RAIDERS AND ART OF WAR
slu...@total.net
This is my first posting. I think the new millenium has made me suddenly
very sentimental about my childhood. has anyone seen a trace of the
following two old games:
1) ANCIENT ART OF WAR for the PC
2) RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC for the Atari
I can barely remember them but do remember loving them a lot, esp
Raiders. Please let me know if u have any idea where I might find them.
Thanks :)
Steve
PS WHAT IS THE BEST ATARI EMULATOR ANYWAY?
Kirk Is
> Hey everyone,
> This is my first posting. I think the new millenium has made me suddenly
> very sentimental about my childhood. has anyone seen a trace of the
> following two old games:
> 1) ANCIENT ART OF WAR for the PC
Oh jeez, I've seen it- maybe more recently at a Abandonwarez site?.
Trouble was this games unplayably fast on like, a 386; you would need some
considerable slowdown features.
Oh, hey, a Google.com search came up with
http://underdogs.gamingdepot.com/Artofwar.htm
looks pretty damn promising!
Oh wait, the link is broken.
Do a search for "abandonware" and "art of war"
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Dome/6773/
Besides the speed issue, I think this game desperately lacks mouse
support. (Mice weren't standard, really, til the rise of windows.)
> 2) RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC for the Atari
> I can barely remember them but do remember loving them a lot, esp
> Raiders. Please let me know if u have any idea where I might find them.
> Thanks :)
> PS WHAT IS THE BEST ATARI EMULATOR ANYWAY?
I'll leave this to other folk.
You know, a PalmPilot version of Art of War would be pretty kickass.
If they could do simcity, why not this?
--
Kirk Israel [spamblock in effect, use ki...@alienbill.com]
I am a follower of the 'retard socratic method': ask a lot of leading
questions, but have NO IDEA what the answer actually is.
Steve Harvey
>Hey everyone,
>
>This is my first posting. I think the new millenium has made me suddenly
>very sentimental about my childhood. has anyone seen a trace of the
>following two old games:
(Bites lip, resists urge to shout YET AGAIN that it won't be the new
millenium for nearly a whole year).
>2) RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC for the Atari
>
>I can barely remember them but do remember loving them a lot, esp
>Raiders. Please let me know if u have any idea where I might find them.
>Thanks :)
>
http://www.classicgaming.com/vault/
...will provide you with pointers to vast hordes of 2600 ROM images,
as well as emulators.
>PS WHAT IS THE BEST ATARI EMULATOR ANYWAY?
The two most popular are PCAE and Stella. PCAE is probably a better
emulator (it has better sound, at any rate), but I think there's only
a DOS version. Stella has a nicer GUI menu and runs great under
Win95/98 -- it's what I use since I don't have DOS drivers for my
sound card. I believe there is also a Unix version of Stella.
-Steve
Kirk Is
> In article <38724C3F...@total.net>, slu...@total.net wrote:
> >This is my first posting. I think the new millenium has made me suddenly
> >very sentimental about my childhood. has anyone seen a trace of the
> >following two old games:
> (Bites lip, resists urge to shout YET AGAIN that it won't be the new
> millenium for nearly a whole year).
No, the year 1 BC does double duty as 0 AD. Thus allowing us to think of
the "1900s" as we do of a "man in his 30s". Keep your shouting to
yourself, and hush up old fogies like Arthur C. Clarke while you're at it.
--
Kirk Israel [spamblock in effect, use ki...@alienbill.com]
"Let 'em all go to hell except cave 76"
--The 2000 year old man singing an early national anthem
Cadimus
> > (Bites lip, resists urge to shout YET AGAIN that it won't be the new
> > millenium for nearly a whole year).
>
> No, the year 1 BC does double duty as 0 AD. Thus allowing us to think of
> the "1900s" as we do of a "man in his 30s". Keep your shouting to
> yourself, and hush up old fogies like Arthur C. Clarke while you're at it.
There is *no* year 0 (BC or AD). When BC 1 rolled over to next year, it
became 1 AD. And starts the first century and first millenium. The end
of first century is at 100 AD and the start of second century at 101 AD.
(This is why we have 20th Ccentury even though we were only in 1900's)
This year is the end of the second millenium (and 20th Century) and come
next Jan. 1, it will be the 3rd millenium and 21st century.
I can only blame the medias for all the misinformation (Newspapers, TV
News, etc.) and even Mars (maker of M&M candy) are to be blamed. The
list can keep going on so I'll cu it short and leave the final blame on
everyone who forgets to research first. (That's what the library is
for!)
Kirk Is
> > > (Bites lip, resists urge to shout YET AGAIN that it won't be the new
> > > millenium for nearly a whole year).
> >
> > No, the year 1 BC does double duty as 0 AD. Thus allowing us to think of
> > the "1900s" as we do of a "man in his 30s". Keep your shouting to
> > yourself, and hush up old fogies like Arthur C. Clarke while you're at it.
> There is *no* year 0 (BC or AD). When BC 1 rolled over to next year, it
No, we should think of the year 1BC AS 0AD. This makes life make *so* much
more sense.
> became 1 AD. And starts the first century and first millenium. The end
> of first century is at 100 AD and the start of second century at 101 AD.
> (This is why we have 20th Ccentury even though we were only in 1900's)
That has nothing to do with it.
> This year is the end of the second millenium (and 20th Century) and come
> next Jan. 1, it will be the 3rd millenium and 21st century.
Blah blah blah.
> I can only blame the medias for all the misinformation (Newspapers, TV
> News, etc.) and even Mars (maker of M&M candy) are to be blamed. The
> list can keep going on so I'll cu it short and leave the final blame on
> everyone who forgets to research first. (That's what the library is
> for!)
I've heard a lot more from the pedants who won't SHUT UP about it NOT
being the "next millennium". It's the rollover- and no matter WHAT you
think it's the millennium we call the "2000s"- and that's what matters.
Since it's already well established that it's well off the supposed event-
the birth of Christ- and it wasn't even our calendar for the first 400
years, we should celebrate the carry-propagation, and acknowledge 1 BC as
0 AD.
--
Kirk Israel [spamblock in effect, use ki...@alienbill.com]
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer
Chris Cracknell
>No, the year 1 BC does double duty as 0 AD. Thus allowing us to think of
>the "1900s" as we do of a "man in his 30s". Keep your shouting to
>yourself, and hush up old fogies like Arthur C. Clarke while you're at it.
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
But it doesn't work that way. You see it takes 100 years for there to
be a century and 1000 years to make a millenium. If you had 10 apples
you would start counting them by calling the first one 0 nor would
you stop at nine apple and say that it made 10.
If they were using our callendar in 1BCE then on new years eve when the
clock struck 12 the date would have become 1CE.
There's not a single credible history book that makes reference to
the year 0BCE. (or 0AD for the christians). There is no year zero.
The funny thing about this media induced hype over the year 2000 is
that the opposite thing happened 100 years ago. Our local paper
recently wrote that those who insist on being accurate to the math
are just being "party poopers" yet 100 years ago there were articles
in the paper ridiculing the common idiot who thought the 20th century
began in the year 1900.
I don't know why people just couldn't celebrate the big zeros comming
around without feeling the need to justify it as being the "millenium".
But the biggest question is... what the hell do we call this decade and
the one to follow?
All my life I've been able to refer to every decade I've lived by its
base ten. The 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s. What the hell do I
call this decade? The Noughts? And is the next decade The Teens?
I've got 20 years of awkwardness ahead of me.
It's still hard to believe I'm living in the year 2000, let alone
made it through 1999. Those years were always fixed in my mind as
"Science Fiction" years as a kid, so far off in the future that
I'd never likely live to see them. Now here they are and my HAL
computer is yet to be seen. Although I suppose it's just as well, one
syntax error and it would slaughter my family.
But on the plus side, I got through the totalitarian regime of Big Brother
in 1984. I survived a secret UFO invasion in 1986 as well as the Eugenics
war. Then there was the arrival of the Tangtunese in the 80s (what was
the year of their arrival?). My birthday came last year and much to my
suprise the moon stayed in orbit (Sept. 13th being my birthday). A lucky
thing for the inhabitants of Moonbase Alpha. And in only a few more years
(if, hopefully, I survive yet another impending holocaust) I could be
living in the offworld colonies with my replicant slaves.
Must be an awful lot of sciencefiction fans in the world who feel a
strange mixture of disappointment and relief.
CRACKERS
(The Sci-Fi years from hell!!!)
--
Collector of Atari 2600 carts - Accordionist - Bira Bira Devotee - Anime fan
* http://www.hwcn.org/~ad329/crab.html | Crackers' Arts Base *
* http://www.angelfire.com/ma/hozervideo/index.html | Hozer Video Games *
Nihongo ga dekimasu - 2600 programmer - Father of 2 great kids - Canadian eh
Kirk Is
> In article <TKQc4.66$8M....@news.tufts.edu>, kis...@andante.cs.tufts.edu (Kirk Is) wrote:
> >No, the year 1 BC does double duty as 0 AD. Thus allowing us to think of
> >the "1900s" as we do of a "man in his 30s". Keep your shouting to
> >yourself, and hush up old fogies like Arthur C. Clarke while you're at it.
> ~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
> But it doesn't work that way. You see it takes 100 years for there to
> be a century and 1000 years to make a millenium. If you had 10 apples
> you would start counting them by calling the first one 0 nor would
> you stop at nine apple and say that it made 10.
I'd say it works pretty well that way. And years aren't like apples;
they're something you live through, not collect. And it makes the most
sense to number them so that the left digits determine the name of that
era- (and below, you trip up on your whole argument as you start to talk
about decades!)
> The funny thing about this media induced hype over the year 2000 is
> that the opposite thing happened 100 years ago. Our local paper
> recently wrote that those who insist on being accurate to the math
> are just being "party poopers" yet 100 years ago there were articles
> in the paper ridiculing the common idiot who thought the 20th century
> began in the year 1900.
No, it's the exact same friggin' thing- pedants like you trying to stick
on this totally irrelevant calculation to take away from the main event of
the rollover, accusing people who disagree with them- even those who make
a good case-- of being "common idiots". It's just that your paper happens
to have someone who is reasonable writing articles for it. Other news
sources have been quoting humbugs like Arthur C Clarke, who seems to be
afraid that "2001" isn't getting its due, so maybe he'll lose out in
royalty payments or something.
> I don't know why people just couldn't celebrate the big zeros comming
> around without feeling the need to justify it as being the "millenium".
It's definately "a" millennium. (BTW, most people who carry your "no year
zero" banner also mock people like you who don't spell it with two l's and
two n's. I, being a reasonable person, don't care that much, but since
your anal about the other issues you might as well get that one right as
well.)
> But the biggest question is... what the hell do we call this decade and
> the one to follow?
> All my life I've been able to refer to every decade I've lived by its
> base ten. The 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s. What the hell do I
> call this decade? The Noughts? And is the next decade The Teens?
> I've got 20 years of awkwardness ahead of me.
Oh but you see, your very words condemn you! By your rationale, no new
decade has started. Perhaps we also need to stop calling decades "the
eighties" and "the nineties", and call them "mostly the eighties" and
"primarily the nineties" since they cover 1981-1990 and 1991-2000.
Considering that we didn't even reckon time this way til 400 years after
the fact, why can't we let the year 1 BC do double duty as 0 AD? It's
already off the measure of anyone's birth, no one back then used any
year tracking like it... what's the big crime?
> It's still hard to believe I'm living in the year 2000, let alone
> made it through 1999. Those years were always fixed in my mind as
> "Science Fiction" years as a kid, so far off in the future that
> I'd never likely live to see them. Now here they are and my HAL
> computer is yet to be seen. Although I suppose it's just as well, one
> syntax error and it would slaughter my family.
Yeah, the Internet is the only scifi thing we're seeing as part of every
day life.
--
Kirk Israel [spamblock in effect, use ki...@alienbill.com]
PROCRASTINATION "Hard work often pays off after time,
but laziness always pays off now."
--Demotivators, http://www.despair.com
Robert Morgan
Chris, but hey... I also disagree with the idea of daylight savings time. I'm
in the minority.
>But the biggest question is... what the hell do we call this decade and
>the one to follow?
>
>All my life I've been able to refer to every decade I've lived by its
>base ten. The 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s. What the hell do I
>call this decade? The Noughts? And is the next decade The Teens?
>I've got 20 years of awkwardness ahead of me.
You read Cecil Adams' The Straight Dope, don't you? (There is an incredibly
similarly worded diatribe in one of his books/articles about 10 years ago.)
If I remember correctly, during the last century's first years, the term used
was the noughts. I don't think that would go over too well (maybe it will in
the UK, though.) Something tells me we're going to end up using oh-one,
oh-two, etc because culturally we're accustomed to writing a year's last two
digits. I also think that it will be common for this and next year to be
referred to by the full wording (two-thousand, two-thousand-(and)-one) because
of our culture's freakish overuse of the years in SF and whatnot. There
probably won't be a "name" for the 200x's until after it's passed.
But, we'll see, I guess.
(Oh, and I'm betting the 201x's will be called the teens.)
>It's still hard to believe I'm living in the year 2000, let alone
>made it through 1999.
(lots of SF progress snipped.)
Well, one stand-out event in 1999 that made me happy was the end of that
horrible global war thanks to that big alien vessel crash-landing on Macross
Island.
Wonder what'll become of that?
------------------------------
LD and video game junkie; looking for a (cheap) LaserActive and modules, and an
RDI Halcyon...
Lee Seitz
Chris Cracknell <ad...@james.hwcn.org> wrote:
>
>It's still hard to believe I'm living in the year 2000, let alone
>"Science Fiction" years as a kid, so far off in the future that
>I'd never likely live to see them. Now here they are and my HAL
>computer is yet to be seen. Although I suppose it's just as well, one
>syntax error and it would slaughter my family.
>
>in 1984. I survived a secret UFO invasion in 1986 as well as the Eugenics
>war. Then there was the arrival of the Tangtunese in the 80s (what was
>the year of their arrival?). My birthday came last year and much to my
>suprise the moon stayed in orbit (Sept. 13th being my birthday). A lucky
>thing for the inhabitants of Moonbase Alpha. And in only a few more years
>(if, hopefully, I survive yet another impending holocaust) I could be
>living in the offworld colonies with my replicant slaves.
Hey, you forgot the on topic events we all survived: The Five Day War
and the Break-Up. And it'll be interesting to see what ATARI (Advanced
Technology and Research Institute) does with NASA now that they've
taken control of it. And it's just a little over a month until Tukla
"Pakrat" Oly is born.
Lee K. Seitz,
Remembering how cool it was when Martin Champion & Lydia Perez saved
the moon colonists. 8)
--
Lee K. Seitz * lks...@hiwaay.net * http://home.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/
Wanted: Pac-Man necktie & Atari 2600 Spy Hunter
Visit the Classic Video Games Nexus for all your classic link & news needs!
http://start.at/cvgnexus
Kirk Is
> Chris Cracknell <ad...@james.hwcn.org> wrote:
> >But on the plus side, I got through the totalitarian regime of Big Brother
> >in 1984. I survived a secret UFO invasion in 1986 as well as the Eugenics
> >war. Then there was the arrival of the Tangtunese in the 80s (what was
> >the year of their arrival?). My birthday came last year and much to my
> >suprise the moon stayed in orbit (Sept. 13th being my birthday). A lucky
> >thing for the inhabitants of Moonbase Alpha. And in only a few more years
> >(if, hopefully, I survive yet another impending holocaust) I could be
> >living in the offworld colonies with my replicant slaves.
> Hey, you forgot the on topic events we all survived: The Five Day War
> and the Break-Up. And it'll be interesting to see what ATARI (Advanced
> Technology and Research Institute) does with NASA now that they've
> taken control of it. And it's just a little over a month until Tukla
> "Pakrat" Oly is born.
A little less on-topic; I'm still waiting for that super-duper VR from
"Strange Days", I'm sick of this old 2D internet porn. (And of course,
Strange Days was gutsier than most, projecting only 5 years into the
future.)
--
Kirk Israel [spamblock in effect, use ki...@alienbill.com]
"Evaporation is God's paper towel" --Dylan Murray
Erik Mooney
>> around without feeling the need to justify it as being the "millenium".
>
>It's definately "a" millennium. (BTW, most people who carry your "no year
>zero" banner also mock people like you who don't spell it with two l's and
>two n's. I, being a reasonable person, don't care that much, but since
>your anal about the other issues you might as well get that one right as
>well.)
It's the start of the third millennium since the beginning of 1 BC. So
everyone is right in having a millennium celebration. Since counting our
millenniums that way makes the celebration happen at the same time as the
fourth-digit rollover, why not do it that way?
BTW, I actually predict that in November and December this year, everyone
will begin to realize and say "hey, 2001 really does start the century and
millennium", so they can have a whole new round of century and millennium
celebrations.
>> All my life I've been able to refer to every decade I've lived by its
>> base ten. The 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s. What the hell do I
>> call this decade? The Noughts? And is the next decade The Teens?
>> I've got 20 years of awkwardness ahead of me.
My guess is "Two-thousand-ohs" or maybe "Twenty-ohs", and the next one
probably "Two-thousand-teens" or maybe "Twenty-teens".
>> It's still hard to believe I'm living in the year 2000, let alone
>> made it through 1999. Those years were always fixed in my mind as
>> "Science Fiction" years as a kid, so far off in the future that
>> I'd never likely live to see them. Now here they are and my HAL
>> computer is yet to be seen. Although I suppose it's just as well, one
>> syntax error and it would slaughter my family.
>
>Yeah, the Internet is the only scifi thing we're seeing as part of every
>day life.
Actually, it's amusing how many science fiction authors right up through
1995 or so don't have anything remotely like the Internet in their
stories.
ObClassic: Anyone else think Millipede is vastly underrated? I think it's
got the best gameplay of all the classics - I'd rather be playing it than
just about anything else like Space Invaders, Asteroids, Defender,
certainly any Pac-Clone...