So, I bought a new system with more memory than the 32-bit operating systems can handle, so I got XP 64-bit with it. I'm not going to bother with Vista until a good game comes out that looks way better using DX10 than DX9, or until they start making games Vista/DX10 exclusive. Anyway, I recently tried to install some of the older LucasArts games like JK, the X-Wing collection, etc. and I've run into the incompatibility problem with their installers. Fun stuff.

Has anyone else here run into this problem? Does anyone know of a way to... make the installers compatible with a 64-bit operating system? I'm not a programmer by any means, so I don't know how to make myself new installers for the games. If nobody knows of a solution and I really feel the need to play them, I can always just format the system and dual boot with my old copy of Win98. I just figured I'd ask the collective intelligence of Massassi before doing so.

Zeq has already written instructions on how to install without the installer, and feels a stab of pain throughout his entire body any time anyone uses the installer.

the instructions can be found here: http://www.jkhub.net/library/index.php/Tutorials:Install_JK

Thank you drive through

Ah, cool. That works for both JK and MotS. At least those two are working now. I have a feeling that I'm just going to have to format and run Win98 to get the others working, though. If I try to do that kind of installer workaround for the others, I get errors about needing to install from the CDs.

So... uhh... I guess, aside from me learning about the no-installer method to get JK and MotS running, my making this thread was probably pretty pointless. Then again, it reminded me that I need to learn to program so I can fix these kinds of problems myself.

If you're talking about the Win95 versions of X-Wing/TIE, there are XP patches for those that likely work for Vista as well. See here.

Well, like pretty much every other older LA game I've tried, XP64 won't even let X-Wing or TIE Fighter attempt to install, and the copy-paste method doesn't work. I'm guessing that's because, unlike JK/MotS, the required registry entries are created by the setup programs. All I get is a bunch of errors either about the launcher being unable to run the SETUP program, or when I run the SETUP app directly, how it's made for a different type of machine. When I try to copy everything to the HDD and run the game executable, they all crash with some mention of needing to install from the CD or a similar message. I found an explanation of how to get XWA running on XP64, but I've got about 5 other games after the JK and X-Wing games, and none of them seem to have a workaround for 64-bit systems. I knew I was going to have to deal with compatibility problems when I got the OS, but I didn't think much about the older games I own.

Don't get me wrong, guys. I do appreciate the help. It's just that I've been searching the web for solutions, and the only results I get tend to be people stating that none of these games will install properly on a 64-bit operating system, and how LucasArts doesn't support any 64-bit OS for use with these games, and blahblahblah. It's just a bit annoying to know that all of these games are pretty much useless unless I wipe my hard drive and dual boot with a 32-bit OS. The simplest solution for me to get these things running is to just format and dual boot.

Meh, the system could use a reformat anyway. It's been a month or so.

... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

That method is ok, but it does find your screen resolution properly, and JK patch commander doesn't work.

:\ You shouldn't need to be using JK patch commander, either.

nothing 16-bit (the installers) is going to work. the games are 32-bit though.

Perhaps try [URL="VirtualPC"]http://www.microsoft.com/windows/downloads/virtualpc/default.mspx[/URL]. It'll save you from having to do a dual boot, or anything else along those lines.

Actually, the simplest solution is to just use a 32-bit OS, since 64-bit is kind of pointless right now.

I can't really debate the 32 vs 64-bit thing right now. My brain has shut down after being awake for 24 hours.

Basically, the reason I got it was that I wanted to maximize my available memory and I wanted to be set for any future uses. 4GB of memory may very well be overkill for most purposes, but it's pretty handy when you're multitasking video editing/encoding and doing other work. RAM was also really cheap. I got it for somewhere around $160 CDN. I just figured it would make it easier for me in the long run and make my workflow quicker. Plus, I really don't want to upgrade anything for a while. I just wanted to get parts for a combination gaming/workhorse computer which will be doing a lot of relatively memory-intensive stuff and that I plan to keep for at least the next few years.

It's not like I use a lot of 16-bit or even DOS programs, and any 32-bit applications I use work fine in 64-bit XP. I just didn't remember about the old games I still occasionally like to play when I initially configured everything. And I only have access to Windows 98 and XP 64, so dual booting was the only viable option if I wanted to play those games. But I forgot about the whole Virtual PC option. Thanks for the heads up, Zarn. If it works, that would be a lot easier.

Oh man, I'm having trouble staying awake. I'm gonna go now. Feel free to berate me for my choice of hardware and software, I guess.

why must you make such poor choices, i hate you and everything you stand for blah blah blah

Well, I can work around that, but not the resolution issue.

32-bit can natively address 4 GB of RAM and up to 64 GB with PAE.

Yeah, but Windows doesn't. It also has a 2GB per app limit.

Wrong.


Somewhat wrong.

Stop reading [H].

Actually it's completely correct, There is a rather long winded explanation on anandtech here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3034 along with a number of tests.

Ever tried it? It wastes ~1GB of addressing space on something else, forget what it is now. I've never seen a person get all 4GB of RAM to be recognized.



True, with a patch and a properly compiled program you can extend it to 3GB, but that's is not exactly universally supported.

That's why I'm on 32 bit right now. 64 bit vista seems like a waste of resources right now.

Ahhh... Got some sleep. Nice to know that you did still try to educate me about various things, Emon.

I read a little about PAE before I bought my system, and basically I got the same kind of information as Obi did. According to Microsoft themselves, apparently 32-bit XP can only use up to 4GB of RAM even with the /PAE switch, and with SP2 can only use up to 4GB of physical address space. They even have a table that specifies the maximum usable amounts for various versions of Windows 2000, XP, and 2003, which states the same thing about the 4GB limit. So, unless you don't update your system with the service packs, you still run into the issue where Windows only sees at most somewhere around 3.25 GB due to device addressing, and depending on your system, it could be less. As far as I'm concerned, wasted memory is wasted memory. I also read about stability issues when using the /PAE switch. It just didn't seem like a decent solution.

PAE Support Granted, I didn't do an extreme amount of research into the OS when I bought the parts for my system. I had summer courses which required the computer, and my old machine wouldn't start up properly unless you smashed on the reset button for a few minutes after turning on the power. I had dealt with that for a couple of years, and finally gotten fed up with that and the problematic motherboard, so I looked for a decent set of components to buy, and bought the system. That's basically how I've gotten to this point.

Was that in response to Obi? Because the 4GB limit only applies to the 32-bit systems. In my case, it would be a waste for me to use 32-bit. I'd agree that Vista is a waste of resources, though. I've seen how much of a resource hog it can be.

edit: Oh yeah, and gwah?

What resolution issues are you talking about? I didn't run into any issues myself. It's running fine at my LCD's native res.