Re: Well, it's about time (HD on Win3)

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:27:48 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:00:42 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, Mike
S. wrote:
>

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:46:47 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
>

Windows 3? That clunky operating-system-cum-system-shell from 1990?
Yup. It's back... and now with support for HD resolutions! Because we
all know that's what's been holding back that "OS", right? The lack of
high-resolutions. Well, no longer; there's a new open-source SVGA
driver that will run on Windows 3.1 and allow ultra-high resolution
and color depths!

>
I have Win 3.1 running in DosBox. I just booted it up now to make sure
it  still works which it does. I don't use it anymore though.  I agree
with you, I don't miss it.

>
Occasionally, I'll use it to crack open the WEP. Nostalgia. Chip's
Challenge, etc.

I've about 300 Windows 3.1 games installed in my DOSBox collection.
Most of them aren't very good. By the end of the platform's lifespan,
it was becoming something you could actually play reasonably decent
games on, thanks to the Win32 and WinG APIs, and many of the other
built-in services (video playback, for instance) made it easier for
developers to write games with rich multimedia content. Still, the
added memory and CPU requirements meant it always needed more grunt
than an equivalent DOS game.

And the platform was sooooo fragile. Not just in the actual running of
the games, but just in general; files and settings could corrupt so
easily, and making a chance to get game X running well usually meant
Game Y wouldn't run at all. Everytime I play one of those Win3 games
on DOSBox, I'm never sure if it'll actually start or if -by playing
the game- I might ultimately end up fucking up my Win3 install.

I still think the Win3.1 version of the original "Civilization" was
the best version, though. ;-)