A different perspective: I want Retro SS2! For my Retro PC :)

[665646ce6d3e3mzry]

Hi all,

I'm new here and I hope this is a worthy first post. I've recently been putting together an ultimate retro pc from the SS2 era, a 1.4ghz p3 with a voodoo5500, asus tusl2-c mobo etc. I also am running Windows 2000 because I want NT stability. This obviously causes issues with SS of which I have solved many. I noticed most patches or forum discussions are about these new community mods etc which are totally awesome, but not for a retro computer on Win2K. Even the GoG version is no good because it forces 32bit colour.

I managed to get my original CD to install following forum guides. I then found the original latest patch, then I also found the Win2000/XP compatibility EXE and put that in too. SS2 perfectly apart from the fact that I cannot choose a res higher than 1024x768 (ideally I'd like 1280x1024). But another thing is that I would rather not put my original CD in the drive whenever I want to play, I dislike the noise the drive makes and it's just a pain. The original author made the 2000/xp compatibility exe requiring a cdcheck as back then it was a fairly new game and he obviously didn't want to help piracy.

Any suggestions on getting a higher resolution & disabling the requirement of needing my cd?

Thanks

[665646ce6d6e8voodoo47]

if you are running win2000, you really, really want to be using NewDark (the updated engine), avoiding all the old hacks completely. GOG should work right out of the box, but if you want mods, you will either have to make your install mod ready manually, or patch the install up on a winvista+ pc with SS2tool and then copy it back to the retro machine.

16bit can be re-enabled if that is your wish (v5 supports 32bit, so not sure why would you want that), same goes for DX6 (you might actually need that as I don't think the latest official win2k v5 driver supports dx8.1/9 properly. 3rdparty drivers do, can link if you want).

[665646ce6d868mzry]

32bit colour is too laggy for my FPS to be honest. Plus the voodoo has excellent 16bit quality. I don't really want any mods, I just want the old game with 16bit 1280x1024 and no cd requirement. So you suggest NewDark for this? Sorry for my ignorance I am totally new to these modern SS2 patches.

[665646ce6d9c4ZylonBane]

Sounds like the problem is you couldn't truly embrace the retro'ness of your "retro" PC. A true retro Windows gaming PC would use Win98SE. NT kernel OSs suck for games that weren't programmed with them in mind.

[665646ce6dad3mzry]

SS2: Release date: August 11, 1999

I wouldn't call windows 2000 not retro enough for SS2. Also 9X is a horrid abomination which I refuse to re-live. Any 'tech savvy' computer user had moved to 2K back then.

[665646ce6dca5voodoo47]

yes, win2000 is definitely not retro enough for SS2 2.3, that's why I'm saying, if you already have an OS that supports the latest version (2.45), you should definitely go for that. also, that system should have little problem running the game at 1280*1024*32, but as mentioned, 16bit can be re-enabled if you insist.

if you don't want mods, GOG build should do fine - edit cam_ext.cfg and comment out force_32bit if you want 16bit, and use_d3d_display to enable DX6 (you'll probably need this unless you are running 3rdparty v5 driver with dx8.1/9 support), and you should be good to go.

[665646ce6e04eZylonBane]

I wouldn't call windows 2000 not retro enough for SS2.

Uh, the fact that SS2 won't even run without a compatibility patch says that yes, Win2K is not retro enough for it. The whole point of a retro machine is to run old software without having to jump through hoops. You half-assed it, and now you're paying the price. I hope you don't have much interest in DOS games.

Also 9X is a horrid abomination which I refuse to re-live.

Win98 is as horrible as the person using it. I used it for years and never once had to do the supposedly mandatory regular reinstall... probably because I didn't do the sort of stupid stuff that tends to mess Windows up.

[665646ce6e1abmzry]

Thanks this is very helpful info. I'll download the 2.45 patch and edit the files as you suggested. Thanks =)

[665646ce6e2b7voodoo47]

if you have the GOG edition, it's ready to go. if you don't, patching the game with SS2tool on modern machine and then copying the install to the retro pc would be preferable.

[665646ce6e3e8ZylonBane]

But then, running the GOG version on a "retro" PC is pointless since it's not the original program. It was updated specifically to make it run well on modern PCs. The only retro experience he'll get is a lower frame rate. It would be like building a retro PC to play original Doom but then only running one of the modern source ports on it.

[665646ce6e52avoodoo47]

NewDark was faster than oldDark on every machine I've tested, even the p3 1GHz/512MB sdram/64MB radeon9000 rustbucket. while an odd choice for a retro pc, win2000 will allow him to run NewDark, so he has no reason to not run it (unless the v5 driver refuses to cooperate) - with no mods, he will be getting the vanilla game, just with more speed, less crashes, and proper 5:4 monitor support.

but agreed that having win2k on a retro pc kind of defeats the purpose.

[665646ce6e60eZylonBane]

I meant that he'd get a lower frame rate on the retro PC than on a modern PC.

[665646ce6e701voodoo47]

no doubt, but if he's after that special feeling, then it might just do it for him.

[665646ce6e886mzry]

Thanks it seems to be working fine. Although I don't seem to be getting any benefit from using 16bit colour. The official SS2 is running super smooth 60fps+ but the GoG version with the suggested config edits is running at 20-30fps. Just walking past the steamy air vent in the wall at the very start of the game brings the FPS down massively. I've tried a bunch of changes in the config file but with no luck.

BTW ZylonBane the one thing you're forgetting is that by using the more modern patch fixes gameplay bugs etc, so it is preferable to be using an updated version if possible. If it can run as fast as the original version then it doesn't take away from the fact that I'm using retro hardware, for a retro experience.

If you have any suggestions it's much appreciated. Otherwise, I can probably get by using the original version at 1024x768 & cd inserted.

[665646ce6e97fZylonBane]

I'll never understand why so many people insist on typing GOG as "GoG". I always wonder what they think the "o" stands for.

[665646ce6ea6dmzry]

Doesn't it stand for 'old'? The correct grammatical abbreviation would be GoG. Thanks for the help.

[665646ce6eb9avoodoo47]

try commenting out multisampletype 8 in cam_ext.cfg. if that won't help, rename cam_ext.cfg into something else temporarily, and try to run the game. this will enable the super oldschool mode, see whether his will give you a fps boost.

maybe try to run it in the dx9 mode.

[665646ce6ee29ZylonBane]

Doesn't it stand for 'old'? The correct grammatical abbreviation would be GoG.

In what universe is "old" an article or a preposition?

[665646ce6eff5Kolya]

Actually this depends on how you pronounce Good old Games.

If you pronounce it as a word it's an acronym and should be spelled Gog. Just like Laser, Nasa, Nato, Unicef. Note that this rule is only true for well known things. But I guess in the retro gaming context we're in, Gog is very well known.

However if you pronounce it "geeohgee" it's an initialism and should probably be written as GOG. English does not have consistent rules about capitalisation, only preferred styles in certain contexts, but generally prepositions and articles are lowercased in initialisms.

[665646ce6f112voodoo47]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOG.com

[665646ce6f20dKolya]

Like I said, it's not consistent. And Wikipedia is good for a lot of things, but not as a style guide.
//Also Wikipedia has a different context than we do. See above.
[Gog.jpg expired]

[665646ce6f4dcZylonBane]

Just like Laser, Nasa, Nato, Unicef.

Unless you're in the US, in which case those would be NASA, NATO, UNICEF. LASER has become just "laser" in all but the most technical usage.

[665646ce6fcd1JML]

I'll never understand why so many people insist on typing GOG as "GoG". I always wonder what they think the "o" stands for.

You have no idea how much I'm fascinated by your ability to get hung up on details and play it out in such a humorous/authentic way. Stuff like this is, I guess, the natural dealing with too much technical stuff. The longing to bring personality into the technical details of how to do something one way or another (when taking a break in fixing the cold, metallic, technical riddle).

[665646ce6ff9bKolya]

Unless you're in the US, in which case those would be NASA, NATO, UNICEF. LASER has become just "laser" in all but the most technical usage.

But this is an international website. And in the context of this website gog, Gog, GoG and GOG are all easily understood. Why is it necessary to create a rule? What about efficiency? Wouldn't it be more efficient to accept these different styles and stay on topic than to try and teach the world a lesson of dubious legitimacy?