Why couldn't it run on DOS?
Why indeed
Because it needed GPU support.
>>12466979Yes... why indeed.
>>12466976PC game market was quite shit all the way to the early 2000s (DirectX and GPUs), that's all.It just made more sense to make games for consoles, where you would sell more copies.
>>12466993What are you even talking about, you LARPing zoomer retard? The OP wasn't asking the question you think he was.
>>12466976It could but DOS had run its course in the eyes of the industry. After 1996 it declined rapidly in the commercial space.There's a Dos version of the 3dfx libraries, so anything could have been done in DOS. I got the libraries(via WatcomC) rendering some triangle many years back. As soon as I'll pick up another 3dfx card I'll have to check out the "voodoo version" of Blood.There's a lot to set up but I have to say that 3dfx made the interface quite simple. No wonder all the techies like Carmack & Co. fell in love with it.
>>12466987Not really. Tomb Raider was more complex game and ran fine on 486, so did Duke 3D.And there was Bioforge and Knight's Chase. Both ran on 486 with a VGA card.It's just that PC game market was shit.
>>12467027RE PC runs like ass on recommended Pentium 133Mhz specs
>>12467027Also it's not like PSX had some uber GPU. It was just a 66Mhz math chip, which was basically antiquated by 1995.
>>12467027>Tomb Raider was more complex game and ran fine on 486It will run like a slideshow unless you have a top end 486 like a DX4 or an Am5x86
>>12466976required directx
>>12467035I do have Am5x86 now but in the 90s I think it was 486 at 100Mhz maybe. Quake ran like shit on it, Duke3D and Tomb Raider were fine.
>>12466976Probably could've. Just look at Bioforge from 1995:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UPRfJ6ZeC8Running on DOS. It's per-rendered backgrounds, tank controls, the works. And it came out a year before Resident Evil's PS1 debut. Yeah, RE could've worked on DOS fine.Why they didn't make a DOS port? At a guess: the PC port came out in 1997 - around the time almost all developers switched over from DOS to Windows, it's that simple. Yeah there's a few titles that got both a DOS and Windows release in 97, but by 1998 that was becoming a rarity.(inb4 someone says RE's PC port came out in 1996 in Japan. I know - it came out in December 1996, so just barely)
>>12466976There are tons of games that would've run on DOS, possibly even better since you don't have the overhead of Windows/DirectX. The reason is .. DOS sucked and everyone hated it.
>>12467056t. childa lot of people were hesitant to jump to win95 specifically because they thought their dos programs would not run in it.
It came very late and japanese-made PC games rarely used DOS (unless RE was outsourced to some western dev)
>>12467140It still sucked.
>>12467056DOS was quirky but thanks to the DPMI interface / software it was a really cool base for a semi-bare metal x86 platform.
>>12466993I'm a tech moron, but i think the reason why DOS was kill for gaming is DirectX. I remember every new game requiring it and something about shaders
do remember as well that with DOS you were in total control of the PC and not have to share anything with the operating system--Windows is always in the background using some system resources
Because the writing was on the wall by 1996, DOS was basically on death's doorstep, and the message was clear, aim for Windows or die. It wasn't worth catering towards the old ass nerds still using DOS without windows.
>>12466976Who cares? DOS sucks.
>>12467842Shaders came later on but yes windows was an "interface streamlining access to hardware". Similar things have happened before with the (video-)BIOS and software side even when things were still running under DOS. The VESA interface enabled one to call 32 bit code(e.g. palette, address switch, ...) from the video bios instead of using a slower software interrupt based approaches.
>>12467140They were a vocal minority of nerds that was basically abandoned by the industry by the late 90s.
