What Classic Games On Cd Rom Do You Still Own For Pandora?

[DaMummy]

whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa....WHOA....we can port carmageddon to the pandora? and of course ANY C&C game would be great as well

 

[second exodous]

whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa....WHOA....we can port carmageddon to the pandora? and of course ANY C&C game would be great as well

I was wondering about the first few DOS Command & Conquer games because they don't look nearly as graphic intensive as Warcraft II, so maybe. The only one I played is where you could have the Russian girl that would go into a building, fire a few shots, come out and the building would collapse. I haven't played it in a while though.

 

[Prometheus]

whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa....WHOA....we can port carmageddon to the pandora? and of course ANY C&C game would be great as well

No, this isn't about porting - you need source code to port something, and most of the games mentioned in this thread do not have source code available*.

Folks are talking about old games they own that they hope can be emulated on the Pandora.


*A small number have open source "game engine recreations" available, but this is a different matter.

 

[Tensuke]

whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa....WHOA....we can port carmageddon to the pandora? and of course ANY C&C game would be great as well

I was wondering about the first few DOS Command & Conquer games because they don't look nearly as graphic intensive as Warcraft II, so maybe. The only one I played is where you could have the Russian girl that would go into a building, fire a few shots, come out and the building would collapse. I haven't played it in a while though.

Red Alert was great, hope to get that and C&C working. I'd kill to have Tiberian Sun, but it doesn't look possible. Maybe Pandora 2.

 

[second exodous]

I'd kill to have Tiberian Sun, but it doesn't look possible. Maybe Pandora 2.

Unless Intel does something magical with the x86 and makes it use so little power by the time Pandora 2 comes out then I don't think this will be a possibility.

Well, that or the Wine project does something magical to get it running on an ARM chip.

This project being improved has more possibility than the other two however. I think every RTS has an interpreter.

 

[WizardStan]

I'd kill to have Tiberian Sun, but it doesn't look possible. Maybe Pandora 2.

Unless Intel does something magical with the x86 and makes it use so little power by the time Pandora 2 comes out then I don't think this will be a possibility.

Well, that or the Wine project does something magical to get it running on an ARM chip.

This project being improved has more possibility than the other two however. I think every RTS has an interpreter.

It goes against most of my principles to say this, but a Pandora 2 will probably be a multi-core system with a significantly higher clock rate. x86 emulation will probably have advanced enough that emulating Tiberian Sun (and other earlier Windows programs) is a piece of cake.

 

[second exodous]

I'd kill to have Tiberian Sun, but it doesn't look possible. Maybe Pandora 2.

Unless Intel does something magical with the x86 and makes it use so little power by the time Pandora 2 comes out then I don't think this will be a possibility.

Well, that or the Wine project does something magical to get it running on an ARM chip.

This project being improved has more possibility than the other two however. I think every RTS has an interpreter.

It goes against most of my principles to say this, but a Pandora 2 will probably be a multi-core system with a significantly higher clock rate. x86 emulation will probably have advanced enough that emulating Tiberian Sun (and other earlier Windows programs) is a piece of cake.

The Wine project is old, and it has hit 1.0 a while ago, but little is being done to implement it on other architectures. This is the only big windows 'compatibility layer' and it still requires a x86 processor to run.

I hope that ARM handhelds and maybe ARM Desktops cut servilely into the x86 market creating a need for Wine community to get their Windows 'compatibility layer' on ARM, but Intel won't give up without a fight, hence the Atom, underpowered to create the illusion it's low powered.

 

[Bosbeetle]

I have full throttle laying about and maybe planescape torment but I question if that'll work

 

[El Jefe]

In general I'm too young to join in on the retro goodness, but there are a few dos ones I can contribute:
gizmos and gadgets. first real computer game I played, twas excellent at the time.
before that, Basically only math blaster games from The Learning Company.

 

[thewool]

Wonder it will be able to handle the first pseudo 3D games such as Alone in the Dark II and Ecstatica. Hope so :0)

 

[gp32rich]

I'd kill to have Tiberian Sun, but it doesn't look possible. Maybe Pandora 2.

Unless Intel does something magical with the x86 and makes it use so little power by the time Pandora 2 comes out then I don't think this will be a possibility.

Well, that or the Wine project does something magical to get it running on an ARM chip.

This project being improved has more possibility than the other two however. I think every RTS has an interpreter.

It goes against most of my principles to say this, but a Pandora 2 will probably be a multi-core system with a significantly higher clock rate. x86 emulation will probably have advanced enough that emulating Tiberian Sun (and other earlier Windows programs) is a piece of cake.

The Wine project is old, and it has hit 1.0 a while ago, but little is being done to implement it on other architectures. This is the only big windows 'compatibility layer' and it still requires a x86 processor to run.

I hope that ARM handhelds and maybe ARM Desktops cut servilely into the x86 market creating a need for Wine community to get their Windows 'compatibility layer' on ARM, but Intel won't give up without a fight, hence the Atom, underpowered to create the illusion it's low powered.

I reckon the only thing stopping them porting to ARM is grunt to emulate 486 & Pentium. As soon as ARMs are delivered that *can* emulate, WINE will have an emulation layer.

But that's still (chip) versions away.

 

[elwing]

I reckon the only thing stopping them porting to ARM is grunt to emulate 486 & Pentium. As soon as ARMs are delivered that *can* emulate, WINE will have an emulation layer.

But that's still (chip) versions away.

I doubt that wine will feature an emulation layer as its name clearly says that it isn't an emulator... will prolly find some qemu/wine bundle through...

and if that don't comes we could always wait for a NDS emulator to use this: DSx86

 

[second exodous]

DOS is a lot easier to emulate than Windows is, DOS has well documented open variants where Windows does not. It will take a lot more horse power to emulate an x86 architecture and then a closed OS on top of that.

Emulating a architecture isn't that hard, it's doing that and then the OS on top of it. Both take huge performance hits, so in the end you need to have that much faster of a chip.

 

[ldesnogu]

DOS is a lot easier to emulate than Windows is, DOS has well documented open variants where Windows does not. It will take a lot more horse power to emulate an x86 architecture and then a closed OS on top of that.

Emulating a architecture isn't that hard, it's doing that and then the OS on top of it. Both take huge performance hits, so in the end you need to have that much faster of a chip.

Yes, i386 is easy to emulate :rolleyes: I invite you to give it a try. Also having a simulator that can boot an OS isn't that much harder than simulating i386 at user level. You don't care what the OS is, you just provide enough peripherals for it to boot and add MMU/interrupts to your simulator.

And emulating DOS would probably be harder than using QEMU + Wine since you'll have to simulate at the system level given how various extenders play with MMU (at least that's my understanding); and since you have to go to that level your emu will be slower.

Anyway, both DOS simulation and QEMU + Wine wouldn't target the same programs to simulate. So both are needed

 

[second exodous]

DOS is a lot easier to emulate than Windows is, DOS has well documented open variants where Windows does not. It will take a lot more horse power to emulate an x86 architecture and then a closed OS on top of that.

Emulating a architecture isn't that hard, it's doing that and then the OS on top of it. Both take huge performance hits, so in the end you need to have that much faster of a chip.

Yes, i386 is easy to emulate :rolleyes: I invite you to give it a try. Also having a simulator that can boot an OS isn't that much harder than simulating i386 at user level. You don't care what the OS is, you just provide enough peripherals for it to boot and add MMU/interrupts to your simulator.

And emulating DOS would probably be harder than using QEMU + Wine since you'll have to simulate at the system level given how various extenders play with MMU (at least that's my understanding); and since you have to go to that level your emu will be slower.

Anyway, both DOS simulation and QEMU + Wine wouldn't target the same programs to simulate. So both are needed

Emulating i386 and i486 is still emulating x86 isn't it? Also, they are both 32 bit, just like every x86 chip before recently moving to 64bit in this decade.

 

[ldesnogu]

What's your point? I was sarcastic here: even i386 is a pain to simulate efficiently.

 

[second exodous]

What's your point? I was sarcastic here: even i386 is a pain to simulate efficiently.

Ohh, I see. What I meant is emulating Windows is a lot harder than the x86 architecture, I didn't mean to make it sound like it was easy to do. Didn't see your sarcasm since I didn't re-read what I wrote.

 

[ldesnogu]

Ohh, I see. What I meant is emulating Windows is a lot harder than the x86 architecture, I didn't mean to make it sound like it was easy to do. Didn't see your sarcasm since I didn't re-read what I wrote.

No problem But I still disagree; simulating Windows is easier:

1. from a system simulator point of view, you only need to be able to boot an image
2. from a user mode simulator point of view, you have Wine.

The first approach is harder than the second since you need some peripheral models and handling of more details (such as the MMU), but it's much easier than writing an x86 simulator with good performance.

 

[Loonie]

A shed load of PC Engine CDRom/Super CDRoms.

 

[sausage]

1) Twinsen's Oddyssey (LBA2)
2) Worms United
3) Commander Blood