Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is DOS Gaming Dead?

Posted by simoniker on from the barely-functioning dept.

Thanks to Monster Hardware for its article discussing the problems of getting classic DOS games working on today's state-of-the-art PCs. The author discusses trying the Microsoft Program Compatibility Wizard ("After fooling around with a number of games I was able to get a few of them half-way working"), before trying the DOSBox freeware util "...not perfect: Some games run, some games don't." After "trying and mainly failing for the last several weeks to get a handful of old DOS games... to run on a modern PC", is this author's experience typical, or are there any other ways to get old DOS titles running easily?

16 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. It's easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just install DOS and dual boot.

    1. Re:It's easy by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most modern PCs are too fast to satisfactorily run games - a lot of games run so fast that you've consumed all your lives and the game is over before you were even aware that it had begun.

      Old PCs are so cheap (read: free) these days. I keep an old 486 around to run the old DOS games. It's easier than jerking around with emulators, speed throttling software, non soundblaster compatible cards, etc.

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
    2. Re:It's easy by Utopia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I still have a lot of excellent games from the DOS yore.
      For DOS games Virtual PC has been a big boon.
      No more worrying about incompatibility with present day OSes.

    3. Re:It's easy by dzym · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I highly recommend that you go out there and buy the W95 Special Edition of SimCity 2000. $9 or less, and works just fine in Win2k and XP.

      As an aside, SC2K is easily my favorite SimCity game, the more recent ones are too fiddly for my tastes.

  2. This is Typical by vga_init · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's actually quite surprising how support for old DOS games has been difficult to manage. With all of the information available on the subject, one would think that it's more simplistic and straightforward. After all, the hardware that these games was designed to work with was extremely limited, and there just wasn't enough plurality to suggest that a game required a feature of functionality that was so uncommon.

    Granted, there probably were strange things that need to be addressed, but you'd figure that it shouldn't take *that* much to work out. And, of course, there is no doubt that they will eventually.

    DOSBox is a great program, and it has worked wonders for me with regards to some of the more ancient games, but you can forget about using it to play the most recent DOS games. I have only used the Windows port of it, but the VM just wasn't fast enough to handle some of the fancier games, which was too bad. Even then, some older games don't work. Support is just across the board.

    I approach DOS emulation with the same attitude that I approach WINE with; if your program works, then that's awesome! It will undoubtedly work well and you'll have a blast. Of course, there is a good chance that your program won't actually work (at least, not right away). Too bad for you.

    In the end, there is just no substitute for the original machines available today. Maybe tomorrow.

    1. Re:This is Typical by thrice+rocks! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I too have found problems with DOS games not working on my newer systems. Another problem I've encountered is that when older games do work, they sometimes run extremely fast - I'm no expert, but I suppose they weren't designed with anything faster than a 486 in mind (if that, in many cases). I have never run DOSBox, however. Simple solution: My family still has a 386 running DOS and Windows 3.11, so we play older games on that machine. We use a slightly newer machine (a Pentium 166) with Windows 95 to run some games. Everything else has been upgraded too much to play the DOS games I have. Unfortunately, I suspect that there will never be an absolutely perfect solution aside from running an old box. There are so many games designed in so many different ways that it seems it would be difficult to design an emulator that runs everything perfectly. But it doesn't mean that I wouldn't love to see one! (I wish I could run the DOS games of my childhood again - mostly written between 10 and 15 years ago - but I don't have a 5.25" drive to stick the disks in anymore, and I have the feeling they would be corrupt by now anyway. Sigh. I loved the first-generation Learning Company games, and Stickybear games, and Sesame Street games, and endless others.. does anyone know where I can get a drive so that I can try on the 386? It would at least keep me occupied some afternoon to try dozens of ancient floppies..!)

    2. Re:This is Typical by mahdi13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I switch between DOSBox and DOSemu with a Win95 boot disk
      These two projects should really merge since one has some things working and the other has other things working. DOSBox is a lot easier to set up and get running, but I've found DOSemu to be more 'flowing'.

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
  3. The easy way by _Sexy_Pants_ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And the way that I'm just about to start, is find, or build, a DOS only machine. Grab a copy of win95 or 98, find a good 200mhz, and you're off. A good video card isn't really needed, since most 3d acceleration is windows-based, but a good old soundcard won't be too hard to find. You'll soon be playing Duke Nukem all night

    --
    Look it's a joke about my sig IN MY SIG! LOL!
  4. Win95 game. by Jeffool · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Speaking of playing slightly older games, I find it a pain to run even Win95 games. Two that spring to mind are Rocket Jockey, which won't even install, and Grim Fandango, which is constantly freezing while it searches the disc. Is there anyway to install these on the harddrive in XP, that anyone could help my dumbass with?

  5. DOS Box by Malketh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Out of all the things I've tried (VMWare, DOSEmu, FreeDOS, etc) the only way I've been able to get dos titles working perfectly is on old hardware with straight DOS. It's sad, but nothing else works well. I'm lucky in the fact I've got an old P200 with a serial mouse and ISA SoundBlaster card just for that purpose. Biggest pain though is VMWare don't even bother.

  6. Re:If you want actual Dos for perfect compatabilit by Beolach · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you are going this route, you may as well actually use MS-DOS 6.22, rather than Win98. Although you will most likely have better luck getting old DOS games running under Win9x than under WinXP, depending on the game and your hardware you may still have problems. On of the major problems I remember having with DOS games under Win98 was with sound: the SoundBlaster drivers that came with my SB Live! could work either with win32 (Win9x+), or DOS, but not both at the same time. So in order to get sound working in DOS games I had really mess with the config.sys & win.ini files... and after I finally got my sound working, my mouse driver died. So if you go the dual-booting route, I would say dual-boot to the actual platform you want.

    --
    Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
  7. Specs for a retro-gaming PC by Duranki · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This has been on my mind the last few weeks, and this topic is as good a place to post as any. What are the ideal specs for a classic DOS gaming machine? By reading these posts I've gathered the following: either a 486 or P200, loaded with DOS 6.22 and an ISA SoundBlaster 16 card. What about RAM? Lord, how embarrassing...I started off with an old 386SX-16 and worked my way up, but it's been years since I ran any of these games. Anyone care to post their optimal DOS gaming specs? Thanks.

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Re:Wrong if it was properly programmed... by sindarin2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Um...evidentally amateurs aren't the only ones that do this. Try playing Descent on anything pentium II or faster. My experience is that the, normally, slight up and down motion of the ship becomes an uncontrollable jitter making the game unplayable because it looks like it's on crack.

  10. The ultimate challenge... by WWWWolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's a legend that back in the day, Microsoft representative was enthusiastically babbling how well Windows 95 will preserve DOS compatibility and you can easily run most of the DOS games right off the desktop without dual-booting. Then someone from the crowd just asked "How about Ultima VII?" Without bothering to make excuses, the rep just admitted that U7 still doesn't work that easily. =)

    These days, U7 is nothing more than a nightmare with which to scare DOS emulator authors. For playing the game, there's Exult.

    These days the best thing that can happen to a DOS (and any older) games is a rewrite of the underlying engine so it works on modern hardware (Frotz for Infocom games, Exult for Ultima VII, Freecraft/Stratagus for Warcraft II, some others that I haven't tried, like FreeSCI and ScummVM, and so on).

    For the rest, I just have to hope it works from Win98SE DOS box (most "modern" DOS games do; it was just staggering to hear Betrayal at Krondor's MIDI music with SBLive =).

    It's always good to hope that DOSEMU works, in very rare primitive cases where there's no need for staggering speed (who needs Mo'slo when you have sluggish emulation? =) or fancy features like VGA and sound card (I was almost through Ultima IV with DOSEMU until the floppy I kept my savegames on died).

    I've tried Bochs and DOSBox, but they're a little bit on the slow side on my comp (P3-600)...

  11. Re:What old DOS games did you play that were easy? by Sigma+7 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "This program needs 514K free to run. You have 512K free."
    512K free is a bit on the low side - I've usually experienced around 580-600K because of UMBs and HMA. Are you sure you're stripped to the bare minimum?

    In any case, conventional memory requirements was beginning to be a little rediculous even after Windows 95 was released. Games were beginning to require 590K of memory for full functionality (or sometimes any) and it was almost always an extremely tight fit. There wasn't any excuse either since the target market for those games required at least a 386 to remain playable. (e.g. Master of Magic - could only get it running on a modern computer without sound. Haven't checked with VDMsound.)