SMAC and compatibility?

[jadenstriker]

Has any one else run into this problem besides me?

SMAC/SMACX says it cannont run on WinXP and is not compadible with a P4 i850 2.66 Ghz processor.



I hate that... I can't play my game on my PC and everyone In my appartment is running XP an a P4 or AMD athlon 64 bit.

No one has a PC old enough or outdated enough to run the game and I can't spear the cash for a used PC atm.

Is there an emulator out there or a patch that will allow it to run on XP with a P4 processor?

[Chaos Theory]

Read the FAQ, or try searching/reading old threads. This question comes up about every week.

For what it's worth, though, try the Windows XP compatibility patch, and/or adding the section

[Preferences]
ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm=1

to your Alpha Centauri.ini

[Kinjiru]

btw, I have never been able to get SMAX up and running under xp. SMAC will work (just ignore the message) after updating the .ini file, but SMAX just bugs out.

No great loss, I like the original much better anyway.

[cal_01]

There's a 2k/XP patch out there for SMAC I think.

[Addled Platypus]

Originally posted by Chaos Theory

For what it's worth, though, try the Windows XP compatibility patch, and/or adding the section

[Preferences]
ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm=1

to your Alpha Centauri.ini

been there, done that...works wonders

Now if there were more SMAC players...
come out, come out..where ever you are

[cal_01]

I think there's a certain order that you have to apply the compatibility patch as well...?

[Addled Platypus]

from what my grey matters recalls

installed smac
installed xp compatibity
changed to ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm1

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
from what my grey matters recalls

installed smac
installed xp compatibity
changed to ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm1

No SMAC/X patches?

[jadenstriker]

I think this issue should get its own sticky.

Sense it does come up every week, or so they say, may as well have some sort of deticated thread stuck at that top saying what to do.

[#endgame]

You mean, like this thread?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51141

[jadenstriker]

No, I mean it's own independant sticky thread, one that is out in front. An issue as fusturating as this usually needs extra attention and have the help issues in the forgound and far more easily accessable and noticable.

The level at which this issue comes up as a problem exceeds just stashing it in a large FAQ base. It is serious enough to warrent its own independant thread.

The fact that it comes up a lot means that enough people have this problem to have the info more convenatly accessable.

Granted FAQ's are still good idea's and convenant, but issues that are as bad as the 2k/XP compatibility issue that hit top of the list kind of problems often require more accessablility then even a FAQ gives.

[Maniac]

The answer to the compability question is one of the first answered in the FAQ. Generally speaking, people who don't even read that, will also not read a thread specifically devoted to the problem - they just post a thread without even checking if there are any interesting topped threads.

[jadenstriker]

Sorry Maniac, but your wrong. If you where right, we would have seen another post like this aside from mine. Your coming from a point of view of lazyness. It is not a matter of lazyness, it is a matter of being irritated and wanting a convenant way with a path of little resistance, many of those people, will have already did some searching. Many people will goto the FAQ, but because this issue is wide spread, there are going to be a lot of people addressing it, and the more people having the issue, the more deversity in culter, and the more importaince in faster accessability. There are going to be those who have search more exstisively, have not found the answers they needed, and when they come here, will make a quick glance to see if there is a post out in front, and when they don't see one, they will make a new post.

The people that don't look at the FAQ, that you claim are going to ignore a deticaded post, accully do search the forums a little bit first, and they are seeing this post. In all realility they have done some searching, and have lost pacints with trying to find answers to their question, so they are a bit irritated and impationt.

This Thread, unlike the FAQ, is there at first glance, VERY noticable, and answers there importain question quickly. As a reasult, no other new post have come up asking about this issue. It gets them the answer they need, resolves their irritation from extensive searching, and prevents problems that may or may not have occurred if this posted didn't exist, or the person was once again redirect to another area.

Making a deticated post is a win/win deal. You WILL see much fewer new post, you will defuse that person pre-visiting irritation from the post-extincive searching, and other people who are tired of seeing a new post like this every now and then, WON'T get POed because it happens far less then it has in the past. They won't be answering the same question over and over again, as much as they did in the past, and they wont be redirecting the irritated person again, which elemitants the risk of increasing the persons irritation. You WILL greatly reduce the ammount of new post on this same subject. You may not completely stop them, but you WILL greatly reduce them. Those who are irritated with seeing the subject return, will not become irritated any where near as often, because it won't happen any where near as often.

Not making a deticated post is a Loss/Loss. If the person is one of those who are irritated from exstincive searching, not having the information out in front, or redirecting them to another post when they make a new post, will set a bad impression on them. If they are already irritated, that action would risk inflaming it ferther. Inaddtion to that, refusing to make a deticated post makes it where you will see future new post, and people who are tired of the new post asking the same thing, will get irritated again when another post asking about this hits the boards again.

[Petek]

I disagree about the need to top a new thread to address the "compatibility/CPU not supported" issues.

If someone chooses not to look at the current FAQ, or can't find the desired information therein, all they have to do is post a question. This is a fairly friendly forum and most questions get answered promptly, even if the answer is already in the FAQ or has already been answered in other threads.

There are plenty of other places on the Internet where asking a question that's already in the FAQ will result in flames and insults. You rarely see that here.

[Commy]

Originally posted by Petek
I disagree about the need to top a new thread to address the "compatibility/CPU not supported" issues.

If someone chooses not to look at the current FAQ, or can't find the desired information therein, all they have to do is post a question. This is a fairly friendly forum and most questions get answered promptly, even if the answer is already in the FAQ or has already been answered in other threads.

There are plenty of other places on the Internet where asking a question that's already in the FAQ will result in flames and insults. You rarely see that here.

After all, if we couldn't bring up topics already talked about, I'm sure we'd run out of things to talk about on this forum...I've already seen numerous threads and topics repeated 2 or 3 times...