EAW devellopment needs help

[VonBeerhofen 63]

from pilots who can give an honoust opinion about things which aren't working properly or problems which occur during their games. I don't mean personal issues about not liking skies or shadows, or even plane or ground models, terrainsets or effects. These are no real issues and can be changed anytime by anyone who feels he can do better, with programs as mspaint, photoshop, gimp, etc. After all these are just drawings created by people like me who initially didn't have many skills in creating such drawings.

The real problems are when the game stops working or when selections with particular programs don't give the required results or are to cumbersome to use. What I'm saying is that without your help we can not improve things and we're unable to test on our own machines because there are too many factors and problems which relate to hardware, OS and the way EAW was initially programmed in 1998 when XP, VISTA, Win7 and current hardware devellopments were not known.

It's your feedback that helps progress EAW's devellopment and not knowing about the issues you encounter nothing will happen in solving them. Due to such feedback many problems were identified but many still remain unsolved, which is to be expected with a game from 1998. There isn't always an immediate solution, but a lot of problems which may only need a minor adjustment are understood today, but if you don't ask for help you won't get any.

Sure enough there will always be issues to which I and others may not have answer (yet), but when these problems aren't discussed or mentioned things will not change. I hope you also understand that when there is currently no cure for your problem, the issues are being noted and may already have been identified as a recent problem for which there's no cure at present. That doesn't mean that people aren't trying to solve the issue, but solving problems can be pretty timeconsuming.

EAW is still progressing, so don't give up hope for a cure, some people are still trying to work it out and come up with a fix! With zero feedback I can only program new things which will work on my own (obsolete) machine and although that's good enough for me and the people I fly with, I'd like to fix real issues for anyone with an interest in EAWPRO or 1.x derivatives.

VonBeerhofen

[MarkEAW 63]

I thought I already addressed the issues your hinting at in the other thread about needing an additional programmer. So I'm baffled by this new thread of yours.

But.....

We know the main issue is getting the game to run natively without emulation or compatibility workarounds without problems.
But as it stands it runs almost flawlessly with Wrappers and Compatibility Workarounds. these are either applied by us or by Windows OS.
Some work together while other workarounds conflict.

 

[VonBeerhofen 63]

It's not about the other thread Mark. I can't fix the issues you've described in it, but I can fix issues with the addons for v1.2 and setting things up. Many addons were missing files on which there wasn't sufficient knowledge in the days they were created, tools weren't very develloped, not even mentioning the issues related to differences in D3D and Glide behaviour.

For this reason these addons may have worked or not, depending on the system it was running on. Some addons appearently seemed to work untill people dug in deeper and found that there were things that weren't working, because for instance no savedata files were created, mission files were missing or other files which weren't properly understood at the time were edited wrongly. The sharing of information wasn't working very well either and often lacked detail or were written in to cryptic  forms for average users to make sense of.

I'm sorry to say that my personal experience was that I found there to be very few addons which didn't have mayor issues. It's hardly surprising really when you know that to create good working and complete addons would take several people 3 years or more, and many therefore kind of stranded, as people lost interest in fully completing them.

So you see it's not only about fixing hardware issues in the EAW.EXE, it's also about preserving EAW's history and keep it's old addons working, preferrably as intended by their creators. Minor fixes can bring em back to life again. In this respect EAWPRO won't do the job unless these addons are converted, since it's an addon in it's own right, and there's just not enough time for that.  They wouldn't work as intended anyway.

I've been working on a clean v1.2 which can be installed the same way as EAWPRO, add the ZIP to any 1.x version of EAW and use whatever historic addon created at their own risk, including old versions of OAW. In OAW it will require that it's EXE is also replaced, but it should then work as anything else from there on, with or without the wrapper, whatever is required. I feel for many the need is there to stay with the original game, and your website is probably the best location for such a version.

VonBeerhofen

[rotton50 19]

FWIW, we have about a gazillion......no, TWO gazillion add-ons that work flawlessly in 1.6.

[VonBeerhofen 63]

I'm afraid that v1.60 doesn't work on legacy computers with limited resources. It doesn't work on my WinME or XP system. The patched addons do however work flawlessly, inluding OAW, :) The patch is not only very small but easy to install too and provides an alternative to cumbersome upgrades, without altering the game's behaviour in ANY way.

VonBeerhofen

[rotton50 19]

How "legacy" are we talking?

I run EAW 1.6 flawlessly on a 12 year old Dell with Windows Vista and a built in video card using D3DWindower. Truly, nothing fancy.

FWIW, so do A LOT of other players, with units older than mine.

[VonBeerhofen 63]

Does it matter how legacy? Fact is that they can't run v1.60 and that there are probably a large number of players who find themselves in a simmilar situation, or just want to revive their stored versions of EAW. The patch will alow them to do so, irrespective of Operating System.

Possibly a few old time modders will be energised to finish the work they've started, without having to learn new ways. It wouldn't be the first time that oldtimers pick up an old hobby to keep themselves occupied, after all their knowledge doesn't disappear, unless they're struck by Altzheimers or another scary desease.

VonBeerhofen

[VonBeerhofen 63]

The patch is available here:

https://rabartel.home.xs4all.nl/DownLoad/EAWv1.2_NoOS_NoCD.zip

Mark feel free to host and/or edit the contents if you think the ReadMe isn't entirely up to date.

VonBeerhofen

[rotton50 19]

Of course it matters how old the machine is.

Your contention is that players with "old machines" can't play EAW 1.6.

My questions are how old?

386? 486? Pentium I?

What operating system?

Windows 3.1? Windows XP? Windows Vista?

And maybe, what video card?

FWIW, it is a disservice to the community to scare them away from the most advanced version of EAW based what seems to be conjecture.

So, could a standard be developed that states "These are the minimum requirements"? They used to put that right on the game box in the old days. ( maybe they still do but I haven't bought a game since EAW)

We could come up with something similar to that rather than a generic statement that "old machines won't run 1.6". At the very least, since we're trying to keep old players AND entice new players, the general attitude around here SHOULD be "try it and see" not a blanket statement that players won't be able to use it.

Seems only fair to all involved.

[VonBeerhofen 63]

We've been through these questions several times since 2010, I suggest you reread those threads in HQ. They're still the same computers and I hope you'll find the answers to your questions, which are obviously your concern. My concern is those people who have simmilar systems as mine, or lack the knowledge and understanding on how to make their games work with those legacy machines or even newer ones. I hope the patch will get them going again so they can continue playing the game when revisited, the same way they were used to. In that respect v1.60 is totally off topic as it's no longer comparable in any way with v1.2

VBH

[rotton50 19]

All due respect, there are members here who don't not frequent SImHQ so they wouldn't know about those discussions.

In addition, it would require them to search through a myriad of 8 year old posts to find out what we could tell them right here. That is, if we've actually quantified what the minimums were for EAWPro and 1.6, which, far as I know, hasn't been done.

Your comments lead people astray when you insinuate that 1.6 is both complicated to use and a system hog. I can say that it is not complicated to use but I have no idea how much of a hog it is on systems older than my own.

So, how about a more positive approach?

One that encourages members to try out both branches of the EAW world and let them decide for themselves which works best for their enjoyment.

 

 

[VonBeerhofen 63]

I can't be positive about something that doesn't work on my machines. As for the computer specs and visiting old threads in HQ, I doubt wether anyone has any interest in them but you. I recall the same questions being asked about a month or so ago, also in a thread which had nothing to do with v1.60. Why are you repeatedly trying to draw a positive release thread, which may help this community survive, into a negative one. I haven't said anything negative about you or v1.60.

That it's not working is just a fact but further unrelated to the topic of the 1.2 version. You obviously doubt my findings relating to v1.60 as has happened on numerous occasions, but you keep dragging that version into anything I say, at moments which have nothing to do with it. When I then reitterate that it doesn't work you try to turn me into a bad guy which isn't particularly helping with me trying to remain productive for this community.

Can't you be positive for once, if only for those who now have an alternative? I encourage anyone to play the version they like and I don't care which one that is, as I've also said on numerous occasions. Once again v1.60 is totally offtopic here, so are EAWPRO or v1.1a.

1.2 update is released and there's nothing more to be said other then that I hope it will solve some people's issues. I hope that's positive enough for you.

VonBeerhofen

Edited October 12, 2018 by VonBeerhofen

[MarkEAW 63]

Alright VBH. Thanks for explaining to my lack of my understanding.

I'll look at the new 1.2 patch you posted above

 

[Stratos 3,192]

Guys, keep this civilized, I can't see the point of raising the same issue over and over again.

One thing stranges me, If you guys are working on TWO DIFFERENT addons for EAW, while not ignore each other?

[rotton50 19]

Stratos, this has been civilized. There's been no heated rhetoric of any kind, far as I can tell. Certainly not on my part.

My point it pretty simple.

There have been claims made in multiple threads on multiple forums about the inability of the newest version of 1.6 to run on old machines. All I've done is ask for some kind of numbers to back that up. So far it's all just innuendo.

FWIW, I'm not saying it's not true. The 1.6 series has a lot more going on that plain vanilla 1.2 but I know for certain that my 12 year old PC runs it just fine. So the "older machine" claims need better definition, for the greater good of the community.

[VonBeerhofen 63]

I strongly object to the above form of personal attack in a thread which is meant to help this community. This thread holds no threat to any version, in fact there's no mention of any version prior to Rotton's appearance and that goes for simmilar threads in another forum. Perhaps I should be sorry for the low specs of my computer but I'm not, neither should anyone else who can not afford a top of the line machine or is simply trying to hang on to their old machines because they do the required job and it's all they need.

Why would this release or the fact that my computer is incapable of running certain versions of a game have any impact on those versions at all? If it works good then people will be happy campers and stick to their choice, however when it doesn't then people have the right to an alternative, which is what I'm trying to provide.

If people want a cross examination then this is the wrong thread for it, even more so because the answers have long been provided without any further result other then unfounded accusations.

VonBeerhofen

 

Edited October 12, 2018 by VonBeerhofen

[MarkEAW 63]

From my experience, a lot of people prefer the retro look and feel of the original game with the ease of the built in frontend, including the animations in hangers, and the atmospheric sounds and look. Atleast that's what I'm told in e-mail and I also read some posts too.

160 doesn't provide that anymore, but I still I understand the work that's gone into it the gameplay and game data.

Sorry I'm going off topic VBH. I'm sure I know why Rotton wants to always challenge and drag on a null questions all the time. When he was banned at SimHQ it was nice for a month. Now I'm not attacking anybody, I'm just stating the obvious fact.

Edited October 12, 2018 by MarkEAW

[RIBob 39]

While some people maintain elderly computers in order to run older games, it is nevertheless a fact that old machines wear out, and require increasing levels of maintenance in order to continue to function.  At some point, most users will decide that the cost/effort of maintaining an old machine, not to mention an Operating that is no longer supported by the Mfr is not worth the effort, and so will decide to upgrade to a newer computer, and a newer operating system.  It's a fact of life.

The point, as I see it, is to have any given version of the game fully functional on modern machines with modern operating systems.  Any newcomer to the game will probably not have a legacy machine lying around, with an OS convenient for a particular game. 

It is true that modern, Win 10 machines can be configured as Virtual Machines, with any number of older operating systems available.  All it takes is setting it up, selecting the desired OS, and then running it as though the selected OS was the native OS.  This is a bit complex for some people, and it definitely requires a Win10 OS as a basis, access to clean copies of the desired legacy OSs, and a sizeable hard drive that will contain the legacy OSs, as well as everything else. 

I understand that some folks have a vested interest in one version of the game over another.  That's fine, but I don't think it entitles them to attack other people who offer a different version of the game.

 

[MarkEAW 63]

The older machines are kept, because the users are older. They really don't want to spend the money (or time in some cases) to update their computers.

Hell I'm over the hill and I don't really want another computer, I may update mine again, but I really don't want to build a new system again. (but I may some day of course).

[Jel 37]

Quote

From my experience, a lot of people prefer the retro look and feel of the original game with the ease of the built in frontend, including the animations in hangers, and the atmospheric sounds and look. At least that's what I'm told in e-mail and I also read some posts too.

EAWPro meets the requirements of those people quite well. There is no problem if there is only one planeset and theatre.

However, the hangar sounds and sprites are often totally inappropriate for other theatres and planesets, here is an example from the original "Malta":

It was always a PITA to have to make "picplnA/B/G.mnu" files which limited your aircraft selection to set slots, even if there were flyable planes in the "bomber" slots.

Hence, a new system was introduced in which there were only two selection screens, listing either the flyable allied or the flyable axis planes. The option to use the "picpln" files remains in the versions up to and including UAW1.28F - it is just a setting in the "eaw"ini" file.

The hangar screens remained, but at some point the running of hangar sprites and sounds was disabled. to avoid problems such as the one in the screenshot. If you want a game that can cope with multiple theatres and planesets, then this reduction in immersion is the small price you pay for the immense benefits you receive.

Jel

Edited October 13, 2018 by Jel

[VonBeerhofen 63]

Once again, v1.60 has nothing to do with my release of a 1.2 version or the fact that there are people who may not be able to run other versions. It's merely trying to hide the fact that a person is brutally trying to discredit me and my work without any reason, both in this forum and in another.

VonBeerhofen 

Edited October 13, 2018 by VonBeerhofen

[Jel 37]

I do not understand VB. Where has your work been discredited in this thread?

[VonBeerhofen 63]

Don't try and go that route again with me Mr. Jelly. The fact that I'm first told to adapt a more postive attitude when nothing negative was said and the follow up smear campaign to turn me into the bad guy are direct attacks on me and my work and is totally uncalled for. What is innuendo in the fact that v1.60 isn't working on my legacy machine? Do you think I'm lying?

Why do the both of you keep messing up honoust threads which are meant to help the EAW community? Do you think that it will keep people flying EAW or help me devellop my work further? The EAW community is well aware of what's been going on for a very long time now.

I've asked this question in another forum and I will ask it here again, will you and Rotton allow me to do my work in peace or will you keep haunting me with your unfounded accusations whenever I post something of interest?

VonBeerhofen

Edited October 13, 2018 by VonBeerhofen

[Jel 37]

3 hours ago, VonBeerhofen said:

It's merely trying to hide the fact that a person is brutally trying to discredit me and my work

Your words and hence my question. In this thread where has any of your work been discredited?

Actually the opposite is true:

7 hours ago, Jel said:

EAWPro meets the requirements of those people quite well

.... and to clarify my post was a response made by Mark about the retro look and feel

Edited October 13, 2018 by Jel

[rotton50 19]

If you all look dispassionately at the exchanges herein there has been no discrediting of anyone's work.

Everything stated by Jel is correct and my questions about where to draw the line as far as what constitutes an PC that is too old to run 1.6 are cogent to the discussion.

There have been no attacks on anyone's work, only requests for quantifying data and a request that innuendo NOT be used to determine the ability of a player's system to use one of the two main development branches of EAW.

In a normal environment this is called healthy debate and as long as all involved remain respectful, is certainly not inflammatory.

 

 

BTW, to clear up Mark's comment, my ban at SimHQ was an error, fixed with the help of two moderators. It took a couple of weeks to correct because the site Administrator is in a terminal health situation and so of course has other things on his mind.

The correct ban was then enacted on the same guy who's been banned from two different EAW forums five times over a twenty year period.

Also, BTW, take look over there now. A number of comments have cropped up stating how pleasant the forum has become over the past month. Much like the old days of EAW.

So, Stratos, you do have a problem here but it ain't us.