🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi,

Well I got Pitfall II along with my copy of Win95 (it was $35 when
you bought win95).  Overall, the game is very good.  If you spent
hours playing Pitfall on the Atari then I think you will like this
game.  You can play it in a window or in full screen mode.  Windowed
its slower (but this is almost better in some places).  The graphics
are good and the music/sound effects are very nice.  

There are only two things I don't like so far:  1)  If you want to
play full screen you have to manually set that using the file menu
everytime you start up the game.  2)  I don't know how long it will
last.  By this I mean I don't know how long it will be until I
finish the game.  Last night I did 3 levels (out of 15 or so) in
a hour or so.  Once I finish the game I don't know if I will
want to keep playing it over and over again (like I would on
the Atari).

I think the game is worth the bucks but it might be a bit short.

Matt

tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu (Thomas Boyingon) wrote:

>Well I got Pitfall II along with my copy of Win95 (it was $35 when
>you bought win95).  Overall, the game is very good.  If you spent
>hours playing Pitfall on the Atari then I think you will like this
>game.  You can play it in a window or in full screen mode.  Windowed
>its slower (but this is almost better in some places).  The graphics

Windowed is slower for you?  On mine I swear it runs faster...or at
least the same speed.  Only time it slows down is when I am
downloading or doing something in the background, then I switch to
full screen.
	486/100 Mach64 Vid Card 16 megs ram.

- Jason Zisk a.k.a. Sufferin' Pup
- Sophmore at the University of Hartford College of Arts and Sciences
- email: suf...@cris.com

    // It is really sad that dialog boxes in windows have to
    // commit suicide so that the program may continue.
    EndDialog(hwnd,TRUE);

Yeah, but for $35 it is not a BIG deal. I think if I spent $60 and got 
only a week I would be miffed, but...

I haven't had a chance to really play things since I got the release 
Win95, but it looked pretty good with 490.


How do I get the stick to work? (joystick)

Kevin

Thomas Boyingon (tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu) wrote:
: Hi,

: Well I got Pitfall II along with my copy of Win95 (it was $35 when
: you bought win95).  Overall, the game is very good.  If you spent
: hours playing Pitfall on the Atari then I think you will like this
: game.  You can play it in a window or in full screen mode.  Windowed
: its slower (but this is almost better in some places).  The graphics
: are good and the music/sound effects are very nice.  

: There are only two things I don't like so far:  1)  If you want to
: play full screen you have to manually set that using the file menu
: everytime you start up the game.  2)  I don't know how long it will
: last.  By this I mean I don't know how long it will be until I
: finish the game.  Last night I did 3 levels (out of 15 or so) in
: a hour or so.  Once I finish the game I don't know if I will
: want to keep playing it over and over again (like I would on
: the Atari).

: I think the game is worth the bucks but it might be a bit short.

: Matt

men...@indirect.com (Kevin Dorff) wrote:


Mine wouldn't work at first.  I have a SB16 and had disabled the game
port in order to use a standard 2-stick port on another multi-IO.
When Win95 installed, it assumed that my port on the SB16 was the one
of choice. 

To get it working, I went to Device Manager and looked under Sound,
Game Adapter and removed the Gameport device.  Then, I added a new one
using the MICROSOFT/GAMEPORT generice driver.

All works well now!

Good luck,
jimmy


>How do I get the stick to work? (joystick)

>Kevin

>Thomas Boyingon (tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu) wrote:
>: Hi,

>: Well I got Pitfall II along with my copy of Win95 (it was $35 when
>: you bought win95).  Overall, the game is very good.  If you spent
>: hours playing Pitfall on the Atari then I think you will like this
>: game.  You can play it in a window or in full screen mode.  Windowed
>: its slower (but this is almost better in some places).  The graphics
>: are good and the music/sound effects are very nice.  

>: There are only two things I don't like so far:  1)  If you want to
>: play full screen you have to manually set that using the file menu
>: everytime you start up the game.  2)  I don't know how long it will
>: last.  By this I mean I don't know how long it will be until I
>: finish the game.  Last night I did 3 levels (out of 15 or so) in
>: a hour or so.  Once I finish the game I don't know if I will
>: want to keep playing it over and over again (like I would on
>: the Atari).

>: I think the game is worth the bucks but it might be a bit short.

>: Matt

In article <41km2j$d...@rs10.tcs.tulane.edu>, tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu (Thomas Boyingon) writes:
>Hi.  I am thinking of getting hold of a copy of System Shock.  However,
>after playing the demo I was not very impressed.  I have heard that the
>real thing has SVGA graphics.  I was just wondering if anyone can
>compare the release to the demo for me.
>
>Matt
>

I too was luke warm on the demo. However I waited for the ENhanced CD 
version. All emails are digital voice. Lots of extras... Plus you 
got SVGA. But, you really need a P5 for that. I ran 300x400 fullscreen
with a DX2/66mhz VLB. It was great. Game of the year, IMHO.

Greg Cisko (ci...@d0tokensun.fnal.gov) wants us to believe that:
: In article <41km2j$d...@rs10.tcs.tulane.edu>, tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu (Thomas Boyingon) writes:
: >Hi.  I am thinking of getting hold of a copy of System Shock.  However,
: >after playing the demo I was not very impressed.  I have heard that the
: >real thing has SVGA graphics.  I was just wondering if anyone can
: >compare the release to the demo for me.

: I too was luke warm on the demo. However I waited for the ENhanced CD 
: version. All emails are digital voice. Lots of extras... Plus you 
: got SVGA. But, you really need a P5 for that. I ran 300x400 fullscreen
: with a DX2/66mhz VLB. It was great. Game of the year, IMHO.

I'll second that - I was not impressed with the demo AT ALL! However, after
reading all the great reviews on the game I decided to get the enhanced
version. WOW!! SVGA is still a little choppy (even on my P90) but the game
itself is astounding (and I'm only on level 3). Get it!

James.

suf...@cris.com (Jason Zisk) wrote:

>Windowed is slower for you?  On mine I swear it runs faster...or at
>least the same speed.  Only time it slows down is when I am
>downloading or doing something in the background, then I switch to
>full screen.
>	486/100 Mach64 Vid Card 16 megs ram.

The video card has a lot to do with this most likely.  I have a DX2/66
with 8 megs, and it certainly is slower windowed- even full screen
"fast" isn't incredibly smooth on my machine- certainly not Jazz
Jackrabbit quality scrolling or anything.

But as far as I know, Pitfall doesn't even use Directdraw, let alone
using the graphics processor in any Windows accelerator cards.  I
heard it was only WinG- is this true?  Impressive if so.

dav...@interlog.com (Dave Glue) wrote:

>suf...@cris.com (Jason Zisk) wrote:

>>Windowed is slower for you?  On mine I swear it runs faster...or at
>>least the same speed.  Only time it slows down is when I am
>>downloading or doing something in the background, then I switch to
>>full screen.
>>	486/100 Mach64 Vid Card 16 megs ram.

>The video card has a lot to do with this most likely.  I have a DX2/66
>with 8 megs, and it certainly is slower windowed- even full screen
>"fast" isn't incredibly smooth on my machine- certainly not Jazz
>Jackrabbit quality scrolling or anything.

>But as far as I know, Pitfall doesn't even use Directdraw, let alone
>using the graphics processor in any Windows accelerator cards.  I
>heard it was only WinG- is this true?  Impressive if so.

I beleive(not exactly sure) that it uses an very early beta of the
SDK.  Don't quote me, this is info gathered from another
newsgroup(programming related of course).

On my brothers 486/33 with a trident the game is easily as smooth as
Jazz.  Full screen of course.  Make sure you set the slider to "real
time" in the system properties for the game.  Otherwise it will be
quite slow(it gives up quite a bit of resources to the system if you
set it otherwise).  On my system I have it on the middle setting, but
I think you are right, the video card probably helps a lot.




- Jason Zisk a.k.a. Sufferin' Pup
- Sophmore at the University of Hartford College of Arts and Sciences
- email: suf...@cris.com

    // It is really sad that dialog boxes in windows have to
    // commit suicide so that the program may continue.
    EndDialog(hwnd,TRUE);

Kevin Dorff (men...@indirect.com) wrote:
: Yeah, but for $35 it is not a BIG deal. I think if I spent $60 and got 
: only a week I would be miffed, but...

	Or $60 and less than 7 hours like....oops.  Wrong newsgroup.

suf...@cris.com (Jason Zisk) wrote:


>On my brothers 486/33 with a trident the game is easily as smooth as
>Jazz.  Full screen of course.  Make sure you set the slider to "real
>time" in the system properties for the game.  Otherwise it will be
>quite slow(it gives up quite a bit of resources to the system if you
>set it otherwise).  On my system I have it on the middle setting, but
>I think you are right, the video card probably helps a lot.

That's wierd.  Did have the slider at real time, everything set- still
moves a bit jerky with that "shimmering" effect that you get when you
can see the screen redraw, even in full-screen fast mode.  That's part
of the reason I thought it was using WinG, which doesn't provide
double buffering which eliminates that.

dav...@interlog.com (Dave Glue) wrote:

>suf...@cris.com (Jason Zisk) wrote:


>>On my brothers 486/33 with a trident the game is easily as smooth as
>>Jazz.  Full screen of course.  Make sure you set the slider to "real
>>time" in the system properties for the game.  Otherwise it will be
>>quite slow(it gives up quite a bit of resources to the system if you
>>set it otherwise).  On my system I have it on the middle setting, but
>>I think you are right, the video card probably helps a lot.

>That's wierd.  Did have the slider at real time, everything set- still
>moves a bit jerky with that "shimmering" effect that you get when you
>can see the screen redraw, even in full-screen fast mode.  That's part
>of the reason I thought it was using WinG, which doesn't provide
>double buffering which eliminates that.

I dunno what to say...my brother's 486/33 doesn't even use fast mode,
he uses smooth full screen!  Mayeb you're BIOS settings are
whacked...you gotta make sure the wait states are low and stuff.
Maybe you have a naturally slow motherboard?  Dunno, fool around with
it.  A 486/33 should never beat out a 66 with a game like
Pitfall(processor intensive).




- Jason Zisk a.k.a. Sufferin' Pup
- Sophmore at the University of Hartford College of Arts and Sciences
- email: suf...@cris.com

As its a WIN/95 game what will matter a lot is the speed and quality of 
the DIRECTDRAW drivers Pitfall wil inevitably use, as there is a HUGE 
variation in the quality of Directdraw implementations from videocard 
to videocard.

The card at the moment that's fastest with Directdraw is the ATI 
mahc64, probably because directdraw was developed on it, and because it 
was the first card for which directdraw drivers (beta) were released, 
others followed months later.


something to consider when shopping for a videocard, 

m
Jason Zisk 
(suf...@cris.com) 
wrote: : tmb...@rs5.tcs.tulane.edu (Thomas Boyingon) wrote:

: >Well I got Pitfall II along with my copy of Win95 (it was $35 when
: >you bought win95).  Overall, the game is very good.  If you spent
: >hours playing Pitfall on the Atari then I think you will like this
: >game.  You can play it in a window or in full screen mode.  Windowed
: >its slower (but this is almost better in some places).  The graphics

: Windowed is slower for you?  On mine I swear it runs faster...or at
: least the same speed.  Only time it slows down is when I am
: downloading or doing something in the background, then I switch to
: full screen.
: 	486/100 Mach64 Vid Card 16 megs ram.

: - Jason Zisk a.k.a. Sufferin' Pup
: - Sophmore at the University of Hartford College of Arts and Sciences
: - email: suf...@cris.com

:     // It is really sad that dialog boxes in windows have to
:     // commit suicide so that the program may continue.
:     EndDialog(hwnd,TRUE);

hu...@netcom.com (Manu Kumar) wrote:

>
>As its a WIN/95 game what will matter a lot is the speed and quality of 
>the DIRECTDRAW drivers Pitfall wil inevitably use, as there is a HUGE 
>variation in the quality of Directdraw implementations from videocard 
>to videocard.
>
>The card at the moment that's fastest with Directdraw is the ATI 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>mahc64, probably because directdraw was developed on it, and because it 
>was the first card for which directdraw drivers (beta) were released, 
>others followed months later.
>
Do you, or anyone here, know if the MGA Matrox Millenia board handels
direct draw well?  TIA.

Just to add another road-apple to the fire.  I have the new Matrox 
Millenium card and the game runs fantastico.  In fact, everything I 
have runs a million times better than it did on my old PCI Viper card 
(even on my lowly P60)!

mitoosense

hu...@netcom.com (Manu Kumar) wrote:


>As its a WIN/95 game what will matter a lot is the speed and quality of 
>the DIRECTDRAW drivers Pitfall wil inevitably use, as there is a HUGE 
>variation in the quality of Directdraw implementations from videocard 
>to videocard.

>From my experienc with asking this question, Pitfall does not use
DirectDraw.  DirectDraw wasn't even in beta when Pitfall was being
made, I'm pretty sure Pitfall just uses WinG.

And what do you mean by "inveitably" us?  Pitfall has been out for
weeks.

And a video card doesn't have a directdraw "implementation".  The only
thing which could make a difference for games (considering we haven't
seen any DirectDraw games yet, this is a strange opinion) is if the
driver uses the cards accelerator chip.  Obviously, an ATI Mach 64
will perform better than a weaker accelerator such as the Cirrus
Logic- how much better we'll see when we see _one_ game that uses
DirectDraw.  But a card doesn't have to be made with directdraw in
mind- the driver is the interface.