Ditch Windows and install Linux and Steam, then add your game to the library as a non-Steam app and use the compatibility tab in the properties menu to force the use of the Proton compatibility layer. You should then be able to run the game through steam as normal. This has worked for me with almost all my old games and will probably work for you too.
Add the setup/installer executable as a non-steam game, run it to do the install, then modify the non-steam game’s settings to point at the installed executable so it can run from the directory where it is installed.
No problem! I’ve used this trick to run non-game Windows apps on the Steam Deck too, though support can vary wildly.
As an alternative, you might also check Lutris, which employs user scripts for installing and running Windows software in Linux. You can even add them to Steam so they’ll work in the Steam Deck’s gaming mode:
I haven’t personally tried using the tools in this video, but they may be an easier way to set up virtual machines for specific older hardware/ windows machines for gaming.
I’ve gone through this song and dance before with my old games and the most success I’ve had is with wine on Linux. It’s not foolproof unfortunately, and takes a bit of tinkering. It likely won’t work for every game either. You’ll probably want to find tutorials for each specific game you’re trying to run. Another option I’ve had some success with is running a windows xp VM. But again this isn’t foolproof and requires some technical literacy
Check each game's entry on PCGamingWiki. They're a good resource for finding what it takes to get old games running well on modern PCs. A lot of times, the answer is either "buy it on Steam and use a community-made patch" or "buy it on GOG".
I'm curious, what games are you trying to get working?
As others have said, you’re in that pocket of time where the game wants more than DOS, but less than modern windows, which isn’t well catered to. Your best option is a windows 98 or 95 virtual machine, which is doable, but not trivial or quick to set up.
After that (assuming you have a CD/DVD Drive), you’ll need to do VirtualBox’s Machine > Settings > Storage > Enable Passthrough for the DVD drive; them just plug in the game disk.
Going to have to disagree on the second bit. Nearly every game that was released on XP or earlier has run better for me with WINE or DosBox in Linux than Windows. Proton and Lutris/Heroic have only made it better. I have the Might and Magic collection and Mass Effect Remastered on my deck and both run flawlessly with little setup.
Indeed. Linux, with WINE is known to outperform Windows, sometimes by a wide margin, for older games for some time. Win98 hasn’t seen any development in about two decades. Meanwhile, people who enjoy old software have been continually improving WINE, allowing modern hardware and OS advances to be leveraged and unpatched low-level issues to be fixed. Linux is very much a better Win98 than Win98.
That approach works for some studios and some game projects but it’s no silver bullet. A lot of times gamers don’t know what they want until it’s handed on them on a silver platter which can make taking the correct kind of feedback really difficult. Sometimes outside influence may also stray the developers from their original vision.
That being said, developing game in complete secrecy for years and expecting it to become a success has pretty much the same chance as winning in a lottery. Getting MVP out there asap to see if the game will receive any sort of traction and feedback is generally the best approach unless it already has an audience (sequel or well known developer). It can be prototype, demo or early access as long as it’s something.
My opinion: Follow the Apex Legends one. Don’t tell the public literally anything. Build up zero hype, and then release it out of nowhere and let the game speak for itself. No hype = no overinflated expectations or impatient gamers. Obviously not every studio should do this, but I wish more would. I enjoy being pleasantly surprised, rather than wait for a game for years, only for it to be overpromised and DOA.
I see what you’re saying, but it’s unviable for much of the industry, and Apex seems to be a rare case where it found success despite the competition of overwatch, counter strike etc and despite being unknown (unlike valorant, which had significant brand recognition behind it).
But it’s unviable. Large studios need to market their games early to recover development costs through pre purchases and get people excited enough to buy day 1 (and to convince investors that there is enough excitement behind the title).
Small studios already do this - they don’t have brand recognition and therefore no money or need to market their games extensively (except on free platforms like Lemmy, Reddit etc), and hope their game somehow gets picked up by twitch and does well (e.g. Among Us). For many, many indie titles, their games die in obscurity, or get just enough attention to cover costs.
In general, what you’re asking for is the following: Don’t tell the public anything. Build a game that’s good enough but has an unknown IP (so that people who are hunting for registered URLs or LinkedIn hires don’t spot anything that could hint at a game), and then release it suddenly, but be absolutely confident that it is genuinely fun, it’s watertight (free from major bugs) and chef’s kiss optimised so incredibly well, that it gets nothing but glowing reviews on day 1 and word of mouth alone, through Twitch and YouTube is enough to propel it into the mainstream and make it an instant hit.
Or be Starfield lmao. If Bethesda is unable to do to Starfield what No Man’s Sky and Cyberpunk did, then there’s absolutely no confidence that Elder Scrolls 6 will be a good game.
I think you can learn a lot from apex even if it’s not the obvious choice. For Counterstrike 2 the trailer was dropped, aggressively marketed and a beta was put in people’s hands basically at the same time solidifying the game is good. Then it disappeared until launch. It very clearly worked because there were no complaints about the game. No question how good it is because the streamers played it. Then it’s just a waiting game. BG3 not quite the same but putting the game into people’s hands meant that people knew it was solid, before launch. Access creates buzz, especially if a game is enjoyable. It’s the through line between all the success stories. Let people play good game, then other people want to play the good game.
I used to use PlayOnLinux for exactly this thing. It’s a front end/manager for WINE. Heroic and Lutris are similar, but have carried the concept further.
sourcing an older computer that can run xp isn't terribly difficult, or expensive. don't need internets for them, don't need massive video card, or a big high-res monitor. in the end, finding one, and a little space to set it up, is a lot easier and with far fewer headaches than getting many of the old games to run on 'modern' windows or linux.
i have systems from an old celeron 300a to dual core am2 to play the really old games on.. even have crt and white kb/mouse for the full 'experience'.
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze