Best OS and PC for games after DOS?

[VACRMH]

I know I can use DOSbox for really old games, but I have games that I had issues with even back when I had a PC with XP installed (I'm on vista now).

So for those times after DOS and before XP, what's the best OS to use? I'm thinking about picking up a cheap PC.

Also, were there any particular models that were on the higher end back then? I'd rather not deal with picking and choosing parts.

Thanks for any help.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I've heard that folks set up computers with Windows 95/98 on 'em. It's a nice middle ground between pure DOS and XP.

[Game Freak]

With my current setup right now, i have an Acer Aspire Vista with DOSbox, but also a Windows 98 Sony VAIO my friend gave me. It's real good for DOS and earlier Windows games, can handle pretty much anything my other computer doesnt support. I mostly use the VAIO for MIDI stuff though, since my Acer doesnt have a MIDI/Game port for my keyboards

[VACRMH]

Great :) I think 98 sounds like it would work best for me. Anyone know a brand or model that was top of the line back then?

[bangtango]

Another vote for Windows 98 here. I've run a shitload of different games on there without software or hardware issues.

As for a good model or brand of computer, I used to use an NEC laptop and a Compaq desktop back in the heyday of Windows 98.

I wasn't aware until years later that so many people back then held Compaq computers in complete contempt but it seemed like a good machine at the time (1999-2000).

Honestly VAC, I think it may help to know what type of games you'd be using.

On my old Win98 Compaq, I used to run a lot of point and click games like Maniac Mansion, stuff like Oregon/Amazon Trail, the eGames collections with 50-100 "arcade" style games on a single disc, text based sports sims like Football/Baseball Manager and hunting simulations ala Deer Hunter.

I didn't play much in the way of first person shooters, racing games or fighting games on my PC.

[cyberfluxor]

It's really whatever you can find and in good condition. I'd suggest checking out school, church, and corporate auctions if they still hold them. Most institutions are now enrolled in 5-year system cycles so the premium Pentium 2 and 3 boxes have been drying up from either misuse or storage. You may find some decent machines on Craigslist, in thrift stores, or pawn shops. If you look on eBay be sure to search by area code and that local pickup is an option. Be sure to get decent video and audio cards.

Currently my two main DOS machines are a Gateway desktop and Compaq laptop. The desktop (late 90's) is running Windows 98SE while the laptop (mid 90's) runs MS_DOS 6.x with Win 3.11 (used for DOS games on the go). The lappy was a freebie as they didn't want it anymore and the sound card stopped working in addition to several drops on the floor.

As a side note, I have several Gateway computers from the late 90's and all of them have been really good. Maybe others will protest against them, but I suggest keeping an eye out for some or an IBM box or two.

[VACRMH]

Honestly VAC, I think it may help to know what type of games you'd be using.

Good point. Some of the games I can think of are...

Baldur's Gate
Icewind Dale
NOX
Diablo 2
Fallout
Journeyman Project
Nocturne
Total Distortion
Torin's Passage

Those are the ones I own, I'm sure if I had the ability to play more I'd pick em up.

Do laptops have any compatibility issues? I'd love to save some space but the reason I want to do this is to have as much "Pop the disc in and play" as possible.

[FxMercenary]

Ive got a Hercules 3D Prophet III sitting here in mint condition

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles/gf3prophet3hercules3d/

Let me know if you are building a retro PC Gaming Machine, I also have loads of PC 133 Ram.

http://www.ixbt.com/video/images/pr3/prop3-card-front.jpg












Currently I am using a Hercules 3D Prophet II Ultra I My 98 Gaming Machine.

http://www.guru3d.com/review/guillemot/3dprophet2ultra/pic_front.gif

Specs:

Intel Pentium II @ 450mHz
512 MB Crucial PC 133
Hercules 3D Prophet II Ultra 64mb
Sound Blaster PCI 64 D Audio Card with full Midi Support

People throw out old PCs, but Keep Old consoles. One day they will regret doing that =)

[Ed Oscuro]

Virtual PC should do Win9X stuff just fine. Just a thought. On the other hand, even a energy-efficient gaming PC will probably use much more power than a branded computer from those days, if you plug up an LCD monitor that is.

Of course, I have no shortage of old computers to futz with around here. Have most every major processor type and a good number of old graphics cards to play with.

[Berserker]

Windows 98 Second Edition would be best, without question. It's sort of like the apex of modern functionality and full compatibility, before they started trying to really phase out DOS.

Hardware is harder to recommend with that degree of certainty, though I will say that as far as graphics cards are concerned, a 3dfx-based card will be the most widely-supported and probably least hassle for older games in the period you mentioned, sort of like a small advantage from the virtual monopoly 3dfx held over the graphics card market during that time.

To my mind the Voodoo3 cards represent pretty much the pinnacle of that era, before they started just treading water and then sinking trying to keep up with NVIDIA with the later Voodoo4 and Voodoo5 series, of which I have no personal experience with.

[Ed Oscuro]

Fun fact: Windows 98SE will install with a Windows 98 original serial #, at least it did when I reinstalled the OS on an old laptop here. You want 98SE for the USB support, although I believe I still had to install drivers for my USB sticks (I think it was automatic though, not hard in any case).

I imagine some stuff will only work right on Win95, though, so beware. I have access to a Win95 and various Win98 machines, and if I were setting them up for gaming I'd probably keep the Win95 machine for DOS and the like while Win98 would get a Voodoo accelerator setup (I'd actually like more to put a newer card in, like the GeForce 9400 GT 512MB; only problem here is that it's $75 and I don't think there's drivers for Win9x in any case).

[calthaer]

Microsoft stopped offering the updates for Windows 98 online a few years back. I nabbed all of them before that happened, but I'm not sure where that CD / DVD went to - it's around somewhere. Let me know if you really want 'em.

Virtual PC does not to Direct3D, IIRC. If the game is a 2D Win9X game, it'll be fine (e.g., Full Throttle, C&C: Red Alert, X-Com, etc.)...but the 3D things like Unreal, Thief, System Shock 2, and such don't work in Virtual PC.

Just get some hardware and throw Win98SE on there. It's a solid-ish OS that was great for gaming.

[NoahsMyBro]

@- Vac -

I don't know where in MD you are, or how anxious you are to act on this, but April 8 through April 11 I'll be staying near Fenwick Island, DE. I've got a basement and garage full of obsolete computers, and would be happy to bring one with me if you're interested and near enough to pick it up from me. The computers are pretty much all Win-98 era machines, and most had their original Pentiums or PIIs upgraded with 'TurboChips', to run P2-1.4Ghz CPUs.

Let me know.

[VACRMH]

@- Vac -

I don't know where in MD you are, or how anxious you are to act on this, but April 8 through April 11 I'll be staying near Fenwick Island, DE. I've got a basement and garage full of obsolete computers, and would be happy to bring one with me if you're interested and near enough to pick it up from me. The computers are pretty much all Win-98 era machines, and most had their original Pentiums or PIIs upgraded with 'TurboChips', to run P2-1.4Ghz CPUs.

Let me know.

PM Sent :)

[Gameguy]

Do laptops have any compatibility issues? I'd love to save some space but the reason I want to do this is to have as much "Pop the disc in and play" as possible.
The only thing I can think of is with resolution size with the built in monitor. I have an old Win 95 laptop(from Compaq), it's intended resolution is 800X600. Whenever I tried to play any games that were 640X480, they would be small in the middle of the screen with a black border around it. Even when I changed the resolution settings they wouldn't look correct. Other than that I haven't really had any problems that I can think of at the moment, it would probably be fine with an added monitor.

I have a few Win 95 PCs still around, I even built one from parts I salvaged from the garbage so they can be found for cheap.

[Ed Oscuro]

Microsoft stopped offering the updates for Windows 98 online a few years back. I nabbed all of them before that happened, but I'm not sure where that CD / DVD went to - it's around somewhere. Let me know if you really want 'em.
Which updates? Microsoft Update still offers everything that was ever on it; some stuff like The Microsoft Layer for Unicode on Windows 95/98/Me Systems (http://www.microsoft.com.nsatc.net/globaldev/handson/dev/mslu_announce.mspx) is not on WU but can be found elsewhere (targeted towards specific problems, in this case the Videolan VLC player needs it). DirectX needs an update which can be found online, and IE can be easily updated to the latest version that supported Win98 (better to go with Firefox 2 for any browsing needs, of course).

[Ed Oscuro]

@- Vac -

I don't know where in MD you are, or how anxious you are to act on this, but April 8 through April 11 I'll be staying near Fenwick Island, DE. I've got a basement and garage full of obsolete computers, and would be happy to bring one with me if you're interested and near enough to pick it up from me. The computers are pretty much all Win-98 era machines, and most had their original Pentiums or PIIs upgraded with 'TurboChips', to run P2-1.4Ghz CPUs.

Let me know.
Dude, I could use a TurboChip myself. Got any more details? I'd certainly pay for something like that, depending on the details.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Virtual PC should do Win9X stuff just fine. Just a thought. On the other hand, even a energy-efficient gaming PC will probably use much more power than a branded computer from those days, if you plug up an LCD monitor that is.

Of course, I have no shortage of old computers to futz with around here. Have most every major processor type and a good number of old graphics cards to play with.

Anything that requires DirectX or any sort of hardware acceleration will not work. Or if it uses software-based acceleration.... it'll work incredibly slow.

I tried to run a 1995 game with 3D segments, and it ran at 2 FPS PER SECOND.

[Jorpho]

You want 98SE for the USB support, although I believe I still had to install drivers for my USB sticks (I think it was automatic though, not hard in any case).98's USB support was generally just as good as 98SE's, if I'm not mistaken. The major thing 98SE added was WDM support.

[Push Upstairs]

I fixed up a computer I found near the dumpster.

It *was* an HP Pavillion, but I had to get a new case because I hated the little tiny case it came in. The processor is 500mhz (which is more than the computer I actually used at the time) but this is what I added to it:

Upped maxed the ram to 384 meg
Added a Voodoo 3
Soon to add a SB Live! X Gamer sound card.

Hopefully this is more than enough to handle any 2D/3D game I currently have from the 1998-2000 era.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Added a Voodoo 3

Jeez. I remember saving up to buy a Voodoo 3 back in the day to replace my first computer's crappy video card. 16 MB in those days were a luxury...

[Jorpho]

That reminds me: it is important to keep in mind that a Windows 9x machine can't use more than 512 MB of RAM, and I think even at exactly 512 you risk major stability issues (at least, more major than usual). I read instructions once about using normally-inaccessible extra RAM to set up a RAM disk in the autoexec.bat that could in turn be used to store the Windows Swap file, but I've never been able to find those instructions again.

[Gameguy]

That reminds me: it is important to keep in mind that a Windows 9x machine can't use more than 512 MB of RAM, and I think even at exactly 512 you risk major stability issues (at least, more major than usual). I read instructions once about using normally-inaccessible extra RAM to set up a RAM disk in the autoexec.bat that could in turn be used to store the Windows Swap file, but I've never been able to find those instructions again.
Would you even need to have that much RAM? I know for Windows 95 64MB is all you'll really need. When I upgraded the RAM on my old PC from 16MB to 64MB everything ran fast and the hard drive had at least 10MB of extra space. I'm currently running Windows XP with 256MB of RAM(there are times when it could use more).

[Push Upstairs]

You'll probably have to check with the motherboard/computer maker to see how much RAM it can handle.

I'd say 384 meg is really excessive for, well, *ANYTHING* I'm going to use this thing for. It cost me hardly anything to max it out

I do have to wonder how much a machine like my 98 machine would have cost in '99-2000. Maxed ram, Voodoo 3 card, Live! X Gamer.....probably would have been a huge chunk of change.

[Berserker]

I do have to wonder how much a machine like my 98 machine would have cost in '99-2000. Maxed ram, Voodoo 3 card, Live! X Gamer.....probably would have been a huge chunk of change.

Yeah... I'm thinking that probably would've put you well into a grand, assuming you built it yourself. Remember that RAM cost more in those days, and maxing it out wasn't really a priority unless you were into doing a lot of video editing or 3d rendering work.

Like you would've had 128mb for a respectable gaming system, MAYBE 256mb if you had some extra money to throw around and wanted to flaunt your e-peen a little bit. 384/512 would've felt like complete overkill for any kind of gaming/general usage purposes.

[maxlords]

I play some of those games on my system with no issues. I'm running Vista. They run with no issues for me. I've found almost all my old PC games do. The only one that hasn't worked so far is the first AvP.

[VACRMH]

I play some of those games on my system with no issues. I'm running Vista. They run with no issues for me. I've found almost all my old PC games do. The only one that hasn't worked so far is the first AvP.

Baldur's Gate seems to run on everything, there's even versions that run on Vista (which I downloaded because my copy wasn't working) and it still didn't work.

Diablo 2 works just fine though, which is good.

[jb143]

DirectX is supposed to be backwards compatable so anything built on an earlier version *should* still work on a modern PC. The games might still use additional libraries/dll's other than directX that aren't compatable with XP orVista though.

Someone asked about using a laptop. I used to use my old PII Gateway as a console since it had TV out and several USB ports for controllers. Now the same model can be had for next to nothing.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Diablo 2 works just fine though, which is good.

Diablo II's still supported by Blizzard, so it works, even in Vista!


DirectX is supposed to be backwards compatable so anything built on an earlier version *should* still work on a modern PC. The games might still use additional libraries/dll's other than directX that aren't compatable with XP orVista though.

Someone asked about using a laptop. I used to use my old PII Gateway as a console since it had TV out and several USB ports for controllers. Now the same model can be had for next to nothing.

Magic word here is "supposed". I've bought and played several games that require a specific version of DirectX to run, and refuse to boot in anything newer (or older, of course). Other games just crash.

I've wondered if there's a program that reports a certain version of DirectX to the game you're running... kinda like the compatibility mode in XP/Vista.

[jb143]

Magic word here is "supposed". I've bought and played several games that require a specific version of DirectX to run, and refuse to boot in anything newer (or older, of course). Other games just crash.

I've wondered if there's a program that reports a certain version of DirectX to the game you're running... kinda like the compatibility mode in XP/Vista.

I've never ran into that before but I'm sure it's a possibility. What I have seen is that the games 3D engine or other software driver is incompatable with newer computers. I'm writting a DirectX program now and I can use functions specific to DirectX 2.0 if I wanted to and it will still run. But yeah, I did use the word "supposed" for a reason. We are dealing with Microsoft here.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I've never ran into that before but I'm sure it's a possibility. What I have seen is that the games 3D engine or other software driver is incompatable with newer computers. I'm writting a DirectX program now and I can use functions specific to DirectX 2.0 if I wanted to and it will still run. But yeah, I did use the word "supposed" for a reason. We are dealing with Microsoft here.

The fact that some developers -hardwire- the program to look for a specific version of DirectX instead of using an If/Else statement that checks if it has a minimum version installed is what causes most of the problems.

"Is DirectX 5 installed? No, the user has 6, you can't install this game!" Buh. Stupid.

I've had similar issues with old DOS games in DOSBox...

[zektor]

98's USB support was generally just as good as 98SE's, if I'm not mistaken. The major thing 98SE added was WDM support.

As well as the move from IE 4 to IE 5.

If I were to install 98, it would be SE because of the misc fixes included in the package. It is still 98, but the latest (last) version of it.

[VACRMH]

Say for example I went the laptop route, would something like this be good?

Click me! (http://cgi.ebay.com/Gateway-9500-Notebook-computer-900-Mhz-256-MB-14-10-GB_W0QQitemZ110362444334QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLaptops _Nov05?hash=item110362444334&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A570|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A131 8|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50)

What's the kind of hardware I'm looking for in a real nice desktop or laptop?

Thanks for all the reply's so far, this has been really helpful.

[Push Upstairs]

Just remember that some older (pre-Win95) games will need something like "Mo'Slo" to be playable on even that laptop.

[Jorpho]

The fact that some developers -hardwire- the program to look for a specific version of DirectX instead of using an If/Else statement that checks if it has a minimum version installed is what causes most of the problems.

"Is DirectX 5 installed? No, the user has 6, you can't install this game!" Buh. Stupid.Can you give an example of a game that does this?


As well as the move from IE 4 to IE 5.But you can install IE 5 in the original Windows 98 without any difficulty. It's not like there will be leftover IE 4 components entrenched in the system. (And why would you want to stick with IE 5 instead of installing IE6SP1?)

[Ed Oscuro]

The looking for an exact version of DirectX is news to me; that's very bad practice considering that everybody knew DirectX was an evolving mechanism and would continue to be updated.

However, Novalogic's early Delta Force games had a bug, described here (http://www.electro-tech-online.com/chit-chat/34532-question-about-windows-virtual-memory.html), and which I ran into (prevents me from playing them on XP). It's a simple programming error and could probably be hacked out of existence easily, but nobody's done it.

That's hilarious considering that the in-menu automatic update service in Land Warrior still works, and in fact works better than many games released in the years since.

[Gameguy]

Just remember that some older (pre-Win95) games will need something like "Mo'Slo" to be playable on even that laptop.
That's very true, the processor for that laptop is faster than what I'm using for Windows XP!! My hard drive is a bit bigger but that's it.

For older games I personally use a PC with Win 95, Pentium 1 processor(Idealy use either 133Mhz, 166Mhz, or 200Mhz), 64MB RAM(I actually have a PC with 80MB RAM, but only because I had some extra so I just used it. It's not needed). A hard drive about 2-4GB should be enough for older stuff. Use any compatible sound card and it should be fine. You can always uninstall games and reinstall games later if you need the space, but it shouldn't really be a problem(plenty of older games can play right off the disks).

For one old PC I have, the motherboard can't take advantage of processors faster than 133Mhz, but the same PC has a hard drive that's 4GB(this PC I installed a 5 1/4" floppy drive). Another PC has a faster processor of 166Mhz, but the hard drive is only 2GB(and no 5 1/4" floppy drive). I use different PCs for different games, I prefer using the one with the largest hard drive whenever possible but if the games need a faster processor I use another one. Most old PCs are really cheap now, I was given a few for free and I fixed one up for free. Most just get trashed by now.

[Ed Oscuro]

MoSlo should be pretty easy to find...I have a version that came with a game compilation if anybody needs it.

First check out their website, though:
http://moslo.info/

[Kitsune Sniper]

Can you give an example of a game that does this?

Armed and Dangerous (US version). I tried to install this on my system and it bitched about DirectX... I had to run it in a compatibility mode for it to install, I think. And even then it crashed on startup, or when it tried to do anything like save the configuration or a save point.

So I installed it on a VirtualPC system running Windows 98... and it just died on me when a video started to play.

I ended up trading the damn thing to some guy in Goozex. :p

[Jorpho]

Moslo has been superseded by much better and more effective programs that aren't shareware. Throttle, for instance.
http://www.oldskool.org/pc/throttle

[Berserker]

The fact that some developers -hardwire- the program to look for a specific version of DirectX instead of using an If/Else statement that checks if it has a minimum version installed is what causes most of the problems.

"Is DirectX 5 installed? No, the user has 6, you can't install this game!" Buh. Stupid.

I've had similar issues with old DOS games in DOSBox...

Another thing they did that was somewhat similar was spitting out an arbitrary error if you weren't using Windows 95. I don't know how much of a problem this was for 98 users, but on XP and Vista for instance if you try to install the original Close Combat, you won't even make it past the Setup Initialization without some commandline trickery, otherwise the installer dutifully informs you that "This Setup program was not intended to be used with your version of Windows."

Of course with some trickery to get it installed along with some additional minor legwork, Close Combat can run in XP and Vista just fine, confirming the notion that the error is completely arbitrary and meaningless.

[Jorpho]

Armed and Dangerous (US version). I tried to install this on my system and it bitched about DirectX... I had to run it in a compatibility mode for it to install, I think. And even then it crashed on startup, or when it tried to do anything like save the configuration or a save point.Hmm... If it's a check, it's apparently built into the launcher on the CD and trivial to bypass:
http://yodashelpdesk.lucasarts.com/faq.asp?sid=151926051121083026022187&pid=1363&pnm=Armed%20and%20Dangerous?&seid=3550&pos=Windows%20XP&top=Error%20Messages&rid=21260

Got another example? :D

[Ed Oscuro]

Moslo has been superseded by much better and more effective programs that aren't shareware. Throttle, for instance.
http://www.oldskool.org/pc/throttle
Actually, the newest MoSlo looks much better than even that; it shouldn't increase energy usage on SpeedStep CPUs, for instance.

But the new MoSlo isn't even shareware; you've gotta pay a flat-out fee for it ($23 I think it is, but the website is in my post above).

[Kitsune Sniper]

Hmm... If it's a check, it's apparently built into the launcher on the CD and trivial to bypass:
http://yodashelpdesk.lucasarts.com/faq.asp?sid=151926051121083026022187&pid=1363&pnm=Armed%20and%20Dangerous?&seid=3550&pos=Windows%20XP&top=Error%20Messages&rid=21260

Got another example? :D

I meant ARMED AND DELIRIOUS (http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/armed-delirious). Damn memory.

[Berserker]

But the new MoSlo isn't even shareware; you've gotta pay a flat-out fee for it ($23 I think it is, but the website is in my post above).

This is the only reaction I have for people who still try to charge money for small single-purpose utilities after the year 1997:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/natev/whyyoudothis.jpg

[Push Upstairs]

Yeah, something like "Mo'slo" does scream "GNU".

I'm not really sure who would use it (in 2009) for business purposes though..

[PentiumMMX]

For an OS, I'd go with Windows 98SE (Probably the most flexible of the 2 options and also the cheapest to obtain), even with how awesome OS/2 is.

For a PC, I'd suggest getting something like a Pentium; one about 75Mhz and 32MB of RAM will handle almost any DOS game you throw at it. However, if you're interested in running more recent games (Windows-based games from the mid to late '90s) in addition to DOS games, then go with my namesake; a 200Mhz Pentium MMX or higher with at least 128MB of RAM and a good graphics card from the era.

[jb143]

The looking for an exact version of DirectX is news to me; that's very bad practice considering that everybody knew DirectX was an evolving mechanism and would continue to be updated.


My thoughts exactly. Why would you develop somethign that you knew wouldn't work in a year or 2? Unless it was somethign you wanted to keep selling newer versions for. Probally not a game in that case. Either way. It seems like something that could easily be patched.

[VACRMH]

Ok, I'm a butthead. I didn't even think about the computer I bought back in 02.

It has...

OS - XP
2.4 Ghz processor
Geforce Ti4200 128 mb Graphics card
512 Ram

I'm sure I'd have to tinker with things to get it running 98 SE, but is it possible? Or would this leave me with more headaches trying to get everything to run?

[Gameguy]

Ok, I'm a butthead. I didn't even think about the computer I bought back in 02.

It has...

OS - XP
2.4 Ghz processor
Geforce Ti4200 128 mb Graphics card
512 Ram

I'm sure I'd have to tinker with things to get it running 98 SE, but is it possible? Or would this leave me with more headaches trying to get everything to run?
That's way more powerful then you'll ever need for older games. You could sell that, use some of the money to buy an old PC, and still have a bunch left over.

If you're going to be making a PC specific for playing just the old games, you shouldn't need to use any slowdown programs. Just make it old enough to run the games as intended. Whatever the requirements are for Win 98SE should be enough. I haven't had a Win 98 PC, but I believe it runs well with a Pentium 2, 128MB RAM, I'm not sure of a good hard drive size(10GB?). Even that would be more powerful than really needed.

I have a copy of Journeyman Project Turbo, I'll just list the requirements for it for comparison as you mentioned that you wanted to play it.

33Mhz processor
640X480, with 256 colors
4MB RAM, 8MB virtual memory
Single Speed CD-ROM drive
Windows 3.1 or later

[A Black Falcon]

If you're going to be making a PC specific for playing just the old games, you shouldn't need to use any slowdown programs. Just make it old enough to run the games as intended. Whatever the requirements are for Win 98SE should be enough. I haven't had a Win 98 PC, but I believe it runs well with a Pentium 2, 128MB RAM, I'm not sure of a good hard drive size(10GB?). Even that would be more powerful than really needed.


That's not true, because every game is different, no matter what system you make, you'll run into this problem and need slowdown. Even with our first computer, a 20Mhz 386 SX, there were some games that ran too fast... you'll always need slowdown for something, and if you're not using DOSBox and its built-in speed adjustment, that means using programs like MoSlo or Turbo.

The problem, really, is that every period needs different hardware... one computer can't do everything natively.

My older computer's 1.5Ghz P4 with 384MB RDRAM, a 32MB GeForce2 GTS, 110GB HDD, and WinME. Because of WinME it crashes a lot, but aside from that, it's a pretty good computer, and it was my main computer for 5 1/2 years (I skipped XP). It runs any DOS game natively, though some need MoSlo. As far as Windows games go though, I've found that a lot of them do work reasonably well on my newer Vista machine too... and there are a couple, such as Pod, that actually don't work on the old computer, but do on the new one, because the game doesn't work natively on either system (it uses DirectX 3 or 5, and neither one works with newer versions of DirectX, so the alternative is using 3DFX emulation, or a real 3DFX card, which I used to have, but don't anymore), and the older machine doesn't have a good enough video card to handle 3DFX emulation.

I do have a few games with issues on the new machine that work on the older one, like SimTower (it works, but I just can't get any sound out of the game on the new computer, sadly...) or MGS2 Substance (the game is completely Vista incompatible and was not patched), but largely I haven't run into too many problems with Windows games. Its the loss of real DOS compatibility that I really miss. I definitely prefer running them natively to using DOSBox, for some reason...


Good point. Some of the games I can think of are...

Baldur's Gate
Icewind Dale
NOX
Diablo 2
Fallout
Journeyman Project
Nocturne
Total Distortion
Torin's Passage

Those are the ones I own, I'm sure if I had the ability to play more I'd pick em up.

Do laptops have any compatibility issues? I'd love to save some space but the reason I want to do this is to have as much "Pop the disc in and play" as possible.

I have some of those... I'll say how well they work for me on Vista.

Baldur's Gate (1) works fine on Vista, I have it and have played it on this computer. I do have Compatibility Mode (Windows XP SP2) on, but other than that it's fine. Just mess around with the ingame options to get the display looking right, and it'll be fine. The same should apply to Icewind Dale, Planescape Torment, etc.

Diablo 2 works perfectly on Vista, absolutely no problems.

Fallout -- Requires Windows 99/ME Compatiblity Mode to install. The game itself runs fine though; compatibility mode is just needed for the installer.

Nocturne -- I only have the demo (and demos and retail games are not always the same on these issues), but it works fine with no problems.

I just have The Journeyman Project Turbo (for Win95), which is of course different I'm sure, and it doesn't work perfectly. Compatibility mode does seem to help, and it is playable, but it does crash sometimes. Still, it does seem to work.

I have the NOX demo here, but not installed now. I'll try that later.

Edit -- NOX demo works perfectly. Of the games on that list there that I have, they all work in Vista.

[Push Upstairs]

Ok, I'm a butthead. I didn't even think about the computer I bought back in 02.

It has...

OS - XP
2.4 Ghz processor
Geforce Ti4200 128 mb Graphics card
512 Ram

I'm sure I'd have to tinker with things to get it running 98 SE, but is it possible? Or would this leave me with more headaches trying to get everything to run?

As was said, that is too much for a Win98 game machine (but perfect for a Linux box).

I think the spee of the computer you need really is dependent in which era of games you plan to play. Are you playing early 90's, pre-3D acceleration...or 1996 and beyond?

The computer I have now just happened to be 500mhz (and free), but I wanted to add a video and sound card that I could readily find drivers for. But the computer is perfect because I want to do a lot of mid to late 90's computer gaming.

[Gameguy]

That's not true, because every game is different, no matter what system you make, you'll run into this problem and need slowdown. Even with our first computer, a 20Mhz 386 SX, there were some games that ran too fast... you'll always need slowdown for something, and if you're not using DOSBox and its built-in speed adjustment, that means using programs like MoSlo or Turbo.

The problem, really, is that every period needs different hardware... one computer can't do everything natively.
I know that early software really depended on the processor to run at the correct speed, that's why most early computers had Turbo buttons included(they slowed down the processor). This was mostly a problem with earlier games, the games mentioned that he was interested in playing were much later than that, mostly from the early to mid 90's. Even with Solitare included with Windows I notice it runs too fast with a Pentium 1. When you win you can see the cards jump on the screen, but with a Pentium 1 it just goes way too fast.

If someone is wanting to run the games on native hardware instead of emulation/dosbox then you need to set it up with the appropriate hardware. That's what I said with making a system old enough to run the games as intended, if you're mostly playing games intended for a 286, then use a 286 with hardware from that era. If he'll be playing older games then he'll need a 5 1/4" floppy drive as that's what older games came on. Without one there's really no point in worrying about playing older games.

I personally play PC games mostly from the early to mid 90's(mostly adventure), and some games a bit earlier than that. I haven't experienced any problems with processor speed being too fast as of yet. Other games from the late 90's are actually made to run on the hardware I have(Win 95) so I don't have to really worry about compatibility issues. The DOS games I play are from the early 90's so they seem to run fine with my slightly-newer-than-intended PC. Your old PC really isn't that old, it's close to 10 times faster than the one I use for older games.

[VACRMH]

I have some of those... I'll say how well they work for me on Vista.

Baldur's Gate (1) works fine on Vista, I have it and have played it on this computer. I do have Compatibility Mode (Windows XP SP2) on, but other than that it's fine. Just mess around with the ingame options to get the display looking right, and it'll be fine. The same should apply to Icewind Dale, Planescape Torment, etc.

Diablo 2 works perfectly on Vista, absolutely no problems.

Fallout -- Requires Windows 99/ME Compatiblity Mode to install. The game itself runs fine though; compatibility mode is just needed for the installer.

Nocturne -- I only have the demo (and demos and retail games are not always the same on these issues), but it works fine with no problems.

I just have The Journeyman Project Turbo (for Win95), which is of course different I'm sure, and it doesn't work perfectly. Compatibility mode does seem to help, and it is playable, but it does crash sometimes. Still, it does seem to work.

I have the NOX demo here, but not installed now. I'll try that later.

Edit -- NOX demo works perfectly. Of the games on that list there that I have, they all work in Vista.

It may just be my computer or something I'm missing. But I have problems with getting games to run on Vista.

Baldur's Gate doesn't go past the main screen where you click install, I was able to install it on XP however.

Nocturne had all sorts of problems trying Vista and XP (Dual boot). Can't recall if I got past instalation.

Fallout had to be installed on XP, had some video errors but I think I got it to work.

Freddy Pharkas (CD version) installed and played, but graphic errors made it unplayable.

I'm sure alot of games could be made to work with the right amount of tinkering, but it's rare for me to get into PC games in general. So wasting the small amount of time I would be playing trying to get the game to work frustrates me.

[jb143]

I know that early software really depended on the processor to run at the correct speed, that's why most early computers had Turbo buttons included(they slowed down the processor). This was mostly a problem with earlier games, the games mentioned that he was interested in playing were much later than that, mostly from the early to mid 90's. Even with Solitare included with Windows I notice it runs too fast with a Pentium 1. When you win you can see the cards jump on the screen, but with a Pentium 1 it just goes way too fast.



Before the early/mid 90's most games relied only on the CPU speed for the game speed. After that, many games locked the rendering speed to the refresh rate of the monitor, which was pretty standard back then. So that might effect older games now as well.

I remember playing a lot of QBasic games and had to find and edit the "SPEED = 10" to make it playable on a faster computer. Can't do that with .exe's :p

The "correct" way to set the speed of a game now is to have have everything happen as a function of time. That way, the speed will be the same no matter how fast the computer is running. Very important in multiplayer games. This should make modern games more playable in the future.

Of course every developer is going to do things differently...as they always have.

[Ed Oscuro]

This is the only reaction I have for people who still try to charge money for small single-purpose utilities after the year 1997:

kute kitty whiskers . jpeg
Even better is what happened here (http://www.softsystem.co.uk/page3.htm). "oops, we made this program and people liek it, let's just shut down all ways of getting it legally then as a way of getting back at a company that doesn't even know we exist and whom won't change their products to bring us back anyway." Marvelous!

VDMSound should eventually have overtaken it, but they haven't updated in years either.

[A Black Falcon]

It may just be my computer or something I'm missing. But I have problems with getting games to run on Vista.

Baldur's Gate doesn't go past the main screen where you click install, I was able to install it on XP however.

Nocturne had all sorts of problems trying Vista and XP (Dual boot). Can't recall if I got past instalation.

Fallout had to be installed on XP, had some video errors but I think I got it to work.

Freddy Pharkas (CD version) installed and played, but graphic errors made it unplayable.

I'm sure alot of games could be made to work with the right amount of tinkering, but it's rare for me to get into PC games in general. So wasting the small amount of time I would be playing trying to get the game to work frustrates me.

You do know about Compatibility Mode, right? Because as I said, Fallout's installer and Baldur's Gate (among others) need you to activate it for them to work. If you don't know what it is, right-click on the link to the executable (or the executable itself in Windows Explorer), go to "Properties" (probably on the bottom), select the "Compatibility" tab in the box that pops up, enable it and try the options (the various OSes you can enable compatibiliity mode for). XP has Compatibility Mode too, and it's also useful there for getting incompatible older programs (and games) to work right.

For something like Fallout's installer, you need to open the Fallout CD in Windows Explorer and enable compatibility mode on the setup program there (that you run to install the game) for it to work. For installed titles it will often function through the Start Menu links.

[Ed Oscuro]

Nocturne ran pretty well for me on XP (pre-SP3 anyhow; I think I was on SP2 when I did it).

Unfortunately it seems rare that a game will have everything in a format easily extracted and played, but once you get past the setup with some games you're off and flying.

If it's any help, it's a good idea to hunt down a setup.exe executable rather than trying autorun. And if setup isn't working right, then it's a good idea to see if the files look like they could be copied right over. Mainly all these old games have guides scattered about the 'net detailing how to install 'em, though.

[A Black Falcon]

Nocturne ran pretty well for me on XP (pre-SP3 anyhow; I think I was on SP2 when I did it).

Unfortunately it seems rare that a game will have everything in a format easily extracted and played, but once you get past the setup with some games you're off and flying.

If it's any help, it's a good idea to hunt down a setup.exe executable rather than trying autorun. And if setup isn't working right, then it's a good idea to see if the files look like they could be copied right over. Mainly all these old games have guides scattered about the 'net detailing how to install 'em, though.

That's a good point, turning on compatibility mode on an autorun for a game's installer that requires it may not work; you'll likely have to enable it on the setup file itself. This was the case for me with Fallout -- it only stopped complaining and let me install once I enabled compatibility mode on the installer itself, not on the autorun menu.