QFG 4 Failing in Swamp
EbolaMunky
'ello!
Need to know if I'm alone here, everytime I go into the swamp and kill that
little odd magickal mage type thing and get the breathe scroll I can't leave.
I try to exit either up down left or right, but the game crashes and it tells
me that there is a cloned object that needs to be deleted... Any help?
Iso
these aren't the only bugs I have come up against, but this is the only one I
can't get around, are there any patches for it?
Trina Borrás
>'ello!
Hi, Iso,
It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
the collection on cd of all four games, but if you've got either a
diskette version (what I have) or cd version (alone), you have to have
"the" patch. I think Sierra has a couple of them, but just get the
big one, it's maybe around 640k, whatever. I'm pretty sure if you
need this none of your saved games will be any good after applying
patch. That happened to me, I played it part way through many times
before ever finishing it for one reason or another. It's worth it
though, it's such a wonderful game, one of my favorites. Oh, even
with the patch there are tons of gpfs. You know that screen where the
pumpkins are? I can't touch a pumpkin without the game crashing. No
sense to these things, however, once you have the patch you can get
all the way through. You just learrn what bugs *your* game has and
avoid them, thus, save a lot. If you have the new (ish) collection
of Sierra's of the series, I don't know, it should already be patched,
but unless it says so, and tells you explicitly do not patch, there'd
be no harm. That part in the swamp is bad enough wiithout having to
endure crashes. Best of luck,
Trina
posted/cc'd
André Fagervold
Trina Borrás wrote:
> It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
> the collection on cd of all four games,
They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
Shame on Sierra
André
John and Paula Weatherman
>
> 'ello!
>
> Need to know if I'm alone here, everytime I go into the swamp and kill that
> little odd magickal mage type thing and get the breathe scroll I can't leave.
> I try to exit either up down left or right, but the game crashes and it tells
> me that there is a cloned object that needs to be deleted... Any help?
>
> Iso
>
> these aren't the only bugs I have come up against, but this is the only one I
> can't get around, are there any patches for it?
I'm thinking that if you turn the speed down it will let you out. Try
that. If you go to sierra.com they have a message board strictly for
QFG games and you can get a lot of help there. Good luck.
Paula
Trina Borrás
post
>> It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
>> the collection on cd of all four games,
>They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
Andre, that is *so* disgusting!
But I just checked their patches section and all the patches for the
QG series say "diskette only," does that mean the bugs are still there
in the cd collection but there are no patches at all for them? Do you
have the collector CD, if so, what did you do about bugs? If those
patches "for diskette only" do work for the cds, someone ought to get
on their backs to fix up the wording at their patches section to
reflect reality. I'd undertake it myself, but it just (success last
week) took me around four months to persuade Take2(Europe) to remove
*three words* (,i.e., "fully supports ms-dos," which belied reality)
from their Black Dahlia requirements section at their web site so I
feel I've done my bit (for the moment only) in trying to get blood out
of a turnip for lack of the proper cliche which I can't think of, oh
well, I guess beating my head against a stone wall would fit too.
Sierra ought to be easier to communicate with though. In the case of
Take2 I had to resort in the end to making up for them--because they
either ignored me, skirted the issue, said it was the American site
not theirs, otherwise denied all human error which is their wont--a
simpleton's guide to finding thing's on one's own website.
Trina (who's tired of game company incompetence and indifference)
posted/e-mailed cc
P.S. I saw the patch listed, the biggie, it's qg4pat.exe and was over
600k as I recalled. Does it work with cd version to your knowledge?
>Shame on Sierra
Amen
>André
d651...@est.fib.upc.es
> Re: QFG 4 Failing in Swamp
>
>Trina Borrás wrote:
>
>> It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
>> the collection on cd of all four games,
>
>They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
>
>André
Now that SIERRA is trying to show us that they have changed
their rushed, buggy way of releasing games, it would be the
time to show a deference to its loyal customers releasing the
Quest for Glory IV-CD patch.
PLEASE Sierra -- Make a good patch for Quest for Glory IV!!!
Then we will know that we can trust you.
RauL
James Simpson
Borrás) wrote:
>ebola...@aol.com (EbolaMunky) wrote:
>>Need to know if I'm alone here, everytime I go into the swamp and kill that
>>little odd magickal mage type thing and get the breathe scroll I can't leave.
>>I try to exit either up down left or right, but the game crashes and it tells
>>me that there is a cloned object that needs to be deleted... Any help?
The best way to get around this one is to create a new batch file to
start the game JUST for this section. I modified the one that sierra
uses to fire up the game from the Sierra directory to get the
following: (Which I called QT.BAT)
@echo off
c:
cd \SIERRA\QG4CD
call CheckCD D
moslo /20 sierra.exe
cd ..
The important part is to change the
sierra.exe
line to read
MOSLO /20 sierra.exe
then find and unzip moslo....
I then saved the game facing the swamp while still on dry land, quit,
fired up QT.BAT, headed for the tomb, defeated the 2 wizards, got the
goodie, returned to dry land, saved and quit, then restarted with the
usual bat file. (I AM assuming that you ARE playing the DOS version
since this particular bug isn't supposed to occur in the Windoze
version.)
> I can't touch a pumpkin without the game crashing. No
>sense to these things, however, once you have the patch you can get
>all the way through. You just learrn what bugs *your* game has and
>avoid them, thus, save a lot. If you have the new (ish) collection
>of Sierra's of the series, I don't know, it should already be patched,
>but unless it says so, and tells you explicitly do not patch, there'd
>be no harm. That part in the swamp is bad enough wiithout having to
>endure crashes.
Near as I can tell, the CD version and the anthalogy version ARE
patched. The problem is Sierra never got around to eradicating ALL
the bugs in this game.
If you REALLY want to E-mail me, just remove the CU2 from my address.
anise c. hollingshead
>
>
>Trina Borrás wrote:
>
>> It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
>> the collection on cd of all four games,
>
>They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
>Shame on Sierra
>
>André
>
Really?
I played QFG4 on CD, finally got past the infamous swamp bug by
myself, without patch, but took forever!
However, I now own the CD collection on one CD, and it has never given
me any problems. I just assumed it had the patch.
Anise
EbolaMunky
Grr. I just got back from finding a new bug and now I have just found a patch.
I tried it and the game won't even load now... In case anyone wants it, I got
it from GamesDomain and it is called qg4_110a.zip. It doesn't work for me but
it might for you... Remember to back up your saved games.
Iso
Trina Borrás
"André Fagervold" wrote:
>They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
>Shame on Sierra
Hi, Andre, it's just me again,
After I responded to this, I happened to be at Sierra's site and
checked out their faqs and trouble-shooting guides, and in the TS
guide for QG4 CD Version, under "common dos problems" I believe it was
I found their statement to the effect that none of the existing
patches should be used on the cdrom version, they are all for
diskettes,and that using them would corrupt the program, destroy saved
games causing one to have to uninstall and start all over again. Then
it said that it was unnecessary to use any patches because **they were
already patched** up!
So, what do you think now? It seems like the only big bug people are
talking about is at the tomb and the biig freeze that patch was for
was with Tanya in (or around and about) the castle.
My question is why would they patch the single cdrom Shadows. And
then when they put out the collection go and use the source for the
diskettes which was unpatched for the collection's cd, when they had a
perfectly good (relatively speaking of course, heh) one to reproduce?
And if they did do that, which sounds quite twisted, why chose NOT to
patch over previous decision TO patch?
I had written them (Sierra) a little query before I saw that part of
the TS guide and I expect they'll tell me the same thing when they
reply. I was just wondering had you read this (about the collection
only) or did you conclude it because it's so buggy and so was the
diskette version?
I think I need the collection, I'm afraid soon my diskettes are going
to begin to self-corrupt, also I tried to carry my character over from
#1 on and it never would work right, so I never could become a
paladin, just a lowly humble unassuming disrespectable thief. Oh
well.
Any thief ever break into the burgomeister's abode? I did once,
through the window (at night), but I never could get into his bedroom,
I was wondering, did I miss something I could have plundered?
So long for tonight,
Trina
posted/email cc'd
EbolaMunky
I don't think it is possible to get into his bedroom, tried a couple of times.
When I first tried to get into his office, I put the cursor over the window and
held down ENTER so it would just keep on trying, then I would rest and keep
doing that until it opened... Only way I could think to practice. Speaking of
breaking in, is it at all possible to get into the Sheriff's side kicks bedroom
in the first game? He leaves the door open!
André Fagervold
Trina Borrás wrote:
> "André Fagervold" wrote:
>
> >They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector CD
> >Shame on Sierra
>
> Hi, Andre, it's just me again,
>
> Then it said that it was unnecessary to use any patches because **they were
> already patched** up!
>
Utter B******* it is not patched if you always have to adjust speed and details to
be able to come through the swamp.I think I had to adjust it about TEN times with
different settings and then went back to the original and it all of a sudden
decided to work. What's that all about?
> So, what do you think now? It seems like the only big bug people are
> talking about is at the tomb and the biig freeze that patch was for
> was with Tanya in (or around and about) the castle.
>
I still think it is a buggy game whatever Sierra say they have fixed. It is just
not good enough.
> I had written them (Sierra) a little query before I saw that part of
> the TS guide and I expect they'll tell me the same thing when they
> reply. I was just wondering had you read this (about the collection
> only) or did you conclude it because it's so buggy and so was the
> diskette version?
It seems to me that this is a standard form they use to answer all questions
regarding QG4.
Thats all for now
André
Leo
People are getting way too worked up about this problem.
#1 All of the patches for Quest for Glory 4 are included on the
collection CD. That is why the patches on their site say "diskette
version only".
#2. This is not a bug in the game. The game is playing the way it is
supposed to, it is your computer that is going to fast. What is
happening is that the animated scripts in the game play out properly
depending on the speed of your processor. There was no way at the time
for programmers to anticipate how fast processors would get. You could
try slowing your system down with a program like MOSLO or Turbo. I
have seen this work with many old DOS games.
If you have a PII 400 you shouldn't be playing old DOS games anyways.
If you can afford a fast computer, you should spring some cash on a
newer game. Otherwise I have a garage full of 286-486 machines I could
sell you that will run this game just fine.
>
>'ello!
>
>Need to know if I'm alone here, everytime I go into the swamp and kill that
>little odd magickal mage type thing and get the breathe scroll I can't leave.
>I try to exit either up down left or right, but the game crashes and it tells
>me that there is a cloned object that needs to be deleted... Any help?
>
Claude Martins
Leo <beefm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 17 Sep 1998 23:14:27 GMT, ebola...@aol.com (EbolaMunky) wrote:
>
>People are getting way too worked up about this problem.
I don't think they are. It is a fairly frustrating problem.
>#1 All of the patches for Quest for Glory 4 are included on the
>collection CD. That is why the patches on their site say "diskette
>version only".
Agreed, but the CD version of QFG 4 is hardly a bug-free game, even
if you discount the timing bug in the swamp.
>#2. This is not a bug in the game. The game is playing the way it is
>supposed to, it is your computer that is going to fast.
It's not a bug, but it showed poor design on Sierra's part to use
CPU-speed dependent timing (or delay loops). Try out any of
LucasArts' (or Lucasfilm Games as they were known back then) older
games such as Loom, Monkey Island or Fate of Atlantis, and you will
have no problems related to CPU speed.
>What is
>happening is that the animated scripts in the game play out properly
>depending on the speed of your processor. There was no way at the time
>for programmers to anticipate how fast processors would get.
Processors will always speed up (and eventually approach an asymptote,
I imagine), which is why using CPU-speed dependent code is not a good
idea. Sierra used to be guilty of this, and so was Bullfrog. It _is_
possible to write code which will still run on a processor much faster
than it was designed for. Try playing Doom on your PII-500 and let me
know if you experience any unacceptable speed-ups.
>You could
>try slowing your system down with a program like MOSLO or Turbo. I
>have seen this work with many old DOS games.
It's a workaround that you must do to get around the bug, even in the
_Windows_ version of QFG4.
>If you have a PII 400 you shouldn't be playing old DOS games anyways.
Why not, if the gameplay is still good? I enjoyed System Shock much
more than any of the current crop of 3D action/adventures.
>If you can afford a fast computer, you should spring some cash on a
>newer game. Otherwise I have a garage full of 286-486 machines I could
>sell you that will run this game just fine.
What if you buy a newer game such as QFG5 next year, and then want to
experience the backstory of QFG1-4. I don't think that that should
entail a dead-end purchase of an older machine.
- Claude.
--
--
Claude Martins, "Timberwolf", ICQ#: 5304950, York U, Toronto, ON, CA
mailto:mar...@cs.yorku.ca && http://www.ariel.cs.yorku.ca/~martins/
"There's movement all over the place!"
Sarah Prior
I never managed to get through QFG3, that kept locking on me so much I lost
patience, is it worth going back to ?
Claude Martins
According to the QFG5 site <http://www.qg5.com/>, it will
sell for $49.95, so you should be able to get it cheaper
than that at the usual retail outlets.
>I never managed to get through QFG3, that kept locking on me
>so much I lost patience, is it worth going back to ?
<POSSIBLE SPOILERS>
I only experienced one strange bug in QFG3. When it came time
to ask the Laibon for a bride, he kept getting insulted even
though I wasn't saying anything rude. To stop myself losing
too many honour points, I rushed through that dialog and got
the hell out of his hut. Bizarre.
<END POSSIBLE SPOILERS>
As for the story itself, I felt that it was a disappointment.
QFG3 was not planned as part of the tetralogy, but the Coles
felt that the character was not developed enough to face the
obstacles in QFG4 right after QFG2. So, QFG3 was inserted,
and it feels tacked on to the overall storyline.
If you absolutely want to experience the whole Quest for
Glory storyline, then it might be worth playing QFG3 again.
Otherwise, skip it.
For what it's worth, I'd rank the QFG games in this order:
1. QFG2
2. QFG4
3. QFG1
4. QFG3
Here's hoping QFG5 is one to beat the rest.
- Claude.
--
--
Claude Martins, "Timberwolf", ICQ#: 5304950, York U, Toronto, ON, CA
mailto:mar...@cs.yorku.ca && http://www.ariel.cs.yorku.ca/~martins/
"The dreams of youth are the regrets of maturity."
Trina Borrás
SNIP SNIP
>If you have a PII 400 you shouldn't be playing old DOS games anyways.
What colossal cheek!
>If you can afford a fast computer, you should spring some cash on a
>newer game. Otherwise I have a garage full of 286-486 machines I could
>sell you that will run this game just fine.
Do you work for Bill Gates?
Trina
posted/cc'd
Syed Noman Ahmad
I am not sure, what the first poster was trying to say,
but here's my guess..
One of the problems with new computers, standards, OS's is that
they (in some cases) make impossible for you to play old games which
you like so much. I have a Pentium 200 with Win95 and DOS 6.22. I boot
to Win95 as default, but can start DOS 6.22 if there's a need.
So basically I can run any game, you can think of (for PC
platform of course)
Trouble with this approach is that you can only do it to a certain
extent before you start crippling your PC. For instance, I have
my 2.5 gig hard drive partitioned into 4 !! drives, just to
get over that stupid 32 k cluster size problem and I don't
want to install FAT-32 as it'll take away my dual boot previliges
(and if I want to keep them, by having another partition for
DOS and FAT-16, than what's the point of having FAT-32 in
the first place)
So I was whining about this thing in the ng, and somebody
commented, that if I was this much concerned about older games
why didn't I get an old 386-486 (they go for about 50-100$,
sans monitor) and keep it to play older games. This way, I
can use a high end PC without any worries.
Makes sense, doesn't it?
My 0.02$
--
Noman, who doesn't work for Bill Gates ..
EbolaMunky
>#1 All of the patches for Quest for Glory 4 are included on the
>collection CD. That is why the patches on their site say "diskette
>version only".
To stop any other mistakes like this, I will no longer refere to the problems
I experience in QFG4 as "bugs", I will call them "problems I experience in
QFG4".
>If you have a PII 400 you shouldn't be playing >old DOS games anyways.
>If you can afford a fast computer, you should spring some cash on a
>newer game.
So, are you saying that it is my fault that QFG4 isn't working because I
upgraded my computer?
Iso
Trina Borrás
dos games in ms-dos 6.2 with win95 and partitioned harddrive --
>In article <6v2oo8$thq$4...@camel0.mindspring.com>,
>Trina Borrás <tbo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>beefm...@hotmail.com (Leo
HUGE SNIP
>...I have a Pentium 200 with Win95 and DOS 6.22. I boot
>to Win95 as default, but can start DOS 6.22 if there's a need.
>So basically I can run any game, you can think of (for PC
>platform of course)
>Trouble with this approach is that you can only do it to a certain
>extent before you start crippling your PC.
So, Noman, tell me this. What if one (not I of course) decided to
break down and get win95 but to avoid any possible conceivable
potential problem playing one's old dos games, one decided to get a
completely separate hard drive just for win95, and then fixed one's
computer so default was ms-dos/win3.1, and to get to win95 one would
have to ... well, one doesn't know, one would have someone in the know
do all this for one.
Would this sort of setup equally cripple one's PC like your setup
might if one overdoes things?
>For instance, I have
>my 2.5 gig hard drive partitioned into 4 !! drives, just to
SNIP SNIP-
>Noman, who doesn't work for Bill Gates ..
Trina, who *wouldn't* work for Bill Gates ..
(posted and cc'd by e-mail)
Noman
"Trina Borrás" wrote:
>
> So, Noman, tell me this. What if one (not I of course) decided to
> break down and get win95 but to avoid any possible conceivable
> potential problem playing one's old dos games, one decided to get a
> completely separate hard drive just for win95, and then fixed one's
> computer so default was ms-dos/win3.1, and to get to win95 one would
> have to ... well, one doesn't know, one would have someone in the know
> do all this for one.
>
First of all, in Win95 you are guaranteed to run all Win3.1
applications. It's the way the Win32 API is written. So there's
not much reason to keep Win3.1 on a separate hard drive.
So the real issue is DOS 6.2 then. Which you can even boot from
a floppy, if you want. Keep in mind that the person in question 'll
be able to run almost all DOS programs in Win95 directly without
resorting to DOS 6.2 . However it's better to have the ability
to boot to DOS 6.2, since it's already there on her harddrive.
When you install Win95, it keeps a backup copy of DOS and with
minor twiddles you can have a menu during the boot-up asking
you to boot to whichever OS you want. You can also set defaults
so your PC'll automatically start with DOS 6.2 or WIn95 (or
Win95 but with command prompt DOS 7.0) You can do all that
from the same hard drive.
However if someone needs to use two hard drives, then she has to
make sure that Win95 is there on the primary drive (or partition).
Best way is to have a clean formatted hard drive. Install DOS 6.2.
Then install Win95 over it. A clean install (and not an upgrade
from Win3.1 to Win95) is infinitely better than any other option.
Once again, there are very few DOS games (less than 1%) which
won't run in Win95 (DOS 7) directly.
--
Noman, who has never worked for Bill Gates either....
Trina Borrás
>First of all, in Win95 you are guaranteed to run all Win3.1
>applications. It's the way the Win32 API is written. So there's
>not much reason to keep Win3.1 on a separate hard drive.
So far, so good. I hate win3.1, why have two win os's to hate?
>So the real issue is DOS 6.2 then. Which you can even boot from
>a floppy, if you want.
Puh-leese!
> Keep in mind that the person in question 'll
>be able to run almost all DOS programs in Win95 directly without
>resorting to DOS 6.2 . However it's better to have the ability
>to boot to DOS 6.2, since it's already there on her harddrive.
Ok, this is scenario #1, one hard drive, win95 and dos 6.22 (isn't
this what you said was putting such a strain on your system?)...
leftover dos 6.22 or reinstalled, and then win95 over it, or alongside
it?
>When you install Win95, it keeps a backup copy of DOS
Does this mean if dos 6.22 is there before you install it it does not
erase it, even though it has its own newer dos version?
>minor twiddles you can have a menu during the boot-up asking
>you to boot to whichever OS you want. You can also set defaults
>so your PC'll automatically start with DOS 6.2 or WIn95 (or
>Win95 but with command prompt DOS 7.0) You can do all that
>from the same hard drive.
Yes, this I'm aware of (not how to do it, just that it can be done).
>However if someone needs to use two hard drives, then she has to
>make sure that Win95 is there on the primary drive (or partition).
>Best way is to have a clean formatted hard drive.
So, if your current drive is 3gigs and you want to get a separate hard
drive, the *new* (clean) one should be for dos? Which is the
"primary" drive, is it the largest, the oldest ... ? Shouldn't it be
the newer one for "a clean formatted hard drive"?
>Install DOS 6.2.
>Then install Win95 over it. A clean install (and not an upgrade
>from Win3.1 to Win95) is infinitely better than any other option.
So, how is this different from scenario #1? If you install win95 over
dos 6.2, how do you have dos 6.2 on a separate hard drive. Why do you
want to install win9x *over* dos when you are going to have separate
drives, when dos will have its own drive? So, you'll have dos on two
drives, and win95 over one version? Why? So, this means an "upgrade"
doesn't involve dos one way or the other, only would involve 3.1? How
can you have clean formatted drive and still have dos on it (for where
else commeth the backup copy)? People who get new systems don't have
dos 6.2 underneath win95. I don't understand, Noman. And what
happens to my 3.1 stuff if upgrade is out. Do I just reinstall
everything I want to carry over? What about things I don't have
software for, that came with computer, like Word (the version I'm used
to) and wp, and chessmaster3000. What about old mail archives from
former isps? That kind of stuff. Back it all up somewhere (?) and
reinstall when you have a clean formatted drive and win95 install? But
old archived mail ... you'd lose it I think, thousands of letters ...
because its sitting in old e-mail systems now defunct, you couldn't
reinstall them, plus they were part of an isp you don't use now. It's
too much.
>Once again, there are very few DOS games (less than 1%) which
>won't run in Win95 (DOS 7) directly.
Which ones? The AITDs I'll bet. What are the characteristics of dos
games that don't work with win95? And how come it doesn't work with
them all, what things throws it off? And why didn't (or did it) win98
fix those problems? And isn't win98 even more dos-averse than win95?
Thank you, Noman, for trying to explain all this, and I'm sorry I'm so
thickheaded, maybe the negative bias doesn't help either, and not sure
it's one I can overcome.
The "democracy" of the internet, it's a big fat lie. This is survival
of the fittest (in the guise of the trendiest) out here. At least
with tennis shoes, if you don't want a pair for $200 or more you can
still buy one for $20, and walk down the avenue without having to
worry about someone bashing your knees in.
>--
>Noman, who has never worked for Bill Gates either....
Trina ("Beware the Java Menace") B.
posted/cc'd
Digital Devil
This is really stupid, 'cos they included some save games (which don't work
with the patch installed)...
~Digital Devil
André Fagervold heeft geschreven in bericht
<36025F43...@stud.aoa.hist.no>...
:
:
:Trina Borrás wrote:
:
:> It's got to be Sierra's buggiest game. I don't know anything about
:> the collection on cd of all four games,
:
:They didn't even take the the time to install the patches on the collector
CD
:Shame on Sierra
:
:André
:
Avtar Crowder
P2400 and 50% worked) at any of the problems sections. Voila!No crashes!