anywhere ...video gamesmy video gamescompaniesgroups / tagsforum 
New platforms discussion thread
all news tags bugs suggestions help forum search
teran01
2016-10-30 (updated 2016-12-28) #
[Edit: Renamed thread to more general theme, also update my own list in a way similar to Zerothis did]
Now that we UVL moderators can edit and add platforms it is a good moment to start thinking about necessary updates to the platform list. Newly added platforms can not be deleted, so they should be discussed first.
As soon as we have a clear agreement amongst the regular moderators/editors of whether to add or how to handle platforms it should be implemented.
RISC OS:
Not sure about it. We do have the Archimedes (the first RISC OS system?) as own platform. So is the RISC OS platform meant for all PCs that are not an Archimedes and run with a version of RISC OS?
Should be made more clear in the platform description that this platform is also for games running under Win1.0 - 3.0. Basically for everything running under a pre Win95 Windows.
Amstrad PCW: Should be added [DONE]
Tatung Einstein: Should be added [DONE]
Memotech MTX: Should be added [DONE]
Camputers Lynx: Should be added [DONE]
Exidy Sorcerer: Should be added [DONE]
Ouya: Should be added. [DONE]
Linux/Unix: Should be splitted [DONE]
Nascom: Should be added [DONE]
Coleco Adam: Should be added [DONE]
Macintosh: Split [DONE]
NEC PC-8001: Should be added [DONE]
... to be continued...
I do not think splitting _normal_ GNU/Linux distros is a good idea. Perhaps steps should be taken to specifically prevent Linux Distro spitting by editors. Ubuntu, SteamOS, Redhat, Debian, Fedora, Sabanyon, Slackware, Slax, Puppy, Suse, Mandrake Mandriva, ALT Linux Sisyphus, Arch, Caldera, CentOS, Corel LinuxOS, Familiar Project, Gentoo Linux, Knoppix, Lindows, Pardus, PCLinuxOS, Trsiquel, PLD Linux, VLOS Linux, and any other disros can co-exits nicely in this platform. I also think all architectures of Linux distros can co-exits here. Linux-centric and GNU-centric alternative kernels (Hurd, L4) can also go here as they are drop-in replacement kernels (Much like PTS-DOS, DR-DOS, Novell DOS, Caldera DOS, 86-DOS, 4DOS, can be used as drop-in replacements for MS-DOS and there games all fit in the DOS platform)
[SPLIT]
Editors: What to do about specialized distros for platforms we already have? DS Linux, WiiLi, Gamecube Linux, Palm Treo Linux, PSP Linux. As I've stated before, I think, these belong in their existing platforms with distro tags. DS Linux games in the Nintendo DS platform, WiiLi in the Wii platform, etc...
EDIT: Note that any game written 'the only correct way' :) can be compiled for a specialist Linux just as if it were for Windows, Mac, Amiga, Android, or some other 'normal' platform. Provided that all it's dependencies can be all.
Clearly UNIX operating systems of the "Single UNIX Specification" that hold no other distinction can share a single Platform (separate from BSDs and Linuxum)
AIX, SCO UNIX, AT&T UNIX, UNIX (generic), Bell Labs UNIX, Tru64, HP-UX, and another other SUSs that show themselves.
[DONEish]
Solaris, while being UNIX is distinguished by certain hardwares and use by certain revolutionary French game developers. SunOS 5.0+ is Solaris (tag Solaris even if it is for SunOS 5.0)
The original UNIX replacement.
BSD (generic), OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, BSDi4, SunOS (versions 1.0 to 4.1.4), and any others.
FreeBSD[15.384615384615385%] I found a complete list of current FreeBSD games with release dates and licenses. I'm entering it whilst checking it against many incomplete lists.
BSD I've only found extremely partial lists so far.
BSDi4 no lists found.
NetBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.
OpenBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.
SunOS no lists found.
IRIX is UNIX and BSD mixed. It is also and SGI MIPS specific.
RISC OS. Ten games entered currently, but there's many more out there. EDIT 3: Discussion needed.
Minix. It's neither Linux nor UNIX. A Unique operating system unto itself. [DONE]
NeXTstep is complicated.
NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody share many aspects. However, it should be noted that NeXT split OpenStep development and end-user software from the various NeXTstep hardwares (separated head from body, so to speak) to create a cross-platform operating system (or more accurately a platform agnostic operating system or even cross-kernel operating system). Sort of Java like (Java came later, from many of the same people). Still, Many games and tools run on both. OpenStep became Rhapsody (it can be thought of as OpenStep version 5). Rhapsody eventually became Mac OS X Server 1.0. However, I don't think anything Mac should share the NeXTstep platform. If it did, then OpenStep would too. That's a problem because OpenStep runs on Solaris, NeXT, iOS, HP PA-RISC, Mac (old, classic, and new), and Windows NT. GnuStep has an even wider range including Linux.
GnuStep is based on publicly available code and APIs from OpenStep
Cocoa is a descendant of OpenStep
There are various sources that say "OpenStep is not compatible with NextStep in either direction". Yet, the same executable for many games and software will run on both and some even on Rhapsody. That said, "block box" games (NeXTstep on NeXT hardware) must be recompiled to add OpenStep compatibility. OpenStep games can be compile from the get go for OpenStep and "black box". GnuStep games generally compile without code modification on Rhapsody.
NeXTStep is by NeXT Inc.
NextStep is the licensed version (IBM NextStep for example).
NeXTSTEP is Sun's version
OPENSTEP is Apple's version.
SHORT: NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody, same platform, NeXTstep. Each tagged specifically for platform and kernel and architecture compatibility)
[DONE for now]
Pandora. It's a Linux, but very hardware specific.
NASCOM home computer kits ("NASCOM"). Not sure of the variants, but people have reported Frankenstein all sorts of parts among the various models (parts noted by NASCOM for _only_ model such) to add compatibility of other models without sacrificing compatibility of the original model. Sounds completely interchangeable to me, thus, only a single NASCOM platform needed. I lean towards adding now
[DONE]
HP 3000/e3000 series. A very, very long lived platform. 35 years! Thus a high potential for many more games than the 29 entered.
Apple ///. I actually expect about 99 games exist for this. Entirely different animal from Apple ][.
Apple I. I don't think add at this time. I suspect that Apple I games are 100% compatible with Apple ][, so just tag in Apple ][. calling the platform "Apple ][ series" has been mentioned before by me (and solves //c, ][e, ][enhanced, ][plus, and all the variants).
These platforms have fewer than 10 games each and I don't expect more than 12 to be discovered ever.
AtheOS / Syllable OS
SkyOS
QNX/Q-nix
OpenVMS/VMS
GECOS/GCOS (1 game, Space Travel)
TX-0 (3 games period, however it's still running therefore new games are not impossible. The games are very impressive for 1959) New Platform: TX-0 https://archive.org/details/MainFram1984
Data General Eclipse (1 game, Colossal cave)
NIMROD platform (1 game, NIMROD)
PDP-11
AROS. Amiga 3.1 alternative; thus doesn't really work in the Amiga platform.
MorphOS/Quark. Amiga compatible. Leave it in Amiga? Note there are games with Amiga and MorphOS versions so It's kinda prone to split.
PDP-7
PDP-11-45
GE-600.
I'll leave Windows Phone/Mobile to a later thread
I'll leave all other mobile platforms to a later thread
Timex Sinclair TS 1000 & TS 1500.
Data General Nova minicomputer
HP 1000 and 2000 and HP 1000 minicomputer series. I'll clean this mess anyhow, but a single platform for this series seems best. I don't recall HP 2645 at the moment, I'll get back to this later. EDIT: I've looked into the HP 1000/2000 situation and IT IS A MONSTER OF A MESS to sort out. For one thing, they are not all named 1xxx and 2xxx. But the good news is, there seems to be one common platform there that is not HP 3000 nor HP 9000. HP 4000, 6000, 7000, 8000 are IBM-compatibles, HP 5000 is gameless (Lord willing). Also, this series was introduced in 1969 and continued to have units manufactured until 1990 (in the form of clones)! The clones were produced in Poland and Czechoslovakia where they still are still producing new Atari 8-bit games so why not new games for HP 1000? EDIT 2: Actually, HP manufactured new units as late as 1992.
Scientific Data Systems Sigma 7
Matra Alice compatible. Discussed in forum
Ohio Scientific, Ohio Scientific Challenger II, and Ohio Scientific Challenger I+ An all-in-one Ohio Scientific platform seem sufficient to me.
Colleco ADAM Discussed [DONE]
Timex Sinclair 2068
Tandy mess discussed and in forum
Xerox Parc Alto microcomputer
Heath H-89
Amstrad PCW I say we add now [DONE]
Memotech MTX I say we add now [DONE]
Tatung Einstein. I say we add now [DONE]
Camputers Lynx. I say we add now [DONE]
Ouya Platform. I say we add now [DONE]
Exidy Sorcerer. I say we add now [DONE]
2016-11-01 #
I'm not sure there's significant number of BSD-only games that aren't also for Linux. Unix-specific games are mostly relevant from historical perspective even if the platform didn't have many of them. I heartily agree that vast majority of Linux distros should Not be their own platforms.
Mac needs to be split into classic Mac and OS X. The two are about as different as Windows 3.1 and Windows 10.
significant number of BSD-only games[...]historical
. A significant number, no. But each of them is significant. Games like Ogre that are proprietary and legally can't be ported and the authors cannot be consulted (dead in many cases). Games like this influenced the industry and will only ever exist on BSD. It may have clones on other systems, it may even have been illegally ported, but to leave them out of their place history is to damage history. Lets not be unaware that, while GNU/Linux is meant to be a UNIX alternative, so was BSD. BSD was a completely separate effort to have UNIX without closed source. Linux wasn't even intended to do this, not until the GNU people got a hold if it.
I disagree, they as different as Windows 3.1 and Amiga OS 4:) Yes, I say we split OS X and Classic now. But we should not forget that there are over1500 games that are currently not marked as OS X or Classic. Split them by year or lump them into one; either way, each will have to be manually verified as to which it belongs. EDIT: And what about FAT binary games?
EDIT 2 A new relation is needed inseparate from. FAT binary games can be tagged fatbinary and exist as two entries (one in Mac OS Classic and the other in Mac OS X) that are related "inseparate from" each other. This relation is also useful for Mac/Windows hybrid CDs and "flippy disks".
I am going to add these platform now.
Tatung Einstein
Exidy Sorcerer
Done. Feel free to migrate the formerly tagged games under temporary platforms to the new platforms.
RISC OS. Ten games entered currently, but there's many more out there.
OK, I've investigated and it seems RISC OS is a bit more complicated than I realized.
RISC OS was bundled with the original Acorn Archimedes and was included or a dual-boot option for the every Archimedes model (there's more than two). Archimedes machines need not run RISC OS (the same as IBM-Compatibles are not limited to DOS and Windows). But RISC OS was compiled for many other computers besides those. Also, the source code was forked twice and three different groups now maintain their own fork; Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd. and Castle Technology RISC OS Open
Acorn Risc PC 1987 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn A7000 1995 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn A7000+ 1995 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn Phoebe 1998 (Acorn RISC OS)
MicroDigital Medi 1998 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd.)
MicroDigital Mico 1999 (RISCOS Ltd.)
RiscStation R7500 1999 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Castle Kinetic RiscPC 2000 (RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
MicroDigital Omega 2003 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Advantage Six A75 2004 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Iyonix PC 2002 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Advantage Six A9 (RISCOS Ltd.)
BeagleBoard 2008 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Always Innovating Touch Book 2009 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Pandora 2010 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
PandaBoard 2011 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Raspberry Pi (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
ARMX6 2015 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Titanium 2015 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
With very few exceptions, games must be ported or initially written to run natively on each hardware and each fork of RISC OS. In many cases it is a matter of trivial source code changes (so patches/hacks could probably accomplish this for any unported and proprietary games)
re: New platforms discussion thread
I never heard about specialized distros like DS Linux before. Does it mean you can theoretically play normal Linux games on a DS?
Yes, if an application is written in the only correct way :) and the necessary dependences are also available for the hardware, then it will compile for a specialist Linux distro like DS Linux, GameCube Linux, Pandora, etc. But it will also compile for Windows, Mac, Amiga, Android and such, as well (we are not lumping those in with Linux). First, note that it is usually dependencies that initially block ports. SDL, OpenGL, Wwise, Recast, MonoGame, Bullet Physics. Beyond middleware, what format is the content in? Are the graphics bmp, png, jpeg, tiff, SVG? Is the audio mp3, ogg, wav, flac? Are the cutscenes divx, avi, mov, mp4? Port the readers, or convert the content. Is the game written in or does it utilize Gnash or Java? All of these things that games need, have to be ported first. Now when one compiles a Linux game designed for personal computers for DS Linux, major changes are in order; it is rarely just changing architecture code. For instance, there's no hardware keyboard on the DS, it has two screens of reduced size, it has a touchscreen, some units have removable storage while others do not, will the port support link cable multiplayer? . So far I've listed the _easy_ problems. Throw anything at all proprietary into the mix and it get exponentially harder (even for the owner of the proprietary blockers)
UNIX, Solaris, BSD's, IRIX, Minix...
Minix belongs in that line even less than BSD does.
Now this is obscure territory for games. I personally don't have much knowledge about the differences of them all and whether to warrant single platform or not. From a gamer's standpoint it would be enough to have it under one platform (like now with Linux/UNIX) and tag them. Splitting could always be done later when one platform becomes more relevant to gaming. But I think to get them away from Linux platform in a first step.
EDIT: I've also started a rough timeline for UNIX
I'll pass you some basic knowledge to place the importance of UNIX to games. The gaming industry exists because of UNIX gamers. Before Atari, no videogame company experienced any degree of success without having UNIX gamers for employees. UNIX was created for Space Travel, but it is continued use and improvement was driven by Space War. Space War for UNIX lead to Space War for arcades and overall financial success in that arena. Atari was populated with UNIX gamers. Maybe in some alternate universe we owe it all to Apple, but in this universe, UVL exists because of UNIX gamers.
Agreed. As a technical note, Pre95 Windows is 16-bit while Win95 and later is 32-bit (until it goes extinct soon in favor of 64-bit)
Just assuming we would add the following platforms:
- Linux (the one we already have for Linux games, stays basically as is)
- Unix (new platform, games migrated over from current Linux/Unix platform)
- BSD (new platform, games migrated over from current Linux/Unix platform)
- Solaris (new platform, games migrated over from current Linux/Unix platform)
- Minix (new platform, games migrated over from current Linux/Unix platform)
Those are the major platforms with the hightes priority for now I assume?!
Under what platform would we put the rest the "minor" OS you listed? Keep them placed under Linux until their "fate" has been further discussed?
Honestly I have no personal experience with RISC OS or Archimedes. But I get the distinct impression that when programmers say "Archimedes" they mean the original Archimedes operating system (standard on even the later models) and specifically not RISC OS. And likewise, when programmers say "RISC OS", I think they they mean a contemporary version of it on contemporary hardware and not that old "Archimedes" computer that isn't used anymore. I've never seen a programmer say "RISC OS" and "Archimedes" about the same game. They say, "DOS" and "IBM", "Mac" and "68k", even "PS2" and "Linux".
This pages says, "many newly appearing RISC OS games are ports (many hosted on riscos.info), with the occasional original title available from R-Comp's !Store, or a rework of an older BBC Micro or Archimedes game. Many of the ports are relatively processor intensive, and can be impractical on a RiscPC or Iyonix, so a Raspberry Pi 2, Pandaboard, Beagleboard or ARMX6 is required." They actually separate RiscPC and Iyonix from Archimedes (which they group with the BBC Micro!)
Yes, Linux and games without their own platforms should stay for now. New and migrate for Unix, BSD, Solaris, and Minux.
Not sure which you mean by "minor OS". Are you saying everything that's left after Linux, Unix, BSD, Solaris, Minux, and the latest new platforms?. If you mean the 10-or-less, I consider that a question for Andrea. All but one are 'dead platforms' that exist now only as museum pieces and simulators/emulators (in some cases). Unlike say, Apple /// or Commodore 128 which are still being used in peoples homes and small businesses. The 'but one' is TX0; new games for it are unlikely. But unlike the other 9, it is still in operation.
Ok, if no one else brings up arguments against it, I have the following new platforms on my list for a possible weekend platform update:
- Unix
- BSD
- Minix
- Nascom
- Coleco Adam
possible weekend platform update:
It goes against my lazy nature (migrations in my future), but *thumbs up*
Minix [DONE]
Nascom [DONE]
Coleco Adam [DONE]
Unix [DONE] please check for errors
BSD [DONE] please check for errors
Solaris [DONE] please check for errors
Linux, please check for errors
Minix DONE
Nascom DONE
Coleco Adam DONE
Thanks for doing it so promptly!
I think its time to bring up the Macintosh split request again (into Mac Classic and Mac OS). It might be good to get this clarified as soon as possible, because as was said earlier, the migration process will be quite a huge task. Makes it even more important to get it over with as soon as possible.
The Macintosh platform was never much of a point of interest to me personally. I never thought of a split because of two reasons:
1. I don't know of another database that splits it
2. I "fear" that a Macintosh split could ultimately lead to further Windows split requests. And I really don't want to see Win95/98/XP/7/10 splits right now.
Currently there are many more Mac games tagged with classic Mac OS than Mac OS X. Does that mean its better to make the new platform Mac OS X?
My suggested names for the Platforms are "Macintosh Classic" and "Macintosh OS X". That way both start with "M" and are easily found alphabetically in lists, because people won't find it as well under lets say "Classic Macintosh". They expect it under "M".
M is good for Macs. There is actually a later Mac model called "Macintosh Classic" and this phrase is already confusingly used to refer to the original Macintosh. So I think this exact phrase should be avoided.
"OS Classic" is revisionism by Apple. 'Successful' revisionism is one of the 'benefits' of belonging to a cult:) (Mac OS wasn't even named until Mac OS 7.6). I think UVL should use this convention as well.
Macintosh OS Classic
Mac OS Classic
MacOS Classic
MacOSC
Macintosh OS X
Making a new platform for MacOSX is easier, but the bigger issue is what to do for games that are not know which they are for. If MacOSX is the new platform it kinda sets a precedent that unknown OS Mac games go in MacOS Classic. Do we want that? Or should unknowns go in MacOS X? Note that editors who do not tag for OS will be creating many untagged entries for MacOSX games as they are released.
Personally, I think MacOSX should be the new platform, the platform pages should have a guide (year range, arch, screen size, etc) and unknowns going to MacOSC.
As I examine more superfineprint tucked away obscurely in an unnumbered, unindexed, non-technical section of Mac game manuals, I increasingly see actual system specs that do not mention RAM, CPU, resolution, disk space, system software or anything else that useful. Rather they refer to case size, case shape, case type, screen size in inches. Slim, all-in-one, square, handles, unibody, flat, aluminum, luggable, desktop, box, dome, stacked, curved, top logo, side-by-side, vents on top, tower, single-handle, cylindrical, portable, front logo, butterfly. I suppose if I had a butterfly Mac then I would know what that meant. But since I don't have one, this must be forbidden knowledge. It is becoming slightly more acceptable to show Mac system requirements in a wider range of places (including where they are supposed to be) as time passes.
EDIT: another precious gem to add to the Mac system requirements collection from a game initially ported in 2000 (near certainty OS classic) and republished in 2003 with these system requirements:
MAC only
also, an OS X only game released in January 2001 claims
Mac OS v.2.0
They can't mean OS X 10.2 because it wasn't event _announced_ until May 6, 2002. 10.1 wasn't announced until July. In fact, I'm pretty sure there wasn't even a 10.0 at that point; OS X was in public beta until March (2 months after this game's release).
90MHz Power PC I don't know macs at all.
At least the writer is honest.
EDIT: I've solved the mystery of the Butterfly Mac. The opposite of butterfly is scissor of course, Apple says so. This is in reference to the butterfly mechanism used in the keyboard that eliminates key wobble and allows users to press anywhere on the key to get the same result and feel as pressing on the center (doesn't that make it easier to press multiple keys on accident with realizing it?). It also allows both the keys and the keyboard to be thinner but still have a deep stroke and a deep concave surface. And according to some publishers, this feature is a system requirement (their game is not supported if your using a scissor keyboard).
sets a precedent that unknown OS Mac games go in MacOS Classic. Do we want that?
This problem already exists with MegaCD and similar extension peripherals existing as separate platforms.
Also I vote for Mac OS X as long name and OSX as short name. Macintosh has not been part of the platform name in a very long time. Though with quick search I came up with the result that OS X is now named macOS (www.apple.com/macos/) so confusion with the old platform is going to happen regardless of what we do.
Temple OS
I think we should add Temple OS.
Temple OS is about as political and cultish as an OS can be. It is not (seemingly) designed to be practical, powerful, profitable, flashy, or cool. It seems to me it would make a good non-gui developer's tool (one of his videos shows two apps being debugged simultaneously, which he doesn't mention, as if that was just to be taken for granted), a good education tool and a good bootloader for OSless applications. But it is also not designed to be a user's only OS. It "commanded" to be a dual-boot OS ("Windows or Linux", Apple OSes are mentioned only in response to questions and the answer is "VMware"). It is designed to be simple. Users are encouraged to program, tinker, and break everything. It is inspired by the Commodore 64 experience. Where one could literately learn everything about their computer by buying it and studying it (the manual had an extensive map of every chip, memory, and port and no attempts to obscure *anything* about the hardware or software were made and it was not easy to break the law by studying it). The goal is to keep it under 100,000 lines of code. Outside libraries are banned. Yes, "banned"; as TempleOS is open source and public domain, that is a religious commandment rather than a licensing restriction. There will be no arguments with lawyers, any disputes concerning TempleOS must be settle with God. It is written in C/C++, scripts are C/C++, the command line is C/C++, etc... Ring 0 access at all times. Everything compiles, no interpretations. No Paging (64-bit memory access to all available memory even beyond 4GB). PCI, hard drives, drivers are avoided. It is 2D/3D VGA 640x480 ONLY. Togging between 8-bit ASCII/alphabet character sets only, no UTF. No BMP, all images are GR graphics 8-bits-per-pixel, 4-bits of color, no palette. Uses only TempleOS LZW for compression. It uses only the RedSea file system or FAT32 when necessary. No external resource files, graphics are done in code; non-text and interactive elements are done in-document.
I found about 31 games for it
Game physics and other game functions are designed into the kernel. It's more metal than Metal; no need for middleware (it is "banned"). Uses PC Speaker or any PCI sound card for sound (again, no middleware). Joysticks and gamepads are to be mapped through the already existing inputs (keyboard and mouse). It already has support for 9-pin Commodore joysticks (MegaDrive, Atari, and many other vintage 8-bit systems controllers will work or should be an easy mod)
Designed by Dianna Cowern Terry Davis (male). Here are some quotes:
Turns out Dianna Cowern is an alias of Terry Davis. Well, he is schizophrenic, so...
"TempleOS is, literally, more simple than necessary. It is
obnoxiously simple... to the point it hurts."
"Japan, China and Korea must switch to alphabets.
Maybe, the United States will change to metric, out of good will."
"I didn't start the operating system as a work for God, but He directed my path along the way and kept saying it was His temple."
"I have
divine authority to command any company in the computer industry to do anything
that I deem necessary to make God's temple more beautiful, glorious and perfect."
I detect no hint of insincerity in his discourse. He seems to be the real deal, not sarcastic, and a bit scary. Dig deep enough and find something to scare everyone. Warning to the politically correct crowd, there is no word on earth that this man fears. Despite evidence to the contrary, Terry Davis is a 46 year old (2016) successful but now retired industry professional. He is an unapologetic fan of all things videogame including in-game violence, "it's just that there is a good-hearted and a bad-hearted way to do it". Oh, and he's diagnosed as schizophrenic. And he's a really nice guy
Press F7 at anytime to prompt any application speak in tongues (not a joke, this is a serious feature).
Press Shift-F7 at anytime to prompt any application to quote the Holy Bible or, rarely, print a politically charged rhetoric.
EDIT: Terry Davis died in 2018. His family unequivocally confirmed that all of his operating systems and code are Public Domain
source: www.templeos.org/
New platform for Mac OS X was created. Feel free to migrate the OSX games over to the new platform. The tags for the exact minimum OS version are meant to stay I guess?
The tags for the exact minimum OS version are meant to stay I guess?
Yes, I think all tags should stay, including bare osx and osclassic. Because the publisher may support running on the other OS and because of FAT binaries, PEF executables, and Carbon (three options that allow running on both OSes).
Side note: "universal binary" is a trademark and not a technical term. Apple owns and authorizes use based on terms that fluctuate and include political as well as technical requirements ("FAT binary" and "Universal Binary" are not equivalent). I don't think Universal Binary should ever be tagged (like morphmation and blast processing).
dandyboh
It seems that many Colecovision games are gone now that they have bee moved to Coleco Adam. And I think that many of these games still have images, descriptions, ratings, etc... that are linked to the Colecovision version of the game, not the Coleco Adam. For example, Donkey Kong. The game was released on both platforms but the screenshots and reviews here are for the Colecovision version of the game.
I think that the "Coleco Adam" tag was added to a Colecovision game if it was released on both platforms, or if it was released only on Coleco Adam. I'm not sure.
With some luck it only happened to Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. At least on the first look at the current Coleco Adam games there are no other obvious candidates. But of course I am not sure.
Thanks, I said "many" but I don't really know... notice that for these two DK games, didn't look further, so I (badly) assumed there were others.
I (badly) assumed there were others.
Thats it! I'm taking my toys and going home. Oh, wait, I am home, playing with my toys. nevermind.
Thanks for spotting the error.
I cloned both DK games, and I investigated further in the ColecoVision / Adam games... corrected a few Adam games still under ColecoVision platform, but not many of them.
NIMROD (currently under PDP1): I would place it under "custom" platform, because from my understand its only purpose was to run the game.
I would like to bring up that Mac OS X is officially named simply macOS now, so our naming of it as OS X is "confusing" to those who're actually on the platform, even though OS X is much more distinct name over the classic Macs (this problem is also with Xbox One). I think the short name can remain OSX but the full name probably should match the current official one. And somehow have a synonym for Mac OS X but I don't know how synonyms work with platform names currently.
I don't think we should waste to much time keeping up with revisionisms from any company. Many sources of information still say "OS X" (or "OSX") in reference to Sierra (10.12 and 10.12.1) including apple.com and Steam. Apple users must make sense of Apple's convoluted and mutating terms to remain customers so I think they will understand "OS X" for years to come. And as history looks back at the platform I'm sure "OS X" will include 10.12 to 10.18
It still should have macOS as synonym so it can be found with that name, but I don't know how or where to enter that for platforms.
AndreaD
Platforms lack a synonyms feature like groups and companies ...
Adding to the to-do list...
It could also be used for listing clone platforms that might be widely known in some parts of the world. Though more importantly it would make Mega Drive (Genesis), SNES (スーパーファミコン, Super Famicom), etc. more accessible globally.
What about adding the View-Master Interactive Vision ?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View-Master_Interactive_Vision
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View-Master_Interactive_Vision
Never heard or seen this before. Sounds to be a legit platform. Youtube has some nice videos of some of its games, which were very few. Would like to see a 100% platform completion for that one. Seems to be possible.
I was just reading on VHS based consoles. I actually own an Action Max. I didn't realise NEMO made it to prototype stage. Yes, VHS based consoles should be added including viewmaster.
There were VHS drives for personal computers as well. Certainly must be games as well (media-videotape)
Processor Technology Corporation Sol-20
8080 CPU, s-100 bus (expandable). Also Sol-10 and Sol-PC variants. The Sol-10 had no s-100 expandability and the Sol-PC was a singleboard Sol-10. "PC" stands for Personal Computer and this was the first actual digital personal computer to ever be named a PC (there's a "Pastoriza Personal Analog Computer" that predates it). From now on when a game creator tells me a game is for PC only, I will ask them "why would release only for Processor Technology Corporation Sol-PC. Or did you mean it is Pastoriza only?"
The Mac split has been dealt with. But not perfectly
Some of that is difficult when the dev/publisher doesn't provide the missing information. Like if you look at 1Quest, it's itch.io page says it's for Mac/Win, and that's all it says, no system requirements of any kind.
Did you read my "Mac system requirements are like genitals" and "mystery of the Butterfly Mac" rants above?
Not particularly.
Anyway, I'm unsure if Windows platform should be split into the current one (technically WinPE) and UWP, because UWP games are as far as I know impossible to play on pre-Windows 10 machines, though I haven't investigated. Win10 still supports the old WinPE format of course, so it's kinda metaplatform (but then Java is such as well, since it requires Another platform that has compatible Java runtime available). I personally have Zero interest in looking up UWP games since they're Windows Store exclusive.
From the sound of it, Microsoft misnamed yet another thing of theirs. Shouldn't it be called MWP (Mono Windows Platform)?
It runs on Windows desktops, mobile phones, tablets, and I think it's possibly also compatible with Xbox One (probably not). So it's universal in their own little microcosmos, which is IMO fine for naming. Not to mention it's Universal Windows Platform, not Universal Platform.