Keeping the classics alive... together
https://classicdosgames.com/forum/
Is it any different from the other demo versions except that? If not, is it the three-level one or the Egyptian one-level demo?leilei wrote:I've also found a January 1997 Chasm demo (1.28) - this demo doesn't beep on startup.
Temporary wrote:So, to wit: there are no less than six distinct "versions" of Warcraft: Orcs and Humans (not counting the various updates). These are--in order--the initial two (2) very slightly different "pre-release demos", which were not playable and consisted of Bill Roper's narration on top of images of gameplay, the two retail demos (the first and earlier of which at times goes by the name 'Interplay Demo', as it was meant to be exclusively distributed by Interplay Corp, and even shamelessly plugs the company any chance it gets), the floppy version of the retail game, and finally the CD version of the retail game. All playable demos report themselves as version 1.12, even though there are many differences between the versions (the so-called 'Interplay Demo' contains data for the Orcish hero Klaron, for instance). The retail CD release however reports itself as "version 1.22", which is merely a cosmetic difference; the CD version itself is identical to version 1.21. The final, downloadable patch updates the game to 1.21, so it is not to be used on the CD retail release.
I've also told the guy about the Warcraft Alpha Screenshots thread at BetaArchive Forums, here's his comments on the alpha screenshots:Temporary wrote:The "non-interactive demo" is the same as the media distributed in issue five of Interactive Entertainment, only packaged as a self-playing file. The two first "demos" of the game are those; the media folder, and a self-playing version of it. (Treat them as one, add the two early pre-release demos and the demo Blizzard had on their FTP and you get a grand total of four.) If you are aware of any video version of IE's distro, I would be happy to know, too. In any case, the demo was supposed to be shown at the last summer CES 1994 in Chicago (before CES became a winter-only event), but I am unaware of it being shown there. It might have been; Blizzard did not exactly have a major presence there.
Temporary wrote:Regarding the linkage, the alpha screenshots in the first posts are not exactly correctly captioned. To wit; examine the first screenshot in the "Alpha Stage 2" section, and compare it to the screenshot captioned "Alpha Stage 3", and you can see they are in fact the same screenshot only with a different side panel, and three Warlocks plus a Knight added for good measure. In addition, the "Alpha Stage 1" screenshot is the same as the first "Alpha Stage 1.5" screenshot, only with different building graphics. Most of the screenshots in Hallfiry's post are presentation mock-ups. These mock-ups were created throughout the early phase in production for a variety of purposes; some were created for magazines, for reviewers and such, some for presentations, and some were simply for internal, in-house use. There were, in fact, no such versions as "Stage 1", or "Stage 2", or any other stage either. I have not seen a single actual screenshot with the non-isometric building graphics; they have all been mock-ups created to show the then-intended graphics.
The isometric graphics, of course, were then later created by 3D software--if I am not mistaken it was Animator by Autodesk (hence the FLC animation files), and Warcraft 2 used an early version of 3DSMax, if I recall correctly--and resampled/resized to fit the 320x200 canvas. You can see the 3D resampling at work in the screenshots in Hallfiry's post; if you take a look at the screenshot with the purple trees (the same image is on the back of every Warcraft retail box), you can see the Orcish farm's 3D model rendered from a slightly different angle. This camera repositioning can be seen in other screenshots, too, but there are relatively few screenshots available from this period in development, and none of the other ones' are in Hallfiry's post. (As an aside, the purple trees are probably due to Ron Millar's insistence on having very colorful GFX in the game. He insisted the game should be very colorful in contrast to the rather dreary, black and shadowy GFX that seemed to be all the rage back in the day.)
I was confused by the fact that the pack is listed under the files that require the registered version to run. I also did not realize that the levels were made by Tom Hall, somehow I thought that the levels were made in-house by Lasersoft.Joe Siegler wrote:All 6 levels were designed by Tom Hall, and you can use these either on your registered Rise of the Triad game, or on the shareware edition. The other levels in these level packs are the existing shareware levels - these extras are in addition to the shareware levels that are already in your game.
DragonsLover wrote:Here are the first 4 levels:
The HUNT Begins
Prelude to a Kill
Jumpin' Jehoshaphat
GADZOOKS!
You know what's funny? This demo was published on the May 1996 issue CD, right? (I'm using Hallfiry's CD database to get info.) And the full v1.1 was published on the cover CD of the next issue of the magazine. However, v1.3d already came out in April 1996, according to the date stamps and the info here on the Duke Nukem 3D page. I wonder why they didn't publish v1.3d straight away in the June 1996 issue?Litude wrote:3D Realms
Duke Nukem 3D
Found a Computer Gaming World exclusive one level demo version of Duke Nukem 3D. No idea why it was produced since the shareware version had already been released.
CGW 1-Level Demo Version 1.1 - Files
DOSGuy, if you have doubts about the authenticity or completeness of this installer package, you can compare it to the demo of Iron Seed, which was also developed by Channel 7 (apparently, In Pursuit of Greed changed the developer at some point or something, but it's easily noticeable that the shape of the cursor is very similar in both games, and both feature music by Andrew Sega).MrFlibble wrote:Here's another demo of In Pursuit of Greed, this time it's an early one, from 1995:
http://cd.textfiles.com/pcgamer/pcgamer014/GREEDEMO/
The installer identifies this as v2.0.
There are actually two different versions of the LaserSoft build. They are both called version 1.3 but the earlier one still calls the build shareware version in some places while the later one has been updated to refer to it as special version. Here's my ROTT change log, though it is lacking especially in the differences between the LaserSoft 1.3 build and the normal 1.3 build and 1.0 to 1.1 changes section.MrFlibble wrote:BTW, Litude, since you apparently own an original Deluxe Edition CD, can you tell what version number it reports? Also, does it have any other differences, maybe ordering information screens etc. etc.?
Oh, and one more thing, are the extra single-player levels warp-only, or do they work as regular levels in the CD release? PsychedelicSA's review describes them as warp-only, but this post suggests that they are regular levels inserted right after The HUNT Begins:DragonsLover wrote:Here are the first 4 levels:
The HUNT Begins
Prelude to a Kill
Jumpin' Jehoshaphat
GADZOOKS!
Computer Gaming World like many other magazines in the USA has/had this weird practice where the current issue of the magazine had the name of the following month or even the month after that (I guess to make it sound very new and have potential sales for the following two to three months). Adding that to the fact that the magazine cover CD probably needs its content finished at least a week or two before the magazine gets published explains why they couldn't release 1.3d on the magazine in the June issue.MrFlibble wrote:You know what's funny? This demo was published on the May 1996 issue CD, right? (I'm using Hallfiry's CD database to get info.) And the full v1.1 was published on the cover CD of the next issue of the magazine. However, v1.3d already came out in April 1996, according to the date stamps and the info here on the Duke Nukem 3D page. I wonder why they didn't publish v1.3d straight away in the June 1996 issue?
Thanks for the info! I've noticed that the date/time stamp on the level files in the LASRROTT.ZIP package indicates the time as 1:31, suggesting that this was a special v1.31 (?). However, the date on these files is May 25, 1995, although the regular shareware v1.3 that I have (from Apogee's website) has August 1, 1995 as their modify date. But then again, this is the repackaged relese with the new installer, maybe they changed the original date for some reason.Litude wrote:There are actually two different versions of the LaserSoft build. They are both called version 1.3 but the earlier one still calls the build shareware version in some places while the later one has been updated to refer to it as special version. Here's my ROTT change log, though it is lacking especially in the differences between the LaserSoft 1.3 build and the normal 1.3 build and 1.0 to 1.1 changes section.
The exclusive levels are added after the first level just like mentioned in that quote. After that the level progression proceeds as normal.
Ah, right you are! I didn't think of that obvious explanation.Litude wrote:Computer Gaming World like many other magazines in the USA has/had this weird practice where the current issue of the magazine had the name of the following month or even the month after that (I guess to make it sound very new and have potential sales for the following two to three months). Adding that to the fact that the magazine cover CD probably needs its content finished at least a week or two before the magazine gets published explains why they couldn't release 1.3d on the magazine in the June issue.
Yeah I got it from there (the download link is linked there). I don't think it is the original distribution either, but considering it's a file mainly distributed only in Australia I think it's going to be quite the task trying to find the original distribution. From what I remember when looking into the game, CYBERKID.EXE was actually the original distribution of the Cyril Cyberpunk.DOSGuy wrote:Did you get it from http://cd.textfiles.com/moonshine7/MOON ... DE/CYBKID/? I downloaded the install.exe and install.cfg from that folder. It's a customizable installer that's included in every game folder on the CD, and it mentions that you can type "go" (because it creates the go.bat file) when you're done. Suffice it say that I don't think this is how the game was originally distributed by Reality Studios.
Code: Select all
* The current version of the game is v1.1. There was a v1.0, but it was not
an official Apogee release. v1.0 of Wacky Wheels was released in the UK
only, on a cover disk. It does bear the Apogee name, but it is not an
"official" Apogee disk. While it's not illegal, Apogee strongly recommends
against using this version, since the game was not completed. The next
version will be v1.2. We do not know when this will be released; however
late November is a good guess at this time.Code: Select all
Note: This is the first release of this software. There was never a v1.0
released by Apogee in the US. If you see a version that claims to be
v1.0, ignore it, as it's not an official Apogee release, and obtain this
official first release of the software (which is v1.1).
) but it seems it's just not anywhere to be found anymore. But I don't see any reason why Joe Siegler would lie straight to our faces so it was probably out there back in the day.