subhuman@xgtx wrote on 2024-11-11, 04:25:

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-10, 13:38:

RetroGamer4Ever wrote on 2024-09-28, 18:17:

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that.... […]
Show full quote

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that....

1. Old PC hardware availability (CPU/mobo/complete vintage systems/whatever)has decreased significantly, while old PC software remains easily available or grows steadily. What's around may be functional to some degree or going bad/gone bad. This isn't going to change and it's just the way things go. Unless someone starts pooping out retro x86 PC CPUs/board combos to use with retro software or older hardware gets refurbed by one or more players, there's going to be a collapse of the old PC hardware market.

2. The game industry has gotten the message about retro gaming and is remastering/source porting everything it can to modern hardware, making old hardware less necessary and attractive.

3. The emulator scene remains as horny as it as ever been, so again, the shift to modern hardware is moving along at a solid pace.

i hate emulation i think its so stupid. completely ruins the experience. i dont care that you are too lazy/too broke to experience the game on original and intended hardware. in my opinion and this is only an opinion, games should only be enjoyed on period correct hardware.

Sounds as "stupid" or "intelligent" as building a 8800GTX SLI setup to get a subpar experience playing Crysis 1 compared to... every single card released during the last 10 years?

i had the cards laying around what else was i supposed to do with them? also considering that legacy COD servers are still up its a fun computer to mess around with in servers where people still play. only issue is the cards sometimes reach over 100 degrees. yes ive repasted them.

darry wrote on 2024-11-11, 04:49:

You do you. I respect that . […]
Show full quote

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-10, 13:38:

RetroGamer4Ever wrote on 2024-09-28, 18:17:

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that.... […]
Show full quote

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that....

1. Old PC hardware availability (CPU/mobo/complete vintage systems/whatever)has decreased significantly, while old PC software remains easily available or grows steadily. What's around may be functional to some degree or going bad/gone bad. This isn't going to change and it's just the way things go. Unless someone starts pooping out retro x86 PC CPUs/board combos to use with retro software or older hardware gets refurbed by one or more players, there's going to be a collapse of the old PC hardware market.

2. The game industry has gotten the message about retro gaming and is remastering/source porting everything it can to modern hardware, making old hardware less necessary and attractive.

3. The emulator scene remains as horny as it as ever been, so again, the shift to modern hardware is moving along at a solid pace.

i hate emulation i think its so stupid. completely ruins the experience. i dont care that you are too lazy/too broke to experience the game on original and intended hardware. in my opinion and this is only an opinion, games should only be enjoyed on period correct hardware.

You do you. I respect that .

Here is my opinion on the subject, quoted from two threads (MODs, I have done this previously and was not reprimanded, I hope that it is still OK)

darry wrote on 2020-07-01, 12:20:

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certa […]
Show full quote

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certain time period .

In real life, except when buying a complete new machine, hardly anything ever was or stayed "period correct". People often re-used older monitors and peripherals when upgrading to a new machine . Even after buying a completely new machine they often upgraded parts like RAM, video cards CPUs, etc over the months/years . Additionally, at the time of a game's launch, the hardware available did not necessarily allow the said game to run at it's full potential; using later hardware could be beneficial .

Period correctness is a concept that is nice if all you want is a machine that is a snapshot of a given moment in time, museum style .

In practice, if you actually want to run software/games that span a few years, the approach is sub-optimal, unless you actually can manage to have a period correct machine for each year of the time span that you are addressing. IMHO, a much better and practical approach, from a usability point of view, is to base your hardware build decisions on the software you want to run and choose your components so that they allow comfortably running the more demanding/newer applications/games that you have in mind while still working properly with less demanding/older ones . Obviously, you can't cover all time in one build, but planning that build based on what it is able to do, rather than a specific year, makes more practical sense, IMHO .

darry wrote on 2021-03-11, 17:27:

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software . Emulation is not perfect, though gett […]
Show full quote

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software .
Emulation is not perfect, though getting closer all the time . FPGA re-implementation is another approach that will help bring us even closer.
If there ever comes a time when objectively perfect (indistinguishable from the real thing) re-creations of software/hardware environments can be experienced in a "Matrix"-like virtual reality environment, I believe that owning actual retro hardware will lose a lot of its appeal, except to die-hard collectors .

In the mean time, we have real physical old hardware to enjoy when possible and emulation/FPGA to augment/complement and sometimes replace it, depending on one's tolerance to emulation's current limits .
I also agree that playing with old hardware is a lot of the fun, but it still does not need to be period correct .

At the end of the day, if I play Doom 1 on my "period incorrect" Pentium 3 1400 and a real Sound Canvas or Gravis Ultrasound and/or Orpheus and/or AWE64 off of an SSD , is my retro experience any more or less valid than that of someone who scrupulously builds a setup where all parts are 1993 vintage because he wants to experience a "moment in time" ?

TLDR, IMHO :
- Period correctness is as important as you want it to be, if you even care at all. It can also be as loose or restrictive as you want to be , timeframe wise . It is an entirely subjective choice from a usage/enjoyment point of view .
- Real hardware can be used for period incorrect (hot-rodded) builds without resorting to emulation and still be part of the retro experience . The only limit is compatibility (part of the fun is stretching that) between older/newer software and hardware
- Emulation can be part of the retro experience and is a valid personal choice
- Period correctness to any degree, for any reason in a personal build, is a subjective personal choice, but the concept does matter for historical preservation and museum exhibits (depending on scope, purpose and practical constraints) which should strive to be as historically accurate as possible .

That being said, according to your take on "period correctness", since Doom came out in 1993, does the only "period correct" software/hardware to run it consist of what was available leading up to its launch day (December 10, 1993) ? If not, what is the acceptable cutoff point according to you and why ?

To be clear, I am not trying to mock you, disrespect you, or paint you into a corner. I just want to better understand what people consider to be "period correct" and why.

in my opinion, "period correctness" in terms of the relationship between hardware and software is when the software stops supporting the hardware it's intended to run on. for me its about
the era or the technology it’s trying to represent. in my opinion, When software was initially designed for a particular piece of hardware, that hardware was integral to its intended experience. i personally would rather play GLquake at 30FPS in 640x480 mode on a CRT than running it at 1080p 120plus FPS using my 3060ti and ryzen 7.

as for my take on "period correct"

if i were to run Tombraider 1 or any other game from that year/following year on a P1 build with a voodoo 1, that would in my opinion be period correct. If i were to run it on a p4 build with a geforce 4 lt wouldnt be as period correct to me if at all anymore. people can choose to shit on me all they want but this is only an opinion. was I abit harsh on emulation, maybe. do i actually think emulation is all bad news? No. without emulation alot of games would be probably lost to time. would i prefer to run software on the hardware it was developed for? yes. my previous comment was all but an angry rant i went on because i love old hardware so much and apart of me wants to keep software and hardware grouped together by period. considering how many emulation lovers there are and me being a retro hardware lover, maybe i should have never spoken on this topic.

tomb raider on a p4 would be fine because it's capped and there's no fm sound to worry about and some do like the software look better (even then). The real kicker is the tolerance of the controls as that part didn't age well and it's mutual with the series

leileilol wrote on 2024-11-11, 06:25:

tomb raider on a p4 would be fine because it's capped and there's no fm sound to worry about and some do like the software look better (even then). The real kicker is the tolerance of the controls as that part didn't age well and it's mutual with the series

asking out of curiosity, were people still playing 1995-1998 games in the early 2000's? id assume more people would have been more interested in the newest releases of other games by the time th eP4 rolled around right?

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-11, 05:54:

subhuman@xgtx wrote on 2024-11-11, 04:25:

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-10, 13:38:

i hate emulation i think its so stupid. completely ruins the experience. i dont care that you are too lazy/too broke to experience the game on original and intended hardware. in my opinion and this is only an opinion, games should only be enjoyed on period correct hardware.

Sounds as "stupid" or "intelligent" as building a 8800GTX SLI setup to get a subpar experience playing Crysis 1 compared to... every single card released during the last 10 years?

i had the cards laying around what else was i supposed to do with them? also considering that legacy COD servers are still up its a fun computer to mess around with in servers where people still play. only issue is the cards sometimes reach over 100 degrees. yes ive repasted them.

also i should probably remove that build from my signature since its now disassembled and the parts are moved into other builds. liquid cooling a 2006 computer was fun for awhile but became impractical and a few of the caps on the mobo blew probably from the hot ass cards and overclocking i did on the CPU and GPU's.

Neither GLQuake nor Glide Tomb Raider were the original vision. GLQuake is twice removed if you count software + Verite. Tomb Raider has various 3D accelerated versions and none of them look alike. At this point the goal was to have them run as fast as possible, the original vision took the back seat.

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-11, 06:18:

in my opinion, "period correctness" in terms of the relationship between hardware and software is when the software stops suppor […]
Show full quote

darry wrote on 2024-11-11, 04:49:

You do you. I respect that . […]
Show full quote

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-10, 13:38:

i hate emulation i think its so stupid. completely ruins the experience. i dont care that you are too lazy/too broke to experience the game on original and intended hardware. in my opinion and this is only an opinion, games should only be enjoyed on period correct hardware.

You do you. I respect that .

Here is my opinion on the subject, quoted from two threads (MODs, I have done this previously and was not reprimanded, I hope that it is still OK)

darry wrote on 2020-07-01, 12:20:

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certa […]
Show full quote

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certain time period .

In real life, except when buying a complete new machine, hardly anything ever was or stayed "period correct". People often re-used older monitors and peripherals when upgrading to a new machine . Even after buying a completely new machine they often upgraded parts like RAM, video cards CPUs, etc over the months/years . Additionally, at the time of a game's launch, the hardware available did not necessarily allow the said game to run at it's full potential; using later hardware could be beneficial .

Period correctness is a concept that is nice if all you want is a machine that is a snapshot of a given moment in time, museum style .

In practice, if you actually want to run software/games that span a few years, the approach is sub-optimal, unless you actually can manage to have a period correct machine for each year of the time span that you are addressing. IMHO, a much better and practical approach, from a usability point of view, is to base your hardware build decisions on the software you want to run and choose your components so that they allow comfortably running the more demanding/newer applications/games that you have in mind while still working properly with less demanding/older ones . Obviously, you can't cover all time in one build, but planning that build based on what it is able to do, rather than a specific year, makes more practical sense, IMHO .

darry wrote on 2021-03-11, 17:27:

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software . Emulation is not perfect, though gett […]
Show full quote

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software .
Emulation is not perfect, though getting closer all the time . FPGA re-implementation is another approach that will help bring us even closer.
If there ever comes a time when objectively perfect (indistinguishable from the real thing) re-creations of software/hardware environments can be experienced in a "Matrix"-like virtual reality environment, I believe that owning actual retro hardware will lose a lot of its appeal, except to die-hard collectors .

In the mean time, we have real physical old hardware to enjoy when possible and emulation/FPGA to augment/complement and sometimes replace it, depending on one's tolerance to emulation's current limits .
I also agree that playing with old hardware is a lot of the fun, but it still does not need to be period correct .

At the end of the day, if I play Doom 1 on my "period incorrect" Pentium 3 1400 and a real Sound Canvas or Gravis Ultrasound and/or Orpheus and/or AWE64 off of an SSD , is my retro experience any more or less valid than that of someone who scrupulously builds a setup where all parts are 1993 vintage because he wants to experience a "moment in time" ?

TLDR, IMHO :
- Period correctness is as important as you want it to be, if you even care at all. It can also be as loose or restrictive as you want to be , timeframe wise . It is an entirely subjective choice from a usage/enjoyment point of view .
- Real hardware can be used for period incorrect (hot-rodded) builds without resorting to emulation and still be part of the retro experience . The only limit is compatibility (part of the fun is stretching that) between older/newer software and hardware
- Emulation can be part of the retro experience and is a valid personal choice
- Period correctness to any degree, for any reason in a personal build, is a subjective personal choice, but the concept does matter for historical preservation and museum exhibits (depending on scope, purpose and practical constraints) which should strive to be as historically accurate as possible .

That being said, according to your take on "period correctness", since Doom came out in 1993, does the only "period correct" software/hardware to run it consist of what was available leading up to its launch day (December 10, 1993) ? If not, what is the acceptable cutoff point according to you and why ?

To be clear, I am not trying to mock you, disrespect you, or paint you into a corner. I just want to better understand what people consider to be "period correct" and why.

in my opinion, "period correctness" in terms of the relationship between hardware and software is when the software stops supporting the hardware it's intended to run on. for me its about
the era or the technology it’s trying to represent. in my opinion, When software was initially designed for a particular piece of hardware, that hardware was integral to its intended experience. i personally would rather play GLquake at 30FPS in 640x480 mode on a CRT than running it at 1080p 120plus FPS using my 3060ti and ryzen 7.

as for my take on "period correct"

if i were to run Tombraider 1 or any other game from that year/following year on a P1 build with a voodoo 1, that would in my opinion be period correct. If i were to run it on a p4 build with a geforce 4 lt wouldnt be as period correct to me if at all anymore. people can choose to shit on me all they want but this is only an opinion. was I abit harsh on emulation, maybe. do i actually think emulation is all bad news? No. without emulation alot of games would be probably lost to time. would i prefer to run software on the hardware it was developed for? yes. my previous comment was all but an angry rant i went on because i love old hardware so much and apart of me wants to keep software and hardware grouped together by period. considering how many emulation lovers there are and me being a retro hardware lover, maybe i should have never spoken on this topic.

Thank you for explaining. While I have different criteria from you when using retro software and hardware, and would not use the term "period correct" to describe my preference (because it does not fit my subjective definition of it), I feel we have viewpoints that are not conceptually incompatible.

My threshold for using retro software on newer hardware (without resorting to emulation) is summarized in this point :
it needs to run "as well or better" as on hardware it was designed for with "no disadvantages" or "unacceptable compromises" . The double quoted terms are all subjective, of course. For example, an LCD vs CRT, SSD vs HDD, modern PSU might be considered better or a be seen as a disadvantage, subjectively (I am not into CRTs, except 15KHz ones for consoles and I use SSDs and modern PSUs, despite the anachronism of it). Also, using a Glide wrapper on retro hardware, is an "unacceptable compromise" for me, which is why I use 3dfx hardware (if I couldn't, I might as well use an emulator and wrapper on modern hardware, if I needed to go there). These are just examples, of course.

If, for you, running Tomb Raider on a P4 is too far removed from the game era's hardware to allow you to feel that you are getting an authentic experience, whatever the actual mechanics/feelings/logic behind it, I get that, even if I don't personally see it as an issue for me.

To answer your other question, running older games and scene demos when I upgraded hardware was one of my preferred experiences . Seeing how much better (or at least how well) Doom/Quake/games/demos/et could run on my brand new and then current Celeron 1300 (Tualatin) with ISA sound cards was a hoot for me.

Sometime games on real period correct hardware and o.s. runs just as we expect and remember anyway. For example complex DOS games like Stunts (1990) never ran good for me with Dosbox. Maybe just latency problems for such 3D complex games but that's a game I would only play on real hardware.

darry wrote on 2024-11-11, 04:49:

You do you. I respect that . […]
Show full quote

winuser3162 wrote on 2024-11-10, 13:38:

RetroGamer4Ever wrote on 2024-09-28, 18:17:

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that.... […]
Show full quote

Yes, and there are a few immutable factors contributing to that....

1. Old PC hardware availability (CPU/mobo/complete vintage systems/whatever)has decreased significantly, while old PC software remains easily available or grows steadily. What's around may be functional to some degree or going bad/gone bad. This isn't going to change and it's just the way things go. Unless someone starts pooping out retro x86 PC CPUs/board combos to use with retro software or older hardware gets refurbed by one or more players, there's going to be a collapse of the old PC hardware market.

2. The game industry has gotten the message about retro gaming and is remastering/source porting everything it can to modern hardware, making old hardware less necessary and attractive.

3. The emulator scene remains as horny as it as ever been, so again, the shift to modern hardware is moving along at a solid pace.

i hate emulation i think its so stupid. completely ruins the experience. i dont care that you are too lazy/too broke to experience the game on original and intended hardware. in my opinion and this is only an opinion, games should only be enjoyed on period correct hardware.

You do you. I respect that .

Here is my opinion on the subject, quoted from two threads (MODs, I have done this previously and was not reprimanded, I hope that it is still OK)

darry wrote on 2020-07-01, 12:20:

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certa […]
Show full quote

Period correctness is a concept that came about after the fact when people wanted to have a machine be representative of a certain time period .

In real life, except when buying a complete new machine, hardly anything ever was or stayed "period correct". People often re-used older monitors and peripherals when upgrading to a new machine . Even after buying a completely new machine they often upgraded parts like RAM, video cards CPUs, etc over the months/years . Additionally, at the time of a game's launch, the hardware available did not necessarily allow the said game to run at it's full potential; using later hardware could be beneficial .

Period correctness is a concept that is nice if all you want is a machine that is a snapshot of a given moment in time, museum style .

In practice, if you actually want to run software/games that span a few years, the approach is sub-optimal, unless you actually can manage to have a period correct machine for each year of the time span that you are addressing. IMHO, a much better and practical approach, from a usability point of view, is to base your hardware build decisions on the software you want to run and choose your components so that they allow comfortably running the more demanding/newer applications/games that you have in mind while still working properly with less demanding/older ones . Obviously, you can't cover all time in one build, but planning that build based on what it is able to do, rather than a specific year, makes more practical sense, IMHO .

darry wrote on 2021-03-11, 17:27:

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software . Emulation is not perfect, though gett […]
Show full quote

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software .
Emulation is not perfect, though getting closer all the time . FPGA re-implementation is another approach that will help bring us even closer.
If there ever comes a time when objectively perfect (indistinguishable from the real thing) re-creations of software/hardware environments can be experienced in a "Matrix"-like virtual reality environment, I believe that owning actual retro hardware will lose a lot of its appeal, except to die-hard collectors .

In the mean time, we have real physical old hardware to enjoy when possible and emulation/FPGA to augment/complement and sometimes replace it, depending on one's tolerance to emulation's current limits .
I also agree that playing with old hardware is a lot of the fun, but it still does not need to be period correct .

At the end of the day, if I play Doom 1 on my "period incorrect" Pentium 3 1400 and a real Sound Canvas or Gravis Ultrasound and/or Orpheus and/or AWE64 off of an SSD , is my retro experience any more or less valid than that of someone who scrupulously builds a setup where all parts are 1993 vintage because he wants to experience a "moment in time" ?

TLDR, IMHO :
- Period correctness is as important as you want it to be, if you even care at all. It can also be as loose or restrictive as you want to be , timeframe wise . It is an entirely subjective choice from a usage/enjoyment point of view .
- Real hardware can be used for period incorrect (hot-rodded) builds without resorting to emulation and still be part of the retro experience . The only limit is compatibility (part of the fun is stretching that) between older/newer software and hardware
- Emulation can be part of the retro experience and is a valid personal choice
- Period correctness to any degree, for any reason in a personal build, is a subjective personal choice, but the concept does matter for historical preservation and museum exhibits (depending on scope, purpose and practical constraints) which should strive to be as historically accurate as possible .

That being said, according to your take on "period correctness", since Doom came out in 1993, does the only "period correct" software/hardware to run it consist of what was available leading up to its launch day (December 10, 1993) ? If not, what is the acceptable cutoff point according to you and why ?

To be clear, I am not trying to mock you, disrespect you, or paint you into a corner. I just want to better understand what people consider to be "period correct" and why.

Hah. I find this question to be really clever, because it's a paradoxon sort of.
Doom had been played on your typical ~486 PC of the time with a VLB graphics card, maybe, but the development hardware was an Unix workstation.

So the original versions of Doom also had been run on high-end graphics workstations, too. From the very beginning. Even if it initially was by using a PC emulator such as Merge, merely.

But since official 1994 Unix versions exist, too, Doom had been run on on systems with a 1280x1024 256c video mode. CRTs were 17" to 20", likely.
In 1994, already, of course.

majinga wrote on 2024-11-10, 15:14:

Even the retro feeling, is something complicated. Most of us are just nostalgic. But, even play with our old systems don't give back the feelings of the old era. Because, time pass, there is no way to stop it. There is no way to feel the same sensations of 30 years ago. No matter how accurate the system that are you using is.

this is true, to be "period correct" is more than hardware - it's also being the person you were in the environment that was, no matter the efforts the actual experience can never be re-created only an approximation, a kind of emulation itself.

and perhaps, if there is a decline in interest in retro hardware, then part of that is a move toward preservation of software or at least the ability to play old games - which really doesn't require old hardware at all

Sorry, but, this "period correct" thing to me seems a complete bullshit. What the heck it mean?

3Dfx today are almost impossible to buy. So, what if someone find it's old P4 on the basement and want to use it to play old games?
Even tomb raider. Who he played when he was young, but not on the P4, on his previous computer.
Which probably don't had a 3dfx, because at the time 3dfx where too expensive.

Most people played tomb raider on the systems they have at the time, and most of them doesn't have a 3dfx.
Most played it on PS1 or Saturn. This make the tomb raider experience fake? I don't think so.
When I played it the first time in 96, was running it in software mode, because at the time, I don't have a 3dfx.
And that systems where the ones on which tomb raider was designed for.

So, there was no "period correct" everyone played the games on the systems they could. And that's the same today.

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 11:25:

Sorry, but, this "period correct" thing to me seems a complete bullshit. What the heck it mean? […]
Show full quote

Sorry, but, this "period correct" thing to me seems a complete bullshit. What the heck it mean?

3Dfx today are almost impossible to buy. So, what if someone find it's old P4 on the basement and want to use it to play old games?
Even tomb raider. Who he played when he was young, but not on the P4, on his previous computer.
Which probably don't had a 3dfx, because at the time 3dfx where too expensive.

Most people played tomb raider on the systems they have at the time, and most of them doesn't have a 3dfx.
Most played it on PS1 or Saturn. This make the tomb raider experience fake? I don't think so.
When I played it the first time in 96, was running it in software mode, because at the time, I don't have a 3dfx.
And that systems where the ones on which tomb raider was designed for.

So, there was no "period correct" everyone played the games on the systems they could. And that's the same today.

100%, there is no official definition of “period correct”. I see some people trying to match hardware down to the month it was released. In reality this was almost never the case. People had hardware in their machines years apart from release date.

I went to hundreds of LAN parties from 1995 to 2000. Someone would come to the LAN event with a machine their parents could afford. 2 years later, that person had the same machine but maybe had an upgraded graphics card or sound card. PC’s were always about “upgrades” and not about having hardware in your machine that had matching release dates. To me, period correct is having hardware within a couple of years of each other. Just my humble opinion…

Retro hardware will never decrease. People will always have a desire to try experience or have something (or didn’t have) from their child hood.

On another note, I never owned a Voodoo card back in the day. I was always jealous of people who did. It feels bloody great now owning one 😉

Period correct for PC gaming to me means a config that was supposed to exist and run the same period correct software so it's not really necessary to have a single month/year period release of each component but more a config that in a certain range would have sense to exist in those couple years. At the end like a late Am386DX-40 config with 1995 hardware.

@386SX.
There are games who don't run fine on any system available when they came out.
So what about this games?

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 12:51:

@386SX.
There are games who don't run fine on any system available when they came out.
So what about this games?

In those situations then the games will run just as bad as it did. Stunts (1990) ran really bad on my 386SX-20 with the awful video card I had but still latency times of inputs were or at least felt better than any emulated situation.

386SX wrote on 2024-11-11, 12:19:

Period correct for PC gaming to me means a config that was supposed to exist and run the same period correct software so it's not really necessary to have a single month/year period release of each component but more a config that in a certain range would have sense to exist in those couple years. At the end like a late Am386DX-40 config with 1995 hardware.

To me it's either the hardware that the developers had used at the time or the target platform they had been developing for.

The latter is the cross-compile concept.
You have a higher-end system you develop your applications with.

Just like how DOS 2.x had been developed on a DEC system or how MS Windows 1.x had been developed on a more powerful Tandy 2000 (featured 80186, 640x400 8c graphics).

What I also think is a must-have is a CRT monitor or a simulation of it.
Otherwise, the games look just horrible. LCD is not period-correct.
- Except for those vintage LCDs or gas plasma screens used in late 80s/early 90s.
(Or 15" LCD panels used in early flst screen monitors or NTSC flat screen TVs from early 2000s.)

Why? Because of their native resolution being fitting.
VGA was 640x480 pels which these 286/386/486 laptop screens had featured natively.
Ideal for Windows 3.0 using Standard VGA driver and typical DOS applications.
320x200 graphics were being displayed as 640x400, with small black borders on top and bottom.

The aspect ratio maybe wasn't correct for 320x200 because of square pixels vs non-square pixels, but the scaling was integer without interpolation, at least.
Games using ModeX in 320x240 looked fine, also.
By comparion, modern LCDs always must scale/interpolate pixels on a typical DOS system.
Except if Windows has a driver for matching resolution.

Edit: You could also say that "period-correct" is what's listed on the game box. 😉
If a game says "386 or higher" a slightly newer or older generation might be still within period-correctness.
Say a 286 at 20 MHz (if game is still 16-Bit) or a modest 486DX with sufficient cache and RAM.
Let's remember, the recommended requirements are not seldomly the true minimum requirements. So there's always a bit of tolerance.

Edit: Last but not least, there's another factor that's often being forgotten.
Trends, pop culture and fashion aren’t around same time across the world.
Some countries do lag behind a few years, sometimes.

Here in my place, fashion and films was about 2 years behind when it comes to stuff from over the big pond. Music excepted, maybe, because radio was international (shortwave).

I mean, let's look at eastern Europe of the 90s.
They had just started in ca. 1995 to adopt western 80s fashion and music.
Their computers at home were older models, from what I read some countries just had started to try to build 286 PCs in 1992.
In such places, period-correctness was different altogether.

In China, for example, they had home computers based on the japanese Famicom platform. With keyboard, mouse and 1,44 MB floppy drive.
The company Sobor had created them. The OS was SB-DOS, an MS-DOS 6.2 look a like that ran on 6502.
And these computers weren't cheap to ordinary citizens, still.

Ok, I don't get it.

Let's make a real example, let say my first PC was a 386. And I kept it for long time, because, computer where a lot expensive.
Then a lot of years later I got my second computer, a Pentium.
Now, let's say I had a game that I want to play. I got it in a local store, it was there, it seems nice, and I got it.
The box say recommended CPU 486DX.
Now, I don't have a 486, I only have my old 386 which is too slow, don't fit the minimum requirements.
Or my new PC the pentium, which is even too fast, an not "period correct" for the game. But I can use it and it will run the game very well.

That's not a so absurd situation. Back in the days computers where very expensive, and people trend to keep them as long as possible.
Meanwhile a lot of games will came out. And some where specifically made for the systems in between the ones you have.

That's a perfectly fine situation for me. I don't see anything wrong to use a pentium to run a game made when the pentiums didn't exist yet.
So, if this was ok back then, why is wrong now? An if is ok to use a pentium, why not a Pentium 2 or 3.
Maybe, later I bought another PC, but I still have the game, and I still want to play it.
Who decide which system is incorrect for the game? The game run flawlessly on all of them.

aspect ratio for me is another mental block.
You can't find two monitors that display the same image in exactly the same way. And none of them will display a perfect 1:1 pixel image.
The image will be always a bit stretched or wider.
Monitor do have vertical and horizontal regulation to allow you to set the image as it look ok to your eyes. Not to reach the perfect aspect ration of the pixels.
And your eyes can't distict from a square or rectanguar pixel.

Use a CRT is not mandatory.
I don't use it at the moment, I have some, but I don't use them.
Because, I ran out of space. I don't have a place to put all the retro crap I have. So, I'm using a "modern" LCD (they do have at least 10 years now).
And the image is good, whatever I connect to it, a PC, a console, whatever input I use, composite, component, SCART, VGA, DVI, HDMI, the image is good. Not perfect, I'm the first to admit it but that's due the particular monitor I use.

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 18:14:

Who decide which system is incorrect for the game? The game run flawlessly on all of them.

Yes. The technology has advanced too far, though.

In the XT to 486 era you had about same graphics hardware (ISA VGAs), same keyboard (101 key, no Win95 keys), ball mice and tiny CRT monitors of 13"/14" (0.42mm dot pitch for blurry models), single-speed drives, etc. Standard PC/AT chipset with no ACPI/APIC et .

It was all about same, still.

Beginning with 586/Pentium there was an departure already.
ATX mainboards were introduced, PCI graphics cards got popular, the AT architecture was extended by multi-proccesor capabilities (SMP), the 586 had a new timer (APIT), used PCI bridge, Super I/O to connect ISA devices on motherboard etc.
Average CRT monitors were 15" in size with roughly 0.28mm dot pitch.

With Pentium II and III, the classic Pentium line had ended. The Pentium II was based on Pentium Pro which was a different x86 design.
The graphics cards were AGP now, with focus on Windows 9x. They had 2D and 3D accelerator functions, VGA merely has become a tiny legacy block on the chip die.
Sound cards also begun to appear for PCI bus, with reduced DOS compatibility.
Mice started to become optical and USB, with baud rates and resolutions far away from 1200 Baud that a MS Mouse on a 486 had used.
CRT monitors were 17" in size and had fine resolution (0.21mm or 0.24mm dot pitch) - too detailed for 320x200 graphics.

From a technological point of view, the Pentium II or III barely has any relationship with a traditional DOS PC anymore.
The 486 processor was literally prinitive compared to the superscalar Pentiums of late 90s/early 2000s.
It's basically a form of emulation already.

Edit: I want to add that a "Pentium II PC" might refer to more than just the motherboard and CPU, but also the peripherals and internal expansions that were equally new at the time.

If you had an authentic 486 PC and left everything original,
except for the motherboard replacement, then it might still pass as pseudo period correct in a technical sense, I assume.

Ie, the games might run too fast but the beige AT keyboard, serial ball mouse, and 14" CRT monitor, SB16/PAS16 and an real/pure VGA graphics card (say ET4000AX) are still there.

So with the exception of a mainboard that's "fake" (highly advanced mainboard with a RISC processor that basically emulates/reformats the old x86 instructions on the fly), everything else seems authentic to the game.
It will even recongize your VGA card chip and provide SVGA resolutions.

So yeah, I think you really picked a borderline scenario. 😉
Btw, emulation scene had written DOS-based emulators way into Pentium III days. That's also something hard to categorize. 🤷‍♂️

Edit: Typos fixed.

Edit:

Let's make a real example, let say my first PC was a 386. And I kept it for long time, because, computer where a lot expensive. […]
Show full quote

Let's make a real example, let say my first PC was a 386. And I kept it for long time, because, computer where a lot expensive.
Then a lot of years later I got my second computer, a Pentium.
Now, let's say I had a game that I want to play. I got it in a local store, it was there, it seems nice, and I got it.
The box say recommended CPU 486DX.
Now, I don't have a 486, I only have my old 386 which is too slow, don't fit the minimum requirements.
Or my new PC the pentium, which is even too fast, an not "period correct" for the game. But I can use it and it will run the game very well.

There are tolerances, as I said. A 386DX-40 is about as fast as 486DX-25, for example.
A 286-20 or 286-25 PC can be faster than 386SX-16 PC.
Likewise, an early Pentium 60 PC might be slower than a 486DX3-100 or AMD 5x86 P75.

Edit: Redhill site has a fine overview about the improvements in the 586 generation.
https://www.redhill.net.au/c/c-6.php

Also, speed isn't everything. There are other factors, too. Such as CD-ROM drives generations.
Talkie editions of certain titles were released in early 90s, when CD-ROM drives were single-speed (150KBs), double-speed (300KBs) or quad-speed (600KBs).

Back in these days, the CD-ROM drives were running with slower velocity and had a long spin-down delay (if at all).
Users also ran SmartDrive, to compensate for the slow drives of that era.

If you now run these games on a Pentium II with an typical 48x or 52x ATAPI CD-ROM drive, you might encounter stuttering in game play.
Why? Because the modern CD-ROM drives does try to spin up/down all time.
An utility such as CD-SPEED may help here, if being supported.

The terms associated with the technology are CLV and CAV, also.
They're indirectly being related to the speed "issue".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_linear_velocity

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 18:36:

aspect ratio for me is another mental block.
You can't find two monitors that display the same image in exactly the same way.
The image will be always a bit stretched or wider.

If you're talking about CRTs monitors, then yeah, the presence of manual controls would mean that everyone would have the aspect ratio ever so slightly different...

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 18:36:

Monitor do have vertical and horizontal regulation to allow you to set the image as it look ok to your eyes. Not to reach the perfect aspect ration of the pixels.
And your eyes can't distict from a square or rectanguar pixel.

.. however, while it is true that it is not easy at all to distinguish from a single (super blurred up) pixel on a CRT whether it is square or rectangular, it is really easy to distinguish whether circles are correct 1:1 circles or if they become ovals/ellipses when aspect ratio is incorrect. For example, if you play Pinball Fantasies in DOS, you can see quite easily if the playing ball or bumpers, which are supposed to be circles, actually are, or if the aspect ratio is misadjusted. If you have an analog knob to play with to adjust the aspect ratio, you'll quickly realize that a human eye can get the aspect ratio really close, within few % of perfect.

For Re: CRT Terminator Digital VGA Feature Card ISA DV1000 , I specifically developed a Pinball Fantasies and Pinball Dreams video mode detection, to ensure that the aspect ratio of those games would come out best possible. This allows people to play those games on an LCD without the 16:10 square pixels aspect ratio: https://oummg.com/USB3HDCAP_Pinball_Fantasies.png

majinga wrote on 2024-11-11, 18:36:

So, if this was ok back then, why is wrong now?

I like to think that majority of these kinds of "period correct" comments that come off as gatekeeping when read by others, are largely just due to accidentally worded comments that poorly articulate or express people's own preferences, making the comments come off as judgemental, rather than perceptional.

That is, when someone wants to express their enthusiasm for "I really like to retro on a CRT, since they are so awesome", they might write that sentiment as "CRTs are the only way to play retro games" or "I can't understand people who retro on an LCD". Not that they'd necessarily explicitly want to gatekeep, but the wording can get written in a judgemental way, without much attention to the phrasing.

Of course everyone can retro the way they themselves like, be it CRT or LCD, floppies or goteks, or real HW vs emulation.. none of it is wrong.