RGB Classic Games Forum

I've always assumed that the release dates of downloadable shareware games followed a convention where all the files would have the same date/time stamp which represents the release date (as the date) and version number (coded as the time, i.e. 1:00:00 PM means v1.0). I think this might be the ASP convention or something because other shareware programmes like RAR also use it.

Anyway, I've noticed that in some cases, the date indicated for an Apogee/3D Realms shareware game does coincide with the date stamp on the files, while in other cases it does not. I have reported it for Blake Stone v2.1 but the same discrepancy can be also observed for other games as well (Shadow Warrior, Raptor etc.). This made me wonder, maybe I got something wrong, and the date stamps are not a reliable source for the release date?

You can set the timestamp to anything you want. Microsoft used to set the time on every file to match the version of the program (i.e. MS-DOS 6.20 has every file timestamped to 6:20, Windows 3.1 has every file timestamped to 3:10), but I see a lot of programs that don't bother with that stuff. I use the timestamp of the newest file as the release date for listing on the site when I have no other information to go on, but it's not a reliable method for determining the actual release date. If there's a changelog file that indicates the date for releases, I always use that, regardless of what the timestamps say. Apogee had both a timeline page and Apogee FAQ that had release dates for every version of every game, so I always go with those dates... unless there's a very good reason not to. When there are multiple releases with the same version number, such as the Wolfenstein 3D v1.4 "goobers" vs. "no goobers" releases, then I use the timestamp for those releases.

So yes, some companies match the timestamp on all files, and some don't. I don't think there's any industry-wide convention on it. Some people and companies think it looks nicer, or it might be to hide the age of the files that weren't updated, or to hide the development time between files.

DOSGuy wrote:Apogee had both a timeline page and Apogee FAQ that had release dates for every version of every game, so I always go with those dates... unless there's a very good reason not to. When there are multiple releases with the same version number, such as the Wolfenstein 3D v1.4 "goobers" vs. "no goobers" releases, then I use the timestamp for those releases.

Ah, so you took the release dates from the Apogee FAQ. The info there does seem to coincide with the timeline on the official site as well.

However, the date stamps on the Apogee shareware installers are quite consistent: the same date + version number in the time format convention is set on all files - both on all installer files and on all actual game files that are installed. Even more so, in many cases the date stamps on the shareware versions are the same as the dates indicated in the official Apogee sources. For example, Shadow Warrior v1.0 was released on May 13, 1997 in the FAQ and on the site, and this is the date that is set on all files in 3dsw10.zip. With v1.2 of the same game however there is a discrepancy in that the date stamps on the files in 3dsw12.zip say Aug 25, 1997, while the official sources indicate Sep 3, 1997 as the release date. This particular case is further complicated by the fact that the GT Interactive press release, which should mark the official release date of the CD version of the game, is dated Sep 11, 1997.

I suppose that maybe there's a difference between the file modify date and the actual upload date. The original snapshots of Apogee/3D Realms news archive from Summer 1997 have not been preserved by the Wayback machine, but there's a snapshot of the 1997 changelog at the 3D Action Gamers' Archive which indeed states that v1.2 shareware was added on Sep 3, 1997. On the other hand, the Shadow Warrior page on the same website indicates that the release date of v1.2 is Aug 25, 1997.

[Edit] I found a development news page for Aug-Sep 1997. A news item from Aug 22 suggests that the registered version of the game is completed. It also mentions that

An updated shareware episode will be made available for download shortly as well (probably within the next 7 to 10 days).

thus lending support to the Aug 25 release date. On the other hand, there's an announcement from Sep 11:

As you should have seen by now, the shareware episode of v1.2 has been released. If you haven't picked it up yet, you can do so here. Also, the registered version has been in GT's hands for some time now, and we expect to take delivery of our consignment of registered CD's for direct orders on Friday the 12th. I'm also told that the retail stores will have their copies shipped from GT on Monday the 15th. I'd say they should physically be on store shelves by the end of next week. Keep your eyes peeled. Once we physically have copies in house, I will post another update letting you know that, too.

3D Realms started shipping the registered version on Sep 15, 1997, according to the very next announcement.

Here's at least one inconsistency between the Apogee timeline and the archived news page at Apogee's website from 1996: the timeline indicates the release date of Death Rally v1.1 as Oct 1, 1996, whereas in the news the date is Oct 3, 1996 (one could of course assume that the announcement was two days after the upload, or that the versions was completed on Oct 1 yet uploaded on Oct 3).

There's also a smallish discrepancy between the release dates for Rise of the Triad shareware v1.3 here and here but it's just one day so it's quite negligible (AAug 8 in the timeline vs Aug 9 in the news). Same goes for Realms of Chaos except the news are from Nov 11 while the timeline says Nov 10 (the date stamps on the files are also Nov 10).

One another note, I'm starting to suspect that the delay with the Shadow Warrior release could have been caused by the need to implement censored shurikens that was needed for the UK release. Perhaps they kept the original date of completion of the shareware version for integrity's sake, even though the UK censorship edits were introduced later?

[Edit] The Adrenaline Vault website archives has some nice game release date lists, and Shadow Warrior v1.2 is indeed mentioned as released on Sep 3, 1997:
http://web.archive.org/web/199710140431 ... /sep97.asp

So I guess this can be considered confirmed.

Joe Siegler said that Apogee wasn't very good at keeping track of their history before he came along. Whenever he couldn't determine the exact date for a release, he listed it as the first of the month. That could explain the Death Rally v1.1 discrepancy.

DOSGuy wrote:Joe Siegler said that Apogee wasn't very good at keeping track of their history before he came along. Whenever he couldn't determine the exact date for a release, he listed it as the first of the month.

I didn't know that, thanks! (Guess I wasn't reading the interviews very attentively )

Anyway, I'm getting more and more convinced that accuracy in determining the release dates is a relative thing. I guess an official source is one's best bet, even if it might not be of best accuracy - unless of course there's a huge discrepancy between it and other sources that are generally reliable.

There's also the issue of unmarked updates/re-releases that happened sometimes, usually when some more or less serious but single bug was discovered after the release, and a fixed version was released with the same version number.

What confuses me most ATM (it's not about Apogee games though) is the discrepancy between the release dates of some early Win3.x versions of Exile. Starting at least with v1.0.3 Jeff Vogel would include a file called VENDINFO.DIZ with the shareware versions, which sums up all information about a game, including the version number and the release date. The tricky part is that in v1.0.3 the release date is allegedly Jul 14, 1995, and v1.0.1, while lacking a VENDINFO.DIZ, has all date stamps set to Jun 11, 1995. Yet the upload announcements that Jeff Vogel made in the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg newsgroup are from much later dates:

• v1.0.1 - upload at wuarchive.wustl.edu and ftp.cdrom.com announced on Aug 08, 1995 (message)
• v1.0.2 - upload at wuarchive.wustl.edu announced on Aug 30, 1995 (message)
• v1.0.3 - upload at wuarchive.wustl.edu announced on Sep 25, 1995 (message)

Now the delays in and of themselves would not be that surprising, especially since we're talking about one of several FTP sites that could host shareware games. However it seems a bit weird that v1.0.1 would be uploaded in August, even though a more recent version, v1.0.3, was apparently available a month earlier. Makes me wonder if the dates at Google Groups are actually accurate.

Also, there is circumstantial evidence that points to the dates in VENDINFO.DIZ being correct: the copies of v1.0.3 found here and here (a split-file version) have date stamps from Jul 29, 1995 and Jul 27, 1995 respectively.

BTW, I e-mailed Jeff Vogel about this in February but haven't got any reply yet.

I've just noticed that for the v1.2 shareware patch of Terminal Velocity, the date on the site is 20 July 1998. It should be 30 June 1995 instead.

I just used the file timestamps. I guess it was re-released with an installer in 1998. Where did you get 30 June 1995 from? I don't see any patches on Apogee's Milestones & History page, and the Apogee FAQ has very few release dates for patches, and no release dates for Terminal Velocity patches that I can see.

DOSGuy wrote:I just used the file timestamps. I guess it was re-released with an installer in 1998.

ThreeHeadedMonkey mentioned here that Apogee/3D Realms replaced all installers with new ones somewhere in 1998. This is the same installers that are available from their FTP today. However, in most cases the date stamps on the new installer files are the same as the original ones.

DOSGuy wrote:Where did you get 30 June 1995 from?

An old version of the Terminal Velocity shareware v1.1 to v1.2 patch can be found here: tv12swpt.zip. It has the date stamps from June 30, 1996.

Generally, the date stamps on patches should be the same as those on the files of the respective shareware version installers, as these are not the real modify dates of files, but conventional indicators of the release date (with the time stamp indication the version number).

Terminal Velocity is a bit of a special case regarding the new vs. old installers issue. The "new" installers were cleaned up of files that seemed redundant at the time, like the Apogee/3D Realms monthly catalogue file or SWC BBS info. Terminal Velocity shareware v1.1 and v1.2 originally also included two sets of preview screenshots of Duke Nukem 3D. This is mentioned in the Apogee FAQ:

There are five Duke3D shots in the Terminal Velocity v1.1 archive, and five
different shots in the Terminal Velocity v1.2 archive.

These screenshot packs were not only included with the installers of Terminal Velocity shareware v1.1 and v1.2. If you update v1.0 shareware to v1.1 with the first patch it will put the first Duke Nukem 3D preview screenshot pack into the Terminal Velocity directory. Similarly, the shareware v1.2 patch adds the second Duke3D screenshot pack. However, the new versions of the patches from 1998 omit these files because they were only used to promote Duke Nukem 3D prior to its release.

Additionally, the old patch installers use splash screens with ANSI art of the respective Apogee/3D Realms game logos (the same as used by the old shareware installers). The new installers are just some generic DOS GUI.