/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10204647
It was just Windows 98 with a facelift. About as much difference as between vanilla Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition.

>>10204647
>Are there any retro games made specifically for this OS?

No. At it's core, Windows ME is basically an extension of Windows 98SE, it is the last Windows 9X kernel OS from MS. So it shares all compatibility with Windows 9X (95, 98, 98se). Basically Windows ME was trying to pull some of the Quality of Life features from Windows 2000.

>>10204656
>It was just Windows 98 with a facelift. About as much difference as between vanilla Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition.

Under the hood, I think they nerfed DOS shell for running games. I would have to try it on a Windows ME OS that I have. The biggest upgrade is better USB compatibility, as far as I can tell. There's no special version of DX that is limited to this OS. Yes, it is another upgrade on 98.

>>10204665
>I think they nerfed DOS shell for running games.
My second PC came with Windows ME and I played DOS versions of Doom and Duke 3D on it.

>>10204684
Windows ME did kill off it's normal DOS mode so you couldn't run real mode DOS out of the box. That would not have affected protected mode applications like Doom or Duke 3D (or almost any consumer DOS applications released after the late-80s).

>>10204647
Is there any software or games that only run on ME?

>>10204691
>>>10204684
>Windows ME did kill off it's normal DOS mode so you couldn't run real mode DOS out of the box. That would not have affected protected mode applications like Doom or Duke 3D (or almost any consumer DOS applications released after the late-80s).

That's what it was. I somewhat knew it was something like that. Even back when Windows ME came out, I knew people on some forum who would mention the DOS nerfing. But I used 98se up to Windows XP. It was Microsofts attempt to slowly phase out DOS. The NT kernel removes DOS with Windows XP.

>>10204698
Protected mode DOS games still worked in Windows XP but there was some audio bug which made them extra laggy slideshow unless you go into game setup and switch audio off altogether. There was a community patch for this but MS themselves never bothered to fix it.

>>10204706
Because it was virtualised and generally didn't work at all. VDMSound was the Godsend solution at the time, but DOSBox came out a short while after that.

>>10204706
>Protected mode DOS games still worked in Windows XP but there was some audio bug which made them extra laggy slideshow unless you go into game setup and switch audio off altogether. There was a community patch for this but MS themselves never bothered to fix it.

yep. I use to play a lot of Duke Nukem 3D on DOS in Windows 98se. DOS support was always hit and miss as some DOS games would be heavily overclocked and just run too fast. But Jumping to Windows XP, I remember getting no audio and having a really laggy experience. But by that point, 3DRealms released the DN3D source code and some of the first source ports were out by 2003. Also, the Windows XP/ Vista (I had Vista on a laptop) was when we started seeing the earliest versions of DOSBox show up.

>>10204647
why would there be any?
PC games were usually never made "with an OS in mind", they supported it or not. And they support a range of OSs usually

>>10204647
What were people doing that they claimed ME was always crashing on them? I used ME for like 3 years and it never crashed on me.

>>10204647
Hypothetically there can be some which run on ME but don't run on Win9x due to the hardware requirements (like insufficient video memory or drivers not existing for 9x), but the OS itself is backwards compatible. Win9x support DirectX 9.0 (IIRC maybe not 9.0c, but 9.0b)

>>10204695
You can probably find some (like certain versions of web browsers, MS products like Office or Visual Studio and such) on msfn.org. No specific links because they blocked my country and I can't be bothered to use a proxy/VPN to access it.

>>10205145
I had ME for a while and I don't remember it being problematic. That could be selective memory, though.

>>10204647
Man I remember how everyone hated Me and I didn't have any problems with it. I liked it.

Heck I remember how colourful windows used to be and how much you could customise.

Replace all windows icons
Replace the mouse pointer and it's animations
Heck draw your own with the right software
Change all the colours of how windows look like and I think even the colour and font of text
Media player had different cool kids
And don't even get me started on screensavers
Modern windows offers nothing
It's super annoying
Oh I also refused to install XP for a long time while I had no problems with my legal copy of me which suddenly stopped working for me
I tried to do a clean install and it wouldn't work
I tried my legit version of 98 but it wouldn't let me
So I installed the pirated version xp everyone in my country was using and I fell in love with the blue task bar for many years
I skipped vista and 7 and held onto xp for very long
Last os with soul

Btw I've played a lot of midtown madness on me

>>10205147
What fascist hellhole do you live in where msfn.org is blocked?

>>10205173
There are no fascist countries on planet Earth.

>>10205173
It's them who blocked my country, not vice versa. Same with CDRomance. Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with these people.

>>10205189
Tell your gov/chekki brekki hackers to stop DDOSing them. Also, VPN's would have to be cheap as fuck in Russia, surely?

>>10205171
>Man I remember how everyone hated Me and I didn't have any problems with it. I liked it.
As long as you had all the latest drivers and could update WinME itself asap, it was a nice OS.

>>10205145
ME is fairly stable if you're using drivers made for it. Problem is that finding good drivers that aren't just unstably dolled-up DOS drivers is nigh-impossible

>>10204647
Windows 9X BSOD screen

>>10205224
Learn to fucking read already.
I said that I'm not going to bother even if it's two clicks away. If the incompetent retards want to stay incompetent and lose the visitors, let alone contributors of content to their own fucking websites, that's their problem, not mine.

>>10205145
In general, it wasn't really that much more crash-happy than the versions before it, if at all. Many times the problems stemmed from shitty drivers.

Now, I've little proof of this, but it could also be it was around the time that ME released that malware started becoming more and more prevalent, so perhaps people hopping onto ME got hit with it hard. Obviously 98/SE users would've encountered it, too, and in larger numbers due to the greater market share, but ME launched when that shit was EVERYWHERE. BonziBuddy launched just a year prior in 1999, for example.

I briefly used ME after my windows 98 disc exploded in my cd drive
tried to play Tom Clancy's Rogue Spear and it would just crash repeatedly
gave up and managed to borrow a 2000 install cd which was a great OS

>>10205145
It did crash for me, but not as often as people say it did. If it's anything worth mentioning, I built 2 Win98 SE PCs this year and both crashed like hell. ME was more stable than this crap.
Whenever some game chose to crash to Desktop for whatever reason in 98, I always had to reboot immediately because if I didn't Win98 would tell me to fuck myself with a nice BSOD a few minutes later after trying to do anything else. Win98 is flimsy, unstable crap. Unless you do the same thing over and over and never try new stuff. For me it's surprising how Windows only users remember it as freaking good and think of modern day Linux as the worst unstable trash when in my experience is actually the opposite.

>>10205171
WinME came preloaded on my first ever PC, a brand spanking new eMachines. Spent thousands upon thousands of hours playing Diablo/II/LOD, StarCraft, C&C, AoE II. Had so much fun.
But I do remember getting frequent BsoDs. Like at least one a day. Probably viruses from porn and p2p downloads now that I think about it. Even got tricked into installing the infamous Bonzai Buddy at one point. Oh how it was to be a retarded 13 year old

>>10205364
Soul vs. soulless

>>10204695
There's one of those "Learn Windows Me" tour programs that ONLY runs on Me.

>>10205171
Didn't really have any problems with Me as well, except the time I upgraded some NIC and the driver that came with it BSOD'd my system during installation.
Now Windows 98 FE, that was a festering pile of shit...

>>10204647
No it was a waste of time. I remember some people refereed to as Windows 98 Third Edition back in the day. I skipped it entirely and switched to using Windows 2000 and stuck with that for years until Windows XP had matured to Service Pack 2.

>>10205157
That's Vista for me. I did upgrade to 7 pretty soon after its release iirc but I don't remember having any actual issues with Vista.
I'm relatively certain that people just love the hate bandwagons.

>>10206184
The problem with Vista was twofold. First the fact that it brought the system requirements up drastically over XP, and a lot of "Vista ready" PCs were being sold that were very much not capable of handling it remotely well, so a ton of people found it to be extremely slow and laggy. Secondly, the driver support just wasn't there yet when it launched, especially if you installed the 64-bit version. It had some actual issues of its own, but those were largely resolved by Service Pack 2, at which point most PCs were capable of running it well and the driver situation had improved, but by that point Windows 7 rolled around and people just hopped onto that instead.

>>10206227
One of the biggest gripes people had with Vista was DX10, which was exclusive to Vista until Windows 7 came out. I think there are workarounds to get DX10 working on XP. The majority of PC game developers stuck with DX9.

Anyone knows about a dos/pre-installed SCHUMPS game? Played it at my granparents as a kid. Remember it was white fighter, spaceship bosses and upgrades on your own weapons, so you could shoot wider. Could also play 2player. Tetris was also installed. Pls help

>>10206227
There was also UAC, which had two modes:
>Off
>Overbearing helicopter mother
and an early version of SuperFetch, which thrashed your PC for a short while after a fresh install

Also, file copy operations in Explorer were broken out of the box. It would take eons just to duplicate a handful of text files.

>>10206564
Oh yeah, I forgot about UAC. That shit would pop up after fucking everything you did, and I remember turning it off real quick.

>>10206227
fun fact: Vista was Windows 6.0, and "windows 7" was actually 6.1.
if you looked at dxdiag.

>>10206574
>Windows (1)
>Windows 2.x
>Windows 3.x / Windows NT 3.x
>Windows 9x / Windows NT 4.0
>Windows ME / Windows 2000 (NT5.0)
>Windows XP (NT5.1)
>Windows XP 64-bit / 2003 (NT5.2)
>Windows Vista (NT6.0)
>Windows 7 (NT6.1)
>Windows 8 (NT6.2)
>Windows 8.1 (NT6.3)
>Windows 10 (NT10.0)

>>10206227
Aero was kind of a meme back then, too. Yeah, you got a gee-whiz, 3D accelerated interface but there really wasn't a whole lot of substance there to justify having it on all the time. Taskbar thumbnails were useless since it took about half a second to preview each open window (nor could you close them from the thumbnails, that didn't show up until 7). Flip3D looked neat but was useless and made redundant by Alt+Tab, the frosted glass effect went away if you maximized a foreground window, there was no Aero Peek, and there were so many old programs and games out there that couldn't take advantage of the new interface so you constantly had to drop back into the software-rendered 2D interface (which lagged like hell, too because MS removed GDI acceleration support; they eventually brought that feature back in 7). Oh yeah, and if you ever dropped back to software-rendered mode then back to Aero, then all of your live taskbar thumbnails stopped working.

>>10206564
>>10206571
Honestly, UAC is preferable to "create root account, then user, and enter root password as needed" which is basically what Microsoft was trying to replicate from Linux.

>>10205364
Don't feel bad, every 13 year old is retarded

>>10205513
Challenge accepted!

I LOVE Windows ME because it's all about ME.

>>10204647
No, because it was very much Windows 9x with added instability.

>>10207090
And Nintendo Wii is all about urine

>>10206227
>>10206184
There were a lot of very capable old machines that simply did not get Vista/7 drivers, despite being able to run it maxed out just fine. Case in point, nForce3 motherboards. If you used a single core CPU and a Geforce card, you could hack it working by using XP drivers (it would still BSOD on install, but you could reboot and install the drivers). But if you used Radeon cards or dual core CPUs, the XP drivers did not work and the system got fucked with tons of crashes and only basic video support.
This was a problem because this was the time when you had the Athlon 64 X2 completely destroying the Intel P4, and the strongest AGP slot cards were all Radeons (specifically the X1950 Pro, but Ati cards were so far ahead at the time that even a venerable 9800 Pro could play most games fine).

I've seen a shitload of people having to deal with that problem, and I had to switch motherboards to a Via chipset of all things myself, but that 64 X2 + X1950 Pro lasted me until 2008.

Yeah, that card came with 2 molex power plugs and you had to make sure you used the right power rails for both plugs, preferably something not shared with anything else, or else most PSUs at the time simply couldn't power it properly.

>>10206574
fun fact: they skipped Windows 9 because they looked up a bunch of old code and found that shitload of software checked the difference between NT vs 95/98 kernels by looking at the OS name and checking if it started with "Windows 9...".

And yeah, 7 was really just an extra service pack and a new UI for Vista, plus out of the box support for newer hardware (SSD TRIM comes to mind, it was the only reason I switched).

>>10206601
Don't know why they didn't just keep the years going as a thing.

>>10207614
They probably decided it made previous OSes look dated or something.

>>10207629
Isn't that the idea though? You always know what the latest release is.

>>10207614
They still do with their server versions

>>10207340
>fun fact: they skipped Windows 9 because they looked up a bunch of old code and found that shitload of software checked the difference between NT vs 95/98 kernels by looking at the OS name and checking if it started with "Windows 9...".

I thought it was because windows seven eight nine.

>>10207795

https://youtu.be/yJdGHX0O0oQ?t=37

>>10207265
Wii, ME, and Irene!