The desktop game. Then & Now.

Asherdude · Post by **Asherdude** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:05 pm

Here's Snood, a popular Bust-a-move clone, running on an iMac both then & now.

Here's what it looked like in 1998.

And here's what it looks like today!

Frederik · Post by **Frederik** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:46 pm

I prefer the older look (somebody had to say this, right?), it has some sort of oldschool PC game look about it that I like.

The newer one looks like it was made by PopCap games

And man, do I ever miss the classy old Mac system font. The new one is just "Blah". If anybody knows if there is a way to get that classic look on Mac OS X, I would be deeply thankful

moozooh · Post by **moozooh** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:24 pm

I liked playing this game back in 2001. And the old look was definitely better.

Udderdude · Post by **Udderdude** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:20 pm

And here's Taito suing the living shit out of them.

Wait, that didn't happen.

I wish it would, though. And then after that, see them go after Popcrap. :/

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:04 am

Popcap games can run on Intel graphics, but can't achieve 60 frames/sec on anything. Is this a job for Havendale?

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:29 am

Asherdude wrote:Here's what it looked like in 1998.

Haha, you even have the resolution right...seems like a shame to be wasting time on a G3 or iMac with that game though.

Myself, I'd rather be playing a Mac port of Quake...which looks just like it did back then.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:27 pm

Amazing, looking back, that Mac OS was still so crappy back in 1998. OS 9 hadn't even been released yet (not that it was any better)!

Daigohji · Post by **Daigohji** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:29 pm

They both look awful...and slightly disturbing.

Fenrir · Post by **Fenrir** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:55 pm

KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!!

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:07 am

it290 wrote:Amazing, looking back, that Mac OS was still so crappy back in 1998. OS 9 hadn't even been released yet (not that it was any better)!

Come on, that screen has a gray desktop pattern... let me get something decent:

Now compare to this...

Mac OS 8 not only looked a bit better; it had, by far, the smarter interface designs.

And, you know what? Interface-wise, OS 8 still trounces XP or Vista. In some aspects, it still beats OSX (such as: having the "close" box far from the "zoom" and "collapse" buttons; the "textured" title area (for the color-blind); and the thick "edges" on the windows).

moozooh · Post by **moozooh** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:11 am

Thurrott, now that's a badass surname!

Impervious · Post by **Impervious** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:35 am

Stormwatch - don't hate. i still have my win98 next to me. fully equipped with aol 4.0.

-

-

-

-

jkjkjk. 5.0.

Nuke · Post by **Nuke** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:23 pm

That's not really a fair comparison since you could pimp up your win 98 too look much better than the install default.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:06 pm

Mac OS 8 not only looked a bit better; it had, by far, the smarter interface designs.

And, you know what? Interface-wise, OS 8 still trounces XP or Vista. In some aspects, it still beats OSX (such as: having the "close" box far from the "zoom" and "collapse" buttons; the "textured" title area (for the color-blind); and the thick "edges" on the windows).

Interface design doesn't mean jack if the system doesn't have memory protection or preemptive multitasking! Microsoft wasn't much better, but at least they had NT4 out by then -- an honest to god, real operating system. I'm sorry, Mac OS Classic has caused me far too much pain through crashes and instability for me to ever remember it fondly. Also, in '98 I was using the likes of IRIX, AIX, and Linux for daily computing (as well as AmigaOS - which, although not great in the stability stakes, at least booted quickly and could do real multitasking), so saying 'MacOS was better' isn't really gonna cut it.

Now, I do have to give JobsCo props for Mac OS X. By far the best consumer OS on the market today.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:48 pm

Oh, definitely. The "internals" of old Mac OS truly sucked.

Asherdude · Post by **Asherdude** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:48 am

That's actually System 7.5 in my screenshot. It's running the Kaleidoscope Platinum theme. I really miss the customizability of Kaleidoscope.

OS X Shapesifter is supposed to be similar, but it won't work under Leopard. Are there any theme packs out that work with Leopard?

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:16 am

Aaaah, Kaleidoscope... memories, man. I loved the Openstep theme, all cool and sober. But the problem with that and Shapeshifter is that they make the system and apps unstable. System 7, alright, people were used to see it go down in flames once in a while anyway. But to take Unix-made-friendly and make it unstable, no, that's heresy!

it290 · Post by **it290** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:20 am

I have had very few problems with Shapeshifter and Tiger/Intel, FWIW.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:36 am

I've got an even older Mac with an earlier version of Snood on it...looks pretty much like the first screenshot, maybe fewer colors or b&w, can't remember. :p

Stormwatch wrote:
it290 wrote:Amazing, looking back, that Mac OS was still so crappy back in 1998. OS 9 hadn't even been released yet (not that it was any better)!
Come on, that screen has a gray desktop pattern... let me get something decent:

Two words, Stormie:

ONE BUTTON.

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:06 pm

Stormwatch wrote:thick "edges" on the windows

Known as borders in the crazy, mixed-up world of "the" PC, these have had adjustable width since Windows 2.1; but it was specified in pixels rather than points. I can understand how that would throw someone off who'd got used to the Mac Classic version of "WYSIWYG" DTP.

shmups.system11.org

The desktop game. Then & Now.

The desktop game. Then & Now.

Re: The desktop game. Then & Now.