So a week or two ago I went out and got the ID Super Pack on Steam. It covers pretty much iD’s entire back catalogue, bar a few obscure titles, from Commander Keen to Doom3. Plus there’s some of the iD-engine-powered titles from Raven, like Heretic and Hexen. Total cost is $69.95 – far less than the combined cost of the separate components, which comes to $213.90.
As it happens a good half of the bundled items are either multiplayer-centric (like Quake 3), or expansion packs, and thus not of much interest to me. Going back to the original Quake to see what I missed is one thing, but I doubt I’ll bother slogging through 3rd-party mission packs. Also I already own a couple of the games and, er, have been borrowing Rik’s copy of Hexen 2 for about 8 years now. Still, I did the math and the pack still works out as decent value for money, albeit by a smaller margin.
Anyway, is this the way forward for keeping oldies alive? I appreciate people would sometimes rather have a copy on CD. Also there are legitimate concerns about what happens if Valve go out of business and steam shuts down. However this is a quick and easy way for companies to make old favourites available to consumers. They don’t have to worry about printing or distributing copies, or extensive advertising campaigns. Just stick the games on Steam and let word-of-mouth do its work. With the process made relatively painless, there’s more incentive for them to give it a try, when they probably wouldn’t bother if only the traditional methods of distribution were available.
I personally love the idea, especially since the prices have been right so far (compared to Wii’s virtual console or arcade classics on XBox)
My concern is that tech support will keep many companies from jumping on the wagon, as those costs may ecclipse any profit they could get from limited re-release sales. DosBox has done wonders for part of this problem, but even Win95 releases have trouble on XP, and I’m not even sure about Vista or 64-bit multicore platforms. I assume compatability would be worse.
When you release a product and collect money for it, you’re obligated to ensure that it runs. Unfortunately, getting many mid-90s classics to run require elaborate steps conditional on the hardware you’re running (System Shock 2 on XP is a great example). It would be a nightmare to explain those processes to Joe Consumer, and might actually be impossible if they don’t have the technical knowledge to give feedback (like, how many cores does your computer have?) In other cases, it may be completely out of their control. Nvidia is notorious for trading performance on popular, current games while breaking support on older titles. And weren’t there a few games written specifically for 3Dfx/Voodoo? Ooops!
Using the Steam version of Terror From The Deep as an example, the geoscape still runs too fast. 2K knows about the problem from the forums, but they only bought the rights from Microprose. The original source is apparently gone forever. It’s not 2K’s fault, but they literally will never be able to fix this problem. You’ll have to rely on MoSlo or other third party programs, which I have to admit, is a bit much to ask out of a rerelease. When you put it against "should they never have released it at all?" then it becomes a bit more hazy, but I have to be honest and say that I expect more out of an official re-release than the same "work required for content recieved" I could get for cheaper on Ebay.
I’m interested to see what the next stage of system emulation will be. It’s only a matter of time before we get something that emulates Win95 as well as DosBox does DOS (even better that MS’ Virtual PC). But then I truly don’t know the legal issues. Is it possible to replicate the performance of OpenGL, 3Dfx, Win95 without infringing on something? They’re all a little more complicated and a little more specific than DOS…
[/ramble off]
September 26, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
I didn’t realise Shock2 had problems with XP? I’m sure I’ve run it easily enough. Well that was a while ago, but I’ve definitely run the Thief games (same engine) without problems, within the last year or 2. Is this an issue with recent graphics drivers?
Tech issues could definitely hold up release of some oldies. I wonder if they would be willing to make windows source ports of their executables. (like fans have done for Doom). Or would that be too much effort for the returns they’re likely to get on a service like steam?
You’ve raised a good point about 3d cards too. I don’t think support for hardware-accelerated 3d (even direct3d) has yet made it into virtualisation suites. That could cause a problem in future years, for some win9x games if they don’t run natively under WinVista.
September 26, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
When talking about compatibility, we always tend to focus on games from the DOS era, but we’re getting to the stage where the next generation (ie Win9x) games are having trouble on modern systems.
If I was paying a couple of quid for a game from eBay, I’d expect to have to bugger around with various settings to get it to work, but if it was more serious money for an ‘official’ re-release, then I’d expect it to work without any problems.
Even though I’m stuck with a coal-fired processor on Win 98, I still had a ‘your computer is too good’ problem with a game the other day – it would only work with certain 16MB graphics cards and didn’t like my budget Radeon.
Just as XP isn’t happy with all Win 9x stuff, Vista is even less so – expect plenty of challenges to fans of old games in the near future…
September 26, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
When I played through SS2 last month I would have sworn on the Bible that I had last played it without issue on the same rig I have now (and I may have under older Nvidia drivers). I guess I was wrong, because that game would not work at all.
It turns out that all I needed was the XP compatability patch. But in the course of troubleshooting, I came across this:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/…
Just the first post should give you an idea of the myriad of possible errors and solutions (or often, no solution at all!) that exist for running Shock2 on varying configurations. I had actually gone through all of them trying to get the game to work, even disabling hyperthreading and reinstalling multiple times, before I later found the XP patch on a different site. But users inside that thread have definitely had issues, been helped by some of the suggestions, and most are apparently out of luck. I suspect this situation is only going to get worse before it gets better.
I really hope that we’ll see a near-perfect, open-source/GNU Win95 emulator in the vein of DosBox in the coming years. I truly believe that DosBox and its usually spot-on compatability is the major reason we’re seeing official re-releases kick up now (no new work on the distributor’s part, relatively easy troubleshooting and support requirements).
Without something like this, I don’t feel great about Win95-era re-releases. It’s why I keep an old Compaq with Win98 & QuickTime 2.0. And it’s actually getting to the point that I need a new "old" box with a 3D accelerator card. Soldier of Fortune was pretty fussy in the beginning too, and that game’s not too old…
Rik, glad you agree with me on expecting official re-releases to work out of the box. At the same time, I wonder if it’s unfair to demand that, and if we doom the re-releases we want by doing so.
I do wonder how many games, like TFTD, don’t have archived source code and can’t have proper executeables made for modern machines. Or how many re-releases have already been planned but got scrapped over flaky modern compatability during testing.
September 27, 2007 @ 6:15 am