Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Duffman_108 · Jul 19, 2004, 01:46 AM

I have a question.Can Virtual PC for Mac run all the windows games on it??

Ω · Jul 19, 2004, 01:50 AM

Yes.

Lateralus · Jul 19, 2004, 02:00 AM

Yes...

But I wouldn't recommend using Virtual PC for games unless you like your games running at the speed of a slideshow.

Lateralus · Jul 19, 2004, 02:02 AM

This doesn't belong in the Power Mac forum, BTW.

<Ballista> ...off to the software forum! </Ballista>

thePurpleGiant · Jul 19, 2004, 02:18 AM

Yes, but I wouldn't bother with any games released in the past 5 years, simply because they will run too slowly.

Oh, and

Ω · Jul 19, 2004, 02:21 AM

I have no issues playing minesweeper and spider.

-Q- · Jul 19, 2004, 10:03 AM

You could probably enjoy those circa Windows 95 games, but not much else.

Millennium · Jul 19, 2004, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by Duffman_108:
I have a question.Can Virtual PC for Mac run all the windows games on it??

Theoretically, yes. VPC emulates very common PC hardware, so that shouldn't be an issue.

However, keep in mind that this is an emulator. Emulators are by definition slower than their native counterparts, and so you'd be running your software as if it were on a slower machine. Don't expect much from Doom 3, for example.

absmiths · Jul 19, 2004, 11:06 AM

I would say no.

The emulator can RUN them, but they can't really be played.

If you really need some good games, buy a Playstation, Game Cube, X-Box (no) or some other console which will play games much better than any Mac or PC.

Macola · Jul 19, 2004, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by absmiths:

If you really need some good games, buy a Playstation, Game Cube, X-Box (no) or some other console which will play games much better than any Mac or PC.

I'm not a gamer, so excuse my ignorance, but I've always wondered why true gamers have this point of view. I don't have a console, but it seems to me that most consoles are hooked up to TVs for display, and that you get pretty crappy resolution on a TV.

Oh, and

Stradlater · Jul 19, 2004, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Macola:
I'm not a gamer, so excuse my ignorance, but I've always wondered why true gamers have this point of view. I don't have a console, but it seems to me that most consoles are hooked up to TVs for display, and that you get pretty crappy resolution on a TV.

Oh, and

I think more gaming companies develop for consoles than computers. Newer HD-ready TVs can also display things in a decent resolution, progressive or interlaced.

Too much shtick.

Millennium · Jul 19, 2004, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by Macola:
I'm not a gamer, so excuse my ignorance, but I've always wondered why true gamers have this point of view. I don't have a console, but it seems to me that most consoles are hooked up to TVs for display, and that you get pretty crappy resolution on a TV.

The resolution on a TV is poor (unless you're using HD), but TV sets are designed around a user who sits much further back from the screen than they would from a computer monitor. That added distance goes a long way toward counteracting the resolution problem.

sushiism · Jul 19, 2004, 05:11 PM

you get much better games for consoles too, F-zero GX is amazing no pc game can top that.

Lateralus · Jul 19, 2004, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by sushiism:
you get much better games for consoles too, F-zero GX is amazing no pc game can top that.

In that genre, perhaps.

But as a strategy and FPS gamer, I feel little attraction to console gaming.

thePurpleGiant · Jul 19, 2004, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
In that genre, perhaps.

But as a strategy and FPS gamer, I feel little attraction to console gaming.

You forgot the

kupan787 · Jul 19, 2004, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
In that genre, perhaps.

But as a strategy and FPS gamer, I feel little attraction to console gaming.

PCs only game genre advantage are in the FPS, RTS, and MMO department. And the last two are really mainly due to the controler vs keyboard. I have had a few good FPS experiences on the console as (Goldeneye being one), but generally this style game is better served on a computer. Basicly it really depends on what kind of games you play.

Chuckit · Jul 19, 2004, 10:24 PM

What's strange to me is that, while most people say PCs are better for FPS games, I've always preferred consoles. Using a mouse and/or keyboard just doesn't feel as direct as holding a controller. The only games I've ever preferred a PC for are ones with a cursor (like the Sim games or WarCraft) and games that involve a lot of typing. Otherwise, PCs aren't fit to lick my PlayStation's boot ROM.

lngtones · Jul 19, 2004, 10:34 PM

I think PCs are better for gaming because you have an entire keyboard to map things to. You can just do so much more then the 5 or 6 buttons on a console controller. Plus using the mouse as an analog device is a lot easier for me than a tiny joystick. Different strokes for different folks though...

Ω · Jul 19, 2004, 11:47 PM

Three posts in a row without a

pdot · Jul 20, 2004, 03:25 AM

I believe the 3D support is no longer there in the latest VPC product. It would be too slow to do any good anyway.

va3uxb · Jul 20, 2004, 09:30 AM

I don't game much (i.e. hardly ever), and the only PC game I ever really truly enjoyed was called Fury3 by M$. (Actually it was a rebranded Terminal Velocity but anyhow...) It was designed for Windows 95, and was released around the same time as Windows 95.

I have VPC 6.1, with Windows 2000 Professional. I also have an original Windows 95 package. VPC is installed on my iMac 17" G4 / 1GHz / 640 MB Ram. In both 2kPro and 95, my poor old Fury3 runs so slow, responds so slow, it is unplayable. This is a game that uses 256 colours at 320 x 240 resolution, built for Win95.

So I would say, yes PC games will 'work' on VPC, but no, they are not really playable.

Solitaire, of course, works fine.

-Stephanie

p.s. If anyone is familiar with Fury3 or Terminal Velocity, and knows of a similar game that works in OS X, I'd really, really like to hear about it!

andretan · Jul 20, 2004, 09:52 AM

Bah. I can't even play my all time favourite classic Betrayal at Krondor on VPC+Win2k on my iBook 700.

And I used to play that game on a 486/33MHz in DOS!

galarneau · Jul 20, 2004, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by andretan:
Bah. I can't even play my all time favourite classic Betrayal at Krondor on VPC+Win2k on my iBook 700.

And I used to play that game on a 486/33MHz in DOS!

Win2k is the problem. Try Win95 or WinNT... or even DOS. DOS runs fine under VPC, you know.

Powerbook · Jul 21, 2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by galarneau:
Win2k is the problem. Try Win95 or WinNT... or even DOS. DOS runs fine under VPC, you know.

Exactly. PC Games I played flawlessly on my Macs*:
- Monkey Island 3
- The Dig
- Command $ Conquer 2 + 3
- Worms
- Commandos 1 + MissionCD
...

Wait with 3D games for VPC7 and new natively supported cards OR get the maximum of a classic VPC machine: G4/1400/VPC3(!) and a VooDoo3 or 4 card (native support in VPC2+3!).
* = G3/400&500/OS9.2/VPC3+4

Regards,
PB.

Duffman_108 · Jul 22, 2004, 01:22 AM

Would battlefield 1942 for pc not mac run fine in VPC and the same for half-life?

andretan · Jul 22, 2004, 03:24 AM

Originally posted by galarneau:
Win2k is the problem. Try Win95 or WinNT... or even DOS. DOS runs fine under VPC, you know.

Where can I even find a copy of DOS now? o_O

Forte · Jul 22, 2004, 03:26 AM

Why not see if it runs in DOSBox ( http://dosbox.sourceforge.net ) before making the effort to track down a copy of your DOS version of choice?

juanvaldes · 05:48 AM

Originally posted by andretan:
Where can I even find a copy of DOS now? o_O

http://www.freedos.org/

I used to play Imperialism 2 fine on a dual 450 G4. But being a turn based game it wasn't an issue if it ran slow (but did run fine)

qnxde · Jul 22, 2004, 05:17 AM

VPC's CPU emulation is actually fairly decent. Decent enough that you can watch MPEG-4 etc inside VPC (on my 1ghz powerbook anyway). VPC 7 will reportably have the ability to allow games to access your 3D card directly, so in theory a good deal of games could be quite playable. I wouldn't try Doom 3 tho...

JKT · Jul 22, 2004, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by Duffman_108:
Would battlefield 1942 for pc not mac run fine in VPC and the same for half-life?

At the moment, not a hope in hell. However, if the rumours about VPC 7 (due in September at present) are true this may change as VPC 7 is supposedly going to support the graphics card for improved 3D performance. IIRC, at present the issue with VPC 6 (and earlier) is that it can't support the graphics card and has to run 3D through the CPU (someone correct me if I am wrong) which is far, far slower.

andretan · Jul 22, 2004, 07:44 AM

Originally posted by Forte:
Why not see if it runs in DOSBox ( http://dosbox.sourceforge.net ) before making the effort to track down a copy of your DOS version of choice?

I just tried installing Betrayal At Krondor and boy, was it slow!

The site lists this game as fully supported, but when I run it, I get this skippy sound.

Any ideas?

Thanks!

absmiths · Jul 22, 2004, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by Powerbook:
G4/1400/VPC3(!) and a VooDoo3 or 4 card (native support in VPC2+3!).
* = G3/400&500/OS9.2/VPC3+4

Why in the world would they have disabled that feature? The hardest part was making it work - which they did - then they kill it? What were they smoking?

Catfish_Man · Jul 22, 2004, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by absmiths:
Why in the world would they have disabled that feature? The hardest part was making it work - which they did - then they kill it? What were they smoking?

I believe some changes (OSX maybe? I can't really remember) made it impossible for them to support it. It'd certainly make a huge difference though. I can't imagine how slow trying to emulate, say, a Radeon 9600 would be.

Powerbook · Jul 23, 2004, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
I believe some changes (OSX maybe? I can't really remember) made it impossible for them to support it. It'd certainly make a huge difference though. I can't imagine how slow trying to emulate, say, a Radeon 9600 would be.

No! This was way before OSX. In fact Connectix said, they were fed up with people complaining about the VooDoo 3D performance (assumed "100% PC emulation"), so they turned attention away from it to bureau work, 2D only. Also (my guess), they would have had the same effort with every new graphic card generation.

Regards,
PB.

Forte · Jul 23, 2004, 06:46 PM

Originally posted by andretan:
I just tried installing Betrayal At Krondor and boy, was it slow!

The site lists this game as fully supported, but when I run it, I get this skippy sound.

Any ideas?

Thanks!

Try dinking around with the settings a bit (both in the game itself, and the emulator as well). IIRC, there's a way to set the emulated CPU cycles to be faster (I can't quite bring it to memory right now, for some reason, though, lol)... ^^; HTH.

Big Mac · Jul 24, 2004, 05:35 AM

This thread, with its original posts, is perhaps the funniest one I have ever seen on the forums. ROFL