Page 6 of 9

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:10 am
by Darklord
jontycampbell wrote:Alas with DM, it won't play on win7... Bah!
The Amiga version works just great on an emulator, it's generally regarded as the best version to. Amusingly it's even better on an emulator as you can have it running faster and of course autosaves.

Daniel.

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:29 am
by jontycampbell
Darklord wrote:
jontycampbell wrote:Alas with DM, it won't play on win7... Bah!
The Amiga version works just great on an emulator, it's generally regarded as the best version
Does the PC emulate Amiga with better performance than an Amiga can be an Amiga?.... if you see what I mean.

If so, which Amiga emulator can you commend?

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 7:55 am
by Thels
Also, are you sure it doesn't run well under DosBox?

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 2:14 am
by jontycampbell
Thels wrote:Also, are you sure it doesn't run well under DosBox?

Probably runs good on XP but on win7 it's a no go.

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:28 am
by Thels
jontycampbell wrote:
Thels wrote:Also, are you sure it doesn't run well under DosBox?

Probably runs good on XP but on win7 it's a no go.
I don't mean under a Dos Prompt, but under DosBox. It's a DOS emulator.

http://www.dosbox.com/

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:40 am
by Darklord
jontycampbell wrote:
Darklord wrote:
jontycampbell wrote:Alas with DM, it won't play on win7... Bah!
The Amiga version works just great on an emulator, it's generally regarded as the best version
Does the PC emulate Amiga with better performance than an Amiga can be an Amiga?.... if you see what I mean.

If so, which Amiga emulator can you commend?
Yes and No, you see under the emulation options you can turn on all sorts of optional extras, for me activating 2mb of Fast RAM really made DM fly, so while an original Amiga could have had that much fast RAM in practice very few people probably had such. (It had 512kb of slow ram)

So yeah it runs the Amiga version better than most people's Amiga's ever did. :)

I use WinUAE, it's free to.

http://www.winuae.net/

Daniel.

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:43 am
by Darklord
Of course the easiest way to play DM is using one of these clones, they are designed to run on WIndows etc.

http://www.dungeon-master.com/index.htm

The Amiga version is better though if you can wrap your head around the emulation. :)

Daniel.

Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:19 am
by jontycampbell
Darklord wrote:Of course the easiest way to play DM is using one of these clones, they are designed to run on WIndows etc.

http://www.dungeon-master.com/index.htm

The Amiga version is better though if you can wrap your head around the emulation. :)

Daniel.
Brilliant! thanks.

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:05 pm
by Goffmog
jontycampbell wrote:
Thels wrote:Also, are you sure it doesn't run well under DosBox?

Probably runs good on XP but on win7 it's a no go.
Works perfectly under DosBox for me in Win7 - don't even have to fiddle with the settings. Of course the actual best version was on the Atari ST, it ran faster and came on only one disk! ;)

Re: Is LoG a shameless copy of a classic?

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:10 pm
by Darklord
Goffmog wrote:Of course the actual best version was on the Atari ST, it ran faster and came on only one disk! ;)
No no the Amiga version was the best! :P It had several improvements over the ST version which make it a better game. Here's a comparison,

http://dmweb.free.fr/?q=node/247

Daniel.