Collector

I have encountered people who formed attitudes about DOSBox from years ago with much slower machines and when DOSBox had much lower compatibility and never re-evaluated DOSBox. It is not unusual for people to have never touched it since. This includes pre-Intel Mac users and retro hardware freaks. PPC did not have access to the dynamic core and DOSBox was generally pretty slow on it. Many retro hardware freaks have not touched DOSBox since 0.58 and think the sound is crap. Sound accuracy is very important to Qbix and the quality of DOSBox's sound shows this. Even ScummVM uses audio code lifted from DOSBox. More often than not, there is nothing you have change with DOSBox's audio settings, but many don't realize that you have to use the game's setup to get optimal audio, just as you had to on a real DOS PC. Case in point. Many of the SCI0 to SCI1.1 games shipped with Roland MT-32 set as default. Play this through AdLib and it will sound like holy hell.
 
As MI notes, DOSBox is incredibly easy to use once you grasp the concepts of mounting. In fact, for many games it can be as simple as putting a shortcut to DOSBox on the desk top and dragging and dropping a game's EXE onto the shortcut.

I have encountered people who formed attitudes about DOSBox from years ago with much slower machines and when DOSBox had much lower compatibility and never re-evaluated DOSBox. It is not unusual for people to have never touched it since. This includes pre-Intel Mac users and retro hardware freaks. PPC did not have access to the dynamic core and DOSBox was generally pretty slow on it. Many retro hardware freaks have not touched DOSBox since 0.58 and think the sound is crap. Sound accuracy is very important to Qbix and the quality of DOSBox's sound shows this. Even ScummVM uses audio code lifted from DOSBox. More often than not, there is nothing you have change with DOSBox's audio settings, but many don't realize that you have to use the game's setup to get optimal audio, just as you had to on a real DOS PC. Case in point. Many of the SCI0 to SCI1.1 games shipped with Roland MT-32 set as default. Play this through AdLib and it will sound like holy hell.
 
As MI notes, DOSBox is incredibly easy to use once you grasp the concepts of mounting. In fact, for many games it can be as simple as putting a shortcut to DOSBox on the desk top and dragging and dropping a game's EXE onto the shortcut.

I have encountered people who formed attitudes about DOSBox from years ago with much slower machines and when DOSBox had much lower compatibility and never re-evaluated DOSBox. It is not unusual for people to have never touched it since. This includes pre-Intel Mac users and retro hardware freaks. PPC did not have access to the dynamic core and DOSBox was generally pretty slow on it. Many retro hardware freaks have not touched DOSBox since 0.58 and think the sound is crap. Sound accuracy is very important to Qbix and the quality of DOSBox's sound shows this. Even ScummVM uses audio code lifted from DOSBox. More often than not, there is nothing you have change with DOSBox's audio settings, but many don't realize that you have to use the game's setup to get optimal audio, just as you had to on a real DOS PC. Case in point. Many of the SCI0 to SCI1.1 games shipped with Roland MT-32 set as default. Play this through AdLib and it will sound like holy hell.
 
As MI notes, DOSBox is incredibly easy to use once you grasp the concepts of mounting. In fact, for many games it can be as simple as putting a shortcut to DOSBox on the desk top and dragging and dropping a game's EXE onto the shortcut.

I have encountered people who formed attitudes about DOSBox from years ago with much slower machines and when DOSBox had much lower compatibility and never re-evaluated DOSBox. It is not unusual for people to have never touched it since. This includes pre-Intel Mac users and retro hardware freaks. PPC did not have access to the dynamic core and DOSBox was generally pretty slow on it. Many retro hardware freaks have not touched DOSBox since 0.58 and think the sound is crap. Sound accuracy is very important to Qbix and the quality of DOSBox's sound shows this. Even ScummVM uses audio code lifted from DOSBox. More often than not, there is nothing you have change with DOSBox's audio settings, but many don't realize that you have to use the game's setup to get optimal audio, just as you had to on a real DOS PC. Case in point. Many of the SCI0 to SCI1.1 games shipped with Roland MT-32 set as default. Play this through AdLib and it will sound like holy hell.
 
As MI notes, DOSBox is incredibly easy to use once you grasp the concepts of mounting. In fact, for many games it can be as simple as putting a shortcut to DOSBox on the desk top and dragging and dropping a game's EXE onto the shortcut.

The stigma surrounding DOSBox's difficulty of use is largely born of fear of the unknown than actual experience. It's so easy to use. The custom builds even moreso as changes can be made in realtime via window menus rather than editing the conf file and relaunching. There may have been a couple people that got totally confused with it, but it's easier than people make it out to be for sure.

I beg to differ:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCu3txSxzaQ

I beg to differ:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCu3txSxzaQ

This could be one of the best arguments for death scenes in games. What would a Hitchcock or any thriller, suspense, film noir, horror movie be if there was never any threat of death. Or really a majority of the film genres. A death free/unlosable game is like being a toddler playing a game with a parent who always lets the child win. Possibly fun for the child, but boring for anyone else.

This could be one of the best arguments for death scenes in games. What would a Hitchcock or any thriller, suspense, film noir, horror movie be if there was never any threat of death. Or really a majority of the film genres. A death free/unlosable game is like being a toddler playing a game with a parent who always lets the child win. Possibly fun for the child, but boring for anyone else.

This could be one of the best arguments for death scenes in games. What would a Hitchcock or any thriller, suspense, film noir, horror movie be if there was never any threat of death. Or really a majority of the film genres. A death free/unlosable game is like being a toddler playing a game with a parent who always lets the child win. Possibly fun for the child, but boring for anyone else.

Exactly. It is all of these reasons that make DOSBox my very first choice over ScummVM. This does not mean that I have no use for ScummVM, just that there needs to be some extra compelling reason to choose it over DOSBox, like to get the Win version of KQ6 on x64 or some of the Coktel Visions CD games to play without issue, given Coktel's odd use of MSCDEX.
 
And I was  more than a little ticked at some of the ScummVM team over those same incidents, too. They were also upset with the SCI Programmer's Wiki for republishing the SCI Documentation from the old Free SCI group, in spite of the fact that its license explicitly gives permission to do so. They were pretty high handed in trying taking over the SCI resources and communities. This after they had reached out for help to the very same communities when first adding SCI support.

NAGI is by Nick Sonneveld of the AGI Development Site. It was great when there were no other ways to play AGI games on newer hardware. ScummVM might be OK for the non PC AGI games, but DOSBox gives better results. About the only thing that ScummVM has over DOSBox for AGI games is adding quirky mouse support. And for those that are too lazy to figure out just how easy DOSBox is to use, it is a moot point for the new release of Gold Rush!. It is properly preconfigured for the technically impaired.

Yes, AGI games are easy to set up in DOSBox, but I have found that some that can do not optimally configure DOSBox and many simply do not know how or want to learn. To market a DOS game in this era, the game needs to be packaged in a way that less technically capable people have no problems running it. The installer will install the game to the hard drive, automatically configured to run optimally in DOSBox. It is set to run from a launcher that I wrote to make the experience more like a native windows game. I also wrote a frontend to change some basic DOSBox settings.

Many of you may know that I have been working with Sunlight Games to bring the original Gold Rush! to modern PCs. This work is now done and the game will be released shortly. It will be available as a digital download from Sunlight's store and Steam. There will also be a boxed copy that will be shipped worldwide.


 
 

Exactly. It is all of these reasons that make DOSBox my very first choice over ScummVM. This does not mean that I have no use for ScummVM, just that there needs to be some extra compelling reason to choose it over DOSBox, like to get the Win version of KQ6 on x64 or some of the Coktel Visions CD games to play without issue, given Coktel's odd use of MSCDEX.
 
And I was  more than a little ticked at some of the ScummVM team over those same incidents, too. They were also upset with the SCI Programmer's Wiki for republishing the SCI Documentation from the old Free SCI group, in spite of the fact that its license explicitly gives permission to do so. They were pretty high handed in trying taking over the SCI resources and communities. This after they had reached out for help to the very same communities when first adding SCI support.

Ugh, I had to live with PC Speaker sound for AGI games for far too long, it was really annoying. Especially when I recalled hearing more instruments as a kid (we used to own a Tandy 1000). I was overjoyed when Dosbox came out and emulated it perfectly. ScummVM's Tandy sound is not 100% accurate, while DOSBox's is near perfect.
 
I was just reading the undither thread at the SCUMMVM forums again a few weeks ago. What an ego-centric fiasco that was. That and the "we'll come to the rescue of the Mega-Tokyo SCI/AGI fangame community!" attitude while not even acknowledging Sciprogramming.com's existence and basically ignoring requests to support SCI fangames and new SCI implementations we had created (like mp3 music) all still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. Not everyone is like that there (in fact one dev in particular I believe stirred the pot in that undither thread on purpose to bring focus to the issue which I tend to think started internally), but I think Scummvm has gone to a lot of their heads.
 
Anyway, I always prefer Dosbox because it emulates the original system that the original authentic files work on 99% perfectly. Scummvm and other virtual machines/emulators reinterpret the game data files. Usually fairly well, but they can be biased. Sarien, for instance, makes the interface look like the Amiga interpreter which I'm not a fan of. And I've already mentioned the incorrect Tandy sound. Also, it's impossible to get some SCI games to play MIDI equivalent sfx instead of the lo-fi digital ones, which are just 11khz mono 8-bit versions of the MT-32 sounds, which whether you have MUNT or a real one, is not very nice to have to deal with. Also, there are still speed issues with SCI1.1 games where animations that depend on cpu cycles are still too fast. Strangely, though, SCI1.0 games don't have this issue.
 
I just see too many conflicts with my original experience. It works in a pinch, and is definitely the most portable method if you're trying to play on multiple platforms, but Dosbox is still always the better option for me. Best sound, best replication, most familiar, best experience.

The issue is not where it was sent out for outsourcing, but that it was outsourced. While outsourcing is not a certainty of poor quality, it often has. New developers or outsiders may "get" the project, but it has also lead to atrocities like MCL and BOB.

Objectively, it is indeed a very pretty game to look at. But, again, I think it's a bit too colourful. Much like SQ6 is a bit too cartoony for me. SQ5 remains my favourite game, but I've really grown to think of the high-res (compared to AGI, at least) EGA of SQ3 as the definitive look for the series.

The issue is not where it was sent out for outsourcing, but that it was outsourced. While outsourcing is not a certainty of poor quality, it often has. New developers or outsiders may "get" the project, but it has also lead to atrocities like MCL and BOB.

Christ on a bike...
 
Nobody said that the only reason they didn't like SQ1 was because of Scott and Mark not being involved. It was just the one point they made in the thread before moving on.
 
So you're not "just sayin'" about there needing to be more valid criticism (because nobody claimed or denied that). You're just shit stirring.
 
But, hey. You're edgy. You speak your mind. You're not going to kowtow to what "the man" says you're supposed to behave like. Manners are for squares. For mealy mouthed sheeple. You talk. You bring the truth. You say what needs to be said, because it needs to be said. You are: Fronzel Neekburm.
 
:wub:

The only complaint that I have with the parser is when it is badly implemented or incomplete. It drives me nuts if the vocabulary is so sparse that you have to play the "guess what word I am thinking of now" game with the developer. That breaks immersion. It should recognize all synonyms and variants of the word in question. I would go as far as to have it recognize all alternate spellings.
 
Other than that, I can see no reason that the parser could not find a place in a modern game.

The only complaint that I have with the parser is when it is badly implemented or incomplete. It drives me nuts if the vocabulary is so sparse that you have to play the "guess what word I am thinking of now" game with the developer. That breaks immersion. It should recognize all synonyms and variants of the word in question. I would go as far as to have it recognize all alternate spellings.
 
Other than that, I can see no reason that the parser could not find a place in a modern game.

This is also an issue for me, especially after I got Netflix from where I have the bad habit of watchin multiple episodes in a row.

The only complaint that I have with the parser is when it is badly implemented or incomplete. It drives me nuts if the vocabulary is so sparse that you have to play the "guess what word I am thinking of now" game with the developer. That breaks immersion. It should recognize all synonyms and variants of the word in question. I would go as far as to have it recognize all alternate spellings.
 
Other than that, I can see no reason that the parser could not find a place in a modern game.

The only complaint that I have with the parser is when it is badly implemented or incomplete. It drives me nuts if the vocabulary is so sparse that you have to play the "guess what word I am thinking of now" game with the developer. That breaks immersion. It should recognize all synonyms and variants of the word in question. I would go as far as to have it recognize all alternate spellings.
 
Other than that, I can see no reason that the parser could not find a place in a modern game.