I think that baldurs gate (or bioware games running on the same engine) will be more likely, as there is already a project (still not playable) to get it running in linux:C B Felterbush said:I realize this may be a tad premature but I think one could get Diablo 2 on this machine, it has the resources.
Tell me how far fetched it sounds. -CB
Well, I'm agree with you. It's an "OS emulator" instead a "device emulator" but it's an emulator. But you know... WINE means "Wine Is Not an Emulator", that is what it's said in its website.Goity said:Wine is an emulator however, just not one of a processor.
Wine is a wrapper. It would really be stretching the definition of 'emulator' if you wanted to call WINE that.Goity said:Wine is an emulator however, just not one of a processor.
I've run it on 166mhz pentium MMX's at school.Fishbong said:@Felterbush: So you want to emulate an x86 system, install an x86 linux on it and use that to run Diablo2 in WINE. I doubt that´ll work too well.
And why not just install Win98 if you´re going to emulate an x86 system anyway? Then you wouldn´t need WINE.
Anyway, the discussion is inane. I doubt that even a port of Diablo2 would run well on the Pandora. It had quite beefy system requirements for a low-res 2D game.
Getting one of those things to work properly would be a challenge, getting all of them to work properly in unison, that would be a miracle.C B Felterbush said:How do you figure? It is at best one emulator, then Wine. Wine is not an emulator. It is like nickspoon said a wrapper. Wine allows you to convince the software you need to run that it is running in the environment it was meant to run in. That is why there is little or no slowdown on any apps ran with Wine. The only thing that needs to be emulated is the x86 since Wine only runs on it, if that can be done with little resources absorbed then it will be easy to get good speeds out of the apps we use with Wine.
Including Diablo 2 and any other games we choose to run. -CB