/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10276792
For maximum ease of use, just use ExODOS. It even has a front-end and all the manuals and shit. Even those stupid reference cards everyone always lost.

>>10276792
Just using DOSBox is generally easier and faster but 86Box/PCem is more authentic because everything actually works like on a real computer and your game will run like on proper period hardware. Want to know how Quake ran on the best computers at launch? Make a build with a 200MHz Pentium and other hardware that was available at the time. You can also see how Doom ran on a 386 (it ran like shit)

>>10276792
>I understand 86Box and PCem are a lot more accurate
They're really not.
Both of them emulate just barely enough to trick drivers into working. But for example in DOS games specifically it took years for the Keen scrolling bug to get fixed in PCem because the emulator shares all the poorly written low-level code between graphics cards, and unfortunately that's all DOS games use.

for most games pcem/86box are too demanding and a waste of electricity to run. Some form of dosbox(x, staging, etc) is much better most of the time.

>>10276832
I admit I've no clue as to what's going on in the background here. That said, PCem appears to be on life support with little recent activity. Looking at some forum posts from devs, I think I have an idea as to why.

>>10276792
I use whatever works best for the purpose I need it. Then again, that's only because I'm such a richfag I can afford to have dozens of pieces of free software loaded on to my machines. I'll never understand this zoomie obsession with only having one thing.

DOSBox
>good-e-nuff emulated DOS environment with many features DOS never had and some generic good-e-nuff emulated hardware with few options
>still a few DOS games it can't emulate
>with a front-end like D-Fend Reloaded(or prepackaged collection like eXoDOS), it's as easy as it gets to play DOS games
>you will run into massive fuck-heug issues the moment you try to go beyond just games, like level editors and the like
>needs per-game configuration

PCem/86box
>designed to be an emulator of the hardware, not DOS
>can run any OS the emulated hardware supports, provided you can supply the OS install disks and drivers
>short of games that required specific hardware(ReelMagic MPEG decoder card), I haven't found a single DOS game or program that won't run on PCem/86box
>downside is you need to setup the VM just like you would a real machine, installing the OS and drivers and jumping through all the hoops
>but once your system is setup, you just install games and play and they just werk

>>10276960
>PCem appears to be on life support with little recent activity
86Box is active with the last major release being only a month ago and multiple new builds every single day:
https://github.com/86Box/86Box/releases/tag/v4.0
https://ci.86box.net/job/86Box/

>>10277037
>still a few DOS games it can't emulate
Which ones? Not doubting, just curious.
>needs per-game configuration
This always did bother me about DOSBox. Certain frontends do make this much easier, but still.

>>10277049
One that stands out to me is the CD-ROM version of Genesia/Ultimate Domain. Under every fork of DOSBox I have ever tried, it always locks up after a few turns.

>>10277048
And still lacks a proper built in VM manager and runs 15 to 20% slower than pcem

>>10277109
>lacks a proper built in VM manager
I agree that it should have one built in but 86Box Manager works perfectly for me
>runs 15 to 20% slower than pcem
True but it's only really a problem when emulating top end Pentium 2 CPUs. On the other hand it has way more machines and options in general. For example PCem doesn't have MIDI out devices like the Roland MT-32

>>10277049
People say prisoners of ice works, but after a few minutes of gameplay exactly when you go down the ladder iirc the game just ctds, every time I’ve tried. I’d doesn’t matter how I mount the directory and cd image.

>>10277128
Speaking of which, is there any way to emulate the Roland SC-55 or get a similar-sounding soundfont working with 86box?

>>10276792
As soon as you need 3D acceleration in 9x DOSbox/VMware start to crack pretty badly. DOSbox is fine from DOS to 3x though.

>>10277128
>more machines that current CPUs can't handle
yay?

Rate my current 86box builds:

IBM XT
>original 4.77 MHz processor
>640k RAM
>regular CGA card
>no sound card
>PC-DOS 3.20
>mostly for the super old CGA games that don't run well on faster machines or take advantage of composite output

AMI 286 AT clone
>25 MHz processor
>2MB RAM
>ATI Wonder 800+ EGA graphics
>Sound Blaster 2.0 with CMS and Roland MT-32 support
>DOS 6.22
>mostly for EGA games with actual sound

Soyo 4SW2 486
>486 DX2 66 MHz CPU
>32 MB RAM
>Diamond Stealth 64 graphics
>Sound Blaster 16
>DOS 6.22 + Windows 3.11
>for later VGA-era games
Feels like this last one could use some more work, though.

>>10277186
Yes. It's another thing you can do on 86Box but not on PCem. In your machine's settings go into Sound, then under MIDI Out Device choose FluidSynth then click on Configure to the right. Then you can choose any soundfound you have and tweak the settings if you want. I personally use this one (Catbox randomizes filenames so you can just rename it to SC-55 or something of you want):
https://files.catbox.moe/1voohk.sf2

>>10277569
I dunno, the 486 one seems pretty good for any pre-Quake stuff since you have a wide range of CPUs without having to change the motherboard or anything else, from a weak 25MHz 486SX to the 486 on steroids that is the am5x86 at p90 which runs at 160MHz. I guess you can also benchmark with different video cards too because even with software rendering you'll get different performance with different cards. Applies both on real machines and in 86box.

>>10277612
Yeah, guess I've mostly been waffling between keeping that SB16 or upping it to an AWE32 and looking into adding MIDI soundfonts and shit. Sadly my piece of shit laptop can't seem to handle 100 MHz in games like dook.

>>10277664
If your PC really is that shit then I guess you could try PCem if it's not missing anything you're using in 86Box

>>10276817
>You can also see how Doom ran on a 386

We ran DOOM on a 20 mhz 4mb ram pc in the mid 90s. It was ‘normal’ to type doom.bat (or whatever) and then go do something else while you waited to hear demons and guns shots that signaled when it finally loaded.

RoTT ran a bit better and of course so did Blake Stone and Wolf 3D. 90s pc gaming was fun!

>>10277670
I may just do that. Also, is there any reason to try a 386 build? I had one when I was a kid, but at this point it seems to me like it's basically just a worse 486 in any way, unless I'm missing something.

>>10277675
>20 mhz
Doom would run at around 3 FPS on a 386 but on a 20MHz 486 it would be playable in low detail mode and smaller screen size. Also depends on if you have a DX or SX CPU. This guy benchmarked the game on a real 40MHz 386DX and you only get close to acceptable framerates if you play with the microscopic post stamp sized window size:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQEHHc1q06c

>>10277697
>is there any reason to try a 386 build?
Some speed sensitive games might need a 386 to play at the perfect speed but it really just depends on what games you want to play. A typical period accurate Doom build is gonna use a 486 for example. Yes the first Pentium chips were out when Doom released but they were very new (they were available only a few months before Doom came out) and expensive so unless you were a rich kid you'd be playing on a 486 of some sort. That said you can still do the rich guy Doom build and play with a 66MHz Pentium

>>10277729
I’m guessing arenas music and frame rate will be more stable in 386, but that’s just a guess. Arena has horrible problems with cycles and going into taverns and cities.

>>10277752
486*

>>10276808
ExoDOS is so fucking cool. Very impressive project

>>10277569
Add XTIDE hard disk controller and an IDE hard drive to the IBM XT. Running DOS off the HDD is MUCH faster than it running off the floppy drive, plus this will free up one of the floppies. Also, stick an Adlib or SB 1.0 in there. Some games did have music or sound effects that didn't use the PC speaker.

As for the 286, MS-DOS 5.0+ isn't gonna let EMM386 deal with the RAM above 1MB since it's not a 386. You're using a 286 NEAT chipset that CAN do RAM above 1MB, but you'll need to use a 3rd party memory manager like QEMM or The Last Byte. Unless you specifically want to go mess around with those, you might as well use a 386 at the same speed, run memmaker, and call it a day.

For the 486, I highly recommending replacing MSCDEX with SHSUCDX and whatever CD-ROM driver you have(most likely GSCDROM) with XCDROM. The basic drivers are 20K+ each, the replacements are 8K or less. Trying to fit the 20K+ drivers in upper RAM along with the SoundBlaster drivers and all the other stuff is virtually impossible. With the replacements, you should be able to fit just about everything in upper RAM. 616K conventional RAM free with all drivers loaded is very possible. Best part is, they are easy replacements. Just put them in the same folder as the original files, go into config.sys and autoexec.bat and change MSCDEX to SHSUCDX and GSCDROM to XCDROM with the rest of the line untouched, save and reboot.

>>10277812
I'm a bigger fan of the Total DOS Collection, since they seek to have every revision and update and patch for every game.

>>10276808
I downloaded exodos and just use the games with pc-em. I think a lot of stuff is missing the installers so if you want to see what ega and cga looks like on some games the files aren't there.

I use pc-em because I think it feels closer to a real 486, have to use dos box to copy the files to the hdd image first. Pc-em is harder because you have to deal with memory and all that.

>>10277813
Do you actually need to worry about conventional memory when playing a CD game though? I'm pretty sure practically all CD era games use extended memory

>>10277813
>Add XTIDE hard disk controller and an IDE hard drive to the IBM XT
Already did this, actually, though it was with the IBM PC Fixed Disk Adapter. Any reason to switch over to the XTIDE?
>Also, stick an Adlib or SB 1.0 in there
I did have an Adlib in there at one point, but I figured any games I'd play with Adlib support would be too slow on this machine and would be better suited to the 286, which is why I took it out.
>Unless you specifically want to go mess around with those, you might as well use a 386 at the same speed, run memmaker, and call it a day.
Hmm, good point. I'll consider my options here. I went with a 286 because that seems to be what a lot of those later EGA games like Keen were targeting, but if they run just the same on a 386, I could switch.
>For the 486, I highly recommending replacing MSCDEX with SHSUCDX and whatever CD-ROM driver you have(most likely GSCDROM) with XCDROM
I am inclined to wonder along with >>10277830, but if there's no harm and only benefits, I don't see why not.

Also, what's the memory footprint for the various DOS versions look like? Maybe my Google-fu is just weak, but I can't seem to find hard numbers. I presume, of course, the older versions would take up less, but is there really much of a difference to warrant going with a lower version if a machine can handle 6.22?

>>10277873
Good question, I never tested the footprint of each MS-DOS version. I know you literally can't even install MS-DOS 6.22 if you don't have 368K of memory though

>>10277820
Missing 0.3
https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_v0.3
https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/historic/doom0_3
shit collection

>>10277865
>Any reason to switch over to the XTIDE?
More options for drive sizes, but if you have a HDD then you're already good to go.
>I did have an Adlib in there
Sherlock: The Riddle of the Crown Jewels had a sound patch that would play Adlib music if you messed around with the violin, but yeah, there's not a ton of games that would be sound capable.

Reminder that there's a Wolf3D port that lets you play it on a 8088.
>This project is a modification to the original Wolfenstein 3D source release which renders the game in CGA video modes. The engine has also been modified so that it can be run on 8088 based CPUs, allowing it to be run on a wide variety of old PC hardware.
https://github.com/jhhoward/WolfensteinCGA

>>10277954
Pretty based.

>>10278073
Yeah, it's pretty cool but at the same time you realize why id asked for a 286 minimum. You really need a top of the line 8086 with a high clock speed to play at a decent framerate. Something like a 16MHz NEC V30 which is pretty much THE fastest 8086 CPU

>>10277813
Since you're talking about saving memory, I guess I should mention CuteMouse
>CuteMouse is a DOS based, open source mouse driver, which supports many protocols of serial and PS/2 mice. It can search for a serial mouse at all COM ports or only at a specified port. An important CuteMouse feature is its small memory footprint: the resident part (TSR) occupies less than 3.5kb. CuteMouse can also install itself in upper memory, when available, without requiring external utilities such as the LH (LoadHigh) command.
https://cutemouse.sourceforge.net/

>>10277569
You have plenty that needs work aside from that "build"

>>10276792
I've got a P3 with a Voodoo2 and an Awe64, running my custom roll of DOS. No Windows on that system, just DOS. My C: is on an SATA SSD, in a removable cradle so that I can pull it out and do stuff to it. My sound is configured to the same settings as what the default for DOSBox generally is, so that it's easy to yoink out my drive and setup and/or run the games on a DOSBox system when convenient.

>>10278270
Neat, I'll be adding that as well.

My requirements for a dos emulator:

1. There is a folder in my real life which I can move dos games to, which the emulator will detect

2. When I open the emulator, it displays a list of said games in said folder.

3. When I click on a game in the list, it starts

I will accept a 1 time setup period in which I will select out of a very short list 1 clearly and obviously correct driver, and I will accept having to so this up to 2 times in a row, once for graphics and once for audio. During this period I may confirm, in the settings, that since I am using an original DOS controller, a keyboard, absolutely positively zero effort is required to set up controls.

These are my requirements for ALL emulation (sans using my keyboard instead of setting up controller mapping). Every single (every single) [every single]* system can be emulated using this method except for DOS.

You guys enjoy gatekeeping. Enjoy no one knowing about your game, or caring, or discussing it with you. If that's what you guys like about DOS emulation, then congratz, you have it. I'm perfectly content to ignore this entire generation of content until I can execute emulation of DOS games in a manner that would represent a bare minimum functionality in any other category of emulation software

At this point it is not about the difficulty of mounting a disc, but about the totally random hostile attitude surrounding this emulation. If you don't want people easily accessing this stuff I will ignore that stuff because "giving in" to you and behaving the way you want is not acceptable. I have access to much better stuff and a soul, too. If the dos emulation wizards ever want souls involving themselves in the usage of finished/working dos emulation projects then they will have to finish the emulator such that it is working (i.e. games appear in a list and then open when opened)

*every single

>>10278837
>in my real life
*in my real life OS folder directory

>>10278837
>You guys enjoy gatekeeping.
Literally no one in this thread is trying to gatekeep shit. People are sharing advice on PCem/86box emulation builds and drivers, pre-setup collections like eXoDOS and original disk collections like TDC, and how to free up more RAM. Could you please scream about the people in your head persecuting you elsewhere?

>>10278894
>Literally no one
>people here are
>people in your head
First take your meds and then look up the definition of abstraction.

>>10278894
Shall we not give the attention whore (You)s? This has been a perfectly fine thread of cultured gentlemen so far.

>>10278907
If there's already a solution that works as he described he would be really btfo. That'd be the way to handle him. I guess otherwise, you'd seem kinda wrong about what youre saying, and that you're talking about deprive a complaint and not a user of attention

Then again, this anonymous user might check his post history at 4chan.org/u/Anonymous and see you gave him attention. So. Be wary.

>>10276792
I always found PCem better because it emulated the actual hardware, it wasn't just a compatibility layer like DOSBox.
Downside is that you actually had to do shit like configure BIOS, add a hard drive, install DOS/Windows, and so on. But actual old PCs worked the same way too.

also it supports the surround module for the Adlib Gold, maybe the only emulator to do so. It's not perfect but pretty cool. Meanwhile Dosbox couldn't even get the OPL2 sounding right for at least a decade (some of the music in Dune 1 was soooo broken).

>>10277037
>needs per-game configuration
That was needed in the 1990s as well. My old IBM abusebox setup (I think it was a PC 330) in 1999 required different setups per game, some games required the mouse driver for, well, mouse support, while some others like Pinball Fantasies then had no memory to run so I had to reboot without a mouse driver.

>>10278967
The neat this is now there are DOS boot menus that allow you to boot using any combination of conventional, extended or expanded memory, as well as with or without mouse or CD-ROM drivers. Makes it a lot easier to manage games that don't play nice with some or any of the above.

>>10277595
I swear I have like 6 different SC-55 soundfonts and none of them are as good as the real thing, including this one. thanks though.

>>10277595
>69mb
Use this one, it's just 8mb and it sounds like the real thing
https://github.com/trevor0402/SC55Soundfont

>>10277595
>>10278987
>>10279004
Looks like someone is actually tackling proper SC-55 emulation, akin to MUNT:
https://github.com/skjelten/emusc
Looks like it's still in the early stages, though.

>>10278837
Use launchbox for MS-DOS. It's free and piss easy to configure. That way you can have what you want.

>>10278837
On my bare-bones DOS system, I have written a small batch program called GAMES. It has a very very rudimentary branching tree AI in it, so I can use GAMES to organize and launch my games. It makes things convenient, in a way that encourages me to be organized.

If I just launch GAMES with no arguments, it will CD into C:\GAMES and run DIR /w

If I launch GAMES with a simple single argument in the form of the expected name of a game, it will check for the existence of a subdirectory, and CD into the subdirectory. If within that subdirectory I've placed a batch file as a launcher, it will run the launcher. If I haven't placed a batch file there, then it just run a DIR.

The program favors placing all my game directories within subdirectories of C:\GAMES\ , so if I've installed something directly off the C drive, but then run GAMES with that game directory as my argument, then the program will notice the situation and offer to move the directory into a subfolder of C:\GAMES\ for me. If I use two arguments, and one of them is that game directory, it will offer to move the game and simultaneously rename it. It will slightly deviate if the target subdirectory already exists, and offer to put it a layer deeper as a subdirectory of the existing subdirectory.

It also does some other checks for existing files and whether I'm using the same argument twice, to try to infer my intentions.

Everything it does could be done manually with a few commands, but using GAMES makes it uniform and quick.
By making it convenient to stay organized, I dissuade myself from accepting entropy on my hard drive.

By supporting the automatic launching of the preprepared launcher batch files, I encourage myself to place collections and sequels into sub-subfolders with selection menus, and encourage myself to include DOSBox support. If I remove my C drive, and place it in another system, I can right-click any of my launcher batch files, and just run the game in DOSBox directly.

>>10279685
That's a pretty sweet setup.

>>10279685
>branching tree AI

>>10281179
You're complaining that Anon didn't call it a "decision tree", or are you so very young that you aren't aware that AI has existed a long time and wasn't always in the form of a mysterious black box?

>>10278987
>I swear I have like 6 different SC-55 soundfonts and none of them are as good as the real thing
Yeah, but it's better than default soundfonts in my opinion. There's the prerecorded stuff but the problem is that it doesn't work with custom tracks in PWADs
But I agree it's not as good as the real stuff yet

>>10281198
I'm mocking a foolish child who thought it could impress strangers on the internet by saying words it heard. Or maybe I'm mocking an AI? Nah. AI has achieved superzooman intelligence. An AI generated shitpost should be less cringe.

>>10277894
About the most I can find is that apparently DOS 3.30 can be installed on 128K RAM, so it does appears the memory footprint doubled or even tripled afterward in later versions.

>>10282079
>>10277894
>>10277873
DOS 3 is when they introduced Windows, and introduced support for EXE executives to support it. So whatever the memory footprint, DOS 2 is limited to COM files.
Each version of DOS also changes the size of the drive partitions that it's able to address.

>>10282518
PC-DOS 1.0 and MS-DOS 1.25 both supported EXE files from day 1. BAT files too. The big issue is it didn't support folders/directories, or drivers. Or 3.5 inch floppy disks.

>>10277873
>>10277894
>>10282079
DOS 1.x claimed to require 32K of RAM to boot, but can actually boot on as little as 12K, even run some it's commands with that little. DOS 2.x requires 24K to boot. DOS 3.x requires 64K to boot. 4.x needs 96K to work. 5.x onwards only used about 74K at it's worst, but wouldn't function without 512K.

>>10282632
Oh, and I should clarify, DOS 1.x can only boot on 12K of RAM if you boot into ROM Basic first and load it off of cassette, since DOS will attempt to load floppy boot sectors into a section of RAM 31K deep. Otherwise you need 32K of RAM to boot DOS due to that. Likewise with DOS 2.x.

>>10277109
I just load my machines with batch files anyway. 86Box has more emulated hardware available and can mount folders like CDs now. More accurate too, but I don't think that matters much.
I don't think it's actually any slower than pcem tho. I haven't noticed an appreciable difference. My cpu isn't emulating Pentium 2's anyway. Pentium MMX @ 133 - 166Mhz is about my limit.

>>10283053
>can mount folders like CDs now.
This has been one of my favorite features. Really streamlined the setup process for new machines that use CD-ROM.
Before:
>install DOS
>run memmaker to prep for CD-ROM install program
>hunt down or make floppy disk images containing mouse, CDROM, sound card, and whatever other drivers needed
>mount and copy/install one by one
Now:
>install DOS
>run memmaker and then install CD-ROM drivers
>put everything in one directory and then mount as CD-ROM
>copy/install everything at once
Also great for transferring over custom levels/maps for DOS games.

>>10283070
You can mount the .vhd on Windows and put stuff on it as if it was any drive/folder on your host PC. I think on Win11 you can just click the .vhd but on Win 10 you have to open diskmgmt then click Action>Attach VHD

>>10277049
>This always did bother me about DOSBox. Certain frontends do make this much easier, but still.

I think to be honest, it's more a limitation of the system it's emulating; I suppose you could potentially use some machine learning to problem solve ultra specific setup needs for certain games, but the reality of having to mess about with config files and settings until things work is a pretty accurate experience for mid-90s DOS/DOS in Windows gaming.

At least with DOSBox there is a good chance it may work eventually, rather than realising you need a new soundcard!

>>10283165
That's true. Unfortunately, PC gaming has always had quite a bit of jank, from the very beginning up until now, which has required fiddling to get games working. Oh well, that's the price we pay for having such a versatile and long-lasting platform. Imagine actually being able to natively run games from ten years prior without any kind of emulation on a console. The modern PC can, with a bit of tweaking, go back twenty.
>>10277813
On another note, I might actually go with a 386 after all. It appears very few games actually straight-up need a 286, at least from lists I've found of CPU-dependent games, whereas plenty do want a 386 specifically, including some very high profile games like Wing Commander and Ultima VI.

Are any of the emulated screens able to pass the output through something like the FidelityFX Super Resolution? Not for sprite games of course, but for the occasional 3d game. Good or bad, I'm curious to see it.

>>10284069
>The modern PC can, with a bit of tweaking, go back twenty
It's pretty sad how you can't do that on consoles. The closest is Xbox but not every single OG Xbox game runs on a Series X
>I might actually go with a 386
Yeah, it just makes everything simpler. memmaker is the easy way

>>10277037
>you will run into massive fuck-heug issues the moment you try to go beyond just games, like level editors and the like

Erm... POBCAK much? I use dosbox a lot for non-gaming purposes and I've never had problems. Specifically what programs are you having a skill issue with recently?

>>10285169
Borland Turbo Assembler 5.0's 32-bit linker fails. An anon in a recent thread had issues with some archive unpacker in DOSbox as well.

>>10285169
>Due to my limited experience I'm unaware of something
>So it doesn't exist and you are the problem
Zoom much?

>>10285169
I'm surprised it works as well as it does for non-gaming purposes, but given its primary purpose is to play DOS games, I would be even more surprised if it didn't have problems with some such applications.

>>10284101
That's with emulation, though. Again, PCs can, without emulation, natively run games that are over twenty years old. Not all of them, but a good many.

>>10285891
>I'm surprised
You shouldn't be. Games were the things that """pushed the boundaries""" which often meant doing things "wrong". Not so much a problem on systems that basically had a monolithic base architecture. A big problem on ones designed to depend on upgrades. Cringey kludges to deal with that in an emulator shouldn't affect "properly" designed/coded software.

>>10287376
I suppose you have a point. I do like how it can boot even Windows ME IIRC, though I don't know how well that works. I only ever tried Windows 98 SE, and it was a bit janky.

>>10276792
DOSBox is great, I don't see any reason to be a special snowflake and not use it.

>>10288718
It's basically a case of how authentic you want to be. If all you want to do is load games, it's pretty much the best easiest thing to use. If you want to replicate the experience of playing games like it's the 80's/90's, 86box/PCem is your jam.

>>10288714
Dosbox is a convenient tool for some things. Useless for others. Way back in ancient history there was a saying. Right tool for right job

>>10281198
you can stretch the definition of AI to the point where a calculator is AI
hell, you can call a pen and a paper AI
pretty useless definition of AI, for all practical purposes though

>>10288718
DOSbox is fine if all you care about is a DOS game running as quickly as possible but it's not gonna replicate using an 80s/90s PC like 86Box or PCem, which is part of the experience for a lot of retro PC enthusiasts

>>10288718

In my experience, DOSBox works terrifically well except for a very small amount of games - often games in the weird DOS/Windows crossover period where they ran in DOS but in a Windows wrapper and with Windows stuff that I just about understand running alongside.

In some of these cases - pre-packaged approaches created by guys like the Collection Chamber often use PCem, so you can effectively run Windows 95 or Windows 3.1 running in DOS mode.

>>10291082
I would love to see a version of PCem or 86box that visually shows you the parts and puts them one by one inside a computer case as you pick them, like something you'd see on mid to late-90's interactive software. Shit would be cash.

>>10276792
I use Dosbox for ease-of-use and pull out PCEM whenever something is hard to get running properly.

Does DOSBox have the more accurate Nuked FM emulation that 86box has?

>>10294678
Dosbox uses its own FM emulation, iirc.

>>10291126
It runs as well as it can but all mode 13h games run at 75 hz, so without specialized display modern hardware, MS-DOS games can never be emulated properly.

>>10294779
70Hz, actually. Also, can't panels be overclocked to run at that refresh rate? Or do they just accept it but still run at 60Hz internally?

>>10291082
Why would you want to, you just want to play the games which run pretty authentically and you can even adjust the processor speed. Forks like Dosbox-X even allow setting the cycles to simulate different speeds of cpu. Having to setup custom autoexecs to fuck with memory managers and all sorts of other cancer that you had to do to get games like Ultima 7 to run wasn't fun.

>>10294782
Dosbox forces them into 60hz, which can work for certain kinds of games, but scrolling will always be a problem or repeating digital samples won't loop properly. If you have a 120hz display or above, I think you still need free sync to get 70hz.

Probably not the right place for this however one can but try. Any of you lads using SheepShaver for old macs on windows? I have it working pretty well except CD based games keep telling me there's no cd in the drive despite just installing a game! They're mounted with the drive section of the GUI and supposedly the latest versions allow you to drop them stright on the window as it's running to mount them (toast or .img) but it just doesn't work for me. Any thoughts?

>>10294791
What's a good game to test for scrolling at 70Hz? Keen is kind of jittery even under the best of circumstances, and that's technically a 60Hz game anyway since it's EGA. Jazz Jackrabbit is super smooth, but it's a rare 60Hz DOS game. So I'm looking for a game that runs at a smooth 70 FPS.

is there a way to record in either of them with a mic?

>>10294879
maybe its looking in the wrong drive?

>>10294787
Speak for yourself. I unironically enjoy messing with old computers and figuring how to make things work

>>10276792
Nothing will get you playing faster than a preconfigured DOSBox frontend with games already included

https://mega.nz/folder/3t8nzSIS#947kyMN6Z80f8HS7q2XlqA

>>10297495
did you configure different shortcut for each game that it would already launch dosbox and run the game with no additional input on the user side?

>>10297551
no shortcuts, it uses an interactive oldschool dos menu (within dosbox), can navigate it with keyboard

>>10297718
like nc?

>>10297851
bit more simple than that, cannot scroll up or down using arrowkeys, but you can specify games (or groups of games) with letters A to Z and 1-9

its fast though, and you can start a game within 5 seconds

pic related

>>10294969
I actually can't come up with a title. Tyrian mabye? But that might have a dedicated 60Hz mode.

Which ones Second Reality by Future most accurately? That's the winner.

I've tried both, but I prefer 86box. When I used DOSBox, the games seemed to run well but there was noticeable input lag. Despite being a slow emulator, 86box felt much more responsive to me. I tested it mostly with my Williams arcade classic disk. I haven't been using 86box for win9x games. All the win9x games I've wanted to play so far have worked on win10, sometimes with a patch, but installing a patch is faster than just booting up my old PCs.