps, and it was reported back in late June that Youtube would support 60fps but only in HD formats, but beyond the three demo videos Youtube released then, I have read nothing since. Anyone saying they their Youtube video runs at 60fps, except for those three videos, requires you run the video at 2x speed. If Youtube has already converted 60fps to 30fps, those extra 30fps are lost and cannot be recovered by running the video twice as fast. Say you shoot 30 seconds at 60 frames per second, you would have 1800 frames. If you shot at 30 frames per second, you would have 900 frames. Youtube discards 900 of those frames when it converts your video.

Ok will try Vimeo with a Quake III Arena 60 Hz capture from a 3dfx Voodoo 3 3500.

EDIT: Well that didn't work 🙁

Just a warning… […]
Show full quote

Just a warning…

We have some recommendations for this video:
This video's data rate is 16314 kbit/s, which is pretty high. For HD video, we suggest you use a lower data rate, typically 5000 kbit/s. A lower data rate means smaller video files and faster uploading. Learn more about our recommended HD settings.
This video is over 30 frames per second (FPS). To optimize playback, we'll automatically convert it to 30 FPS for you. In the future, you can reduce file size and speed up the upload process by using a more standard frame rate. Check out our Compression Guidelines for more information.

I guess I may have been mistaken, its Dailymotion, not Vimeo, that purportedly supports 60fps. You have only be able to use the 720p format for it.

DOSBox is the easiest way to capture footage of DOS games at 70Hz. Syncing it with audio from an MT-32 or other MIDI device is not seamless.

So far, Steam and Twitch are the only services I've seen that can do 60 FPS. Twitch because it's a direct broadcast of the incoming stream, so you can encode it however you see fit so long as it will decode for everyone else. Steam is the more surprising one, and their video service is pretty much only for game demonstrations in their storefront, but it's interesting to see it can do it. :o

Gamespot and IGN have 60fps capability. However, allowing you or me to show videos in 60fps, I think that is the video we host ourselves.

have you reviewed Ghostbusters 2?

cdoublejj wrote:

have you reviewed Ghostbusters 2?

Not yet... I can add it to the requests list for you though. :B

it's way different the console counter parts. i haven't seen a ghostbusters 1 on dos though, just 2.

It's not strictly DOS, it's PC Booter.
http://www.mobygames.com/game/pc-booter/ghostbusters

I thought the NES version was dreadful enough X_X

Looks sort of similar to the C64 version.

Actually, the original Ghostbusters isn't an absolutely terrible game, but most versions do have issues for sure. Save for the stairwell sequence in the NES version, it's actually pretty easy though monotonous. People often don't realize that the message to "Enter the Zuul Building" is based on how much money you have, so they see the message, buy stuff, then the message goes away, so they think it timed out when really, they just dropped below the money requirement. :P

The notion of dropping trails behind you as you move determines how long the driving sequence takes, as you're not actually driving on the map screen, your planning your route to where you want to go.

Also, contrary to what the AVGN says in his old Ghostbusters video, the Master System version of the game DOES allow you to shoot straight ahead using a different button. I guess the button on his controller simply wasn't working. :P

Ok guys, please don't burn me for this, but as a console gamer during most of the 90's i see this PC platform game and i can hardly believe that it reviewed well or that it was popular. Compared to console platformers of the time, this looks like a C or D grade platformer. We're talking about 1994 where games like Sonic 3 & Knuckles and Donkey Kong Country were released...

Now, don't get me wrong, i know that the PC was never the best platform for platform games (no pun intended) and PC gamers were somewhat thirsty of any decent platform games. But this looks really below average, even graphically. In 1994 you could have at least better graphics on a PC than a 16bit console but this not only looks way inferior to the likes of Sonic, DK or even Mario, it looks like an early Amiga game. And the frame rate doesn't look smooth either, at least judging from the video. The level design looks poor also.

As for the sequel, yes, i can see why it reviewed poorly. Lets forget 3D platforms that were perfected already since 1996 by the way (Mario 64). Lets focus only on 2D platforms. I'm not even going to bring Yoshi's Island or DKC 2 into the discussion. But even on the PC you could find games like the Earthworm Jim ports, for example. I just can't see how anyone would be impressed by this when he had access to some of the best ports of Earthworm Jim 1 and 2. Oh and Rayman.

Like i said, don't burn me for this. I don't have much experience whatsoever from PC games before 1997 (except for the likes of Doom) and i'm mostly talk from the perspective of a console gamer (Awwww, yisssss).