Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

vogons.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 66 posts

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#21

Post by suprjami »

shevy-java wrote: post #9

It was a pretty cool game. Not as good as e. g. civilisation but nonetheless fun. I even managed to make profits with my railroads. Young folks can use dosbox etc... but it just does not feel the same compared to how it was "originally". I could not get myself to want to play raildroad tycoon again; I found it easy to play games such as civilization or UFO: Enemy Unknown (oddly enough the first part is more playable…

OpenXcom adds a whole heap of wonderful conveniences to UFO/X-Com. It's probably my favourite open source game engine clone thing.

https://openxcom.org/

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#22

Post by CyMonk »

fakedang wrote: post #17
stoneforger wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of the games you mention it's civilization that's kind of hard to replay for me. RR tycoon had fewer, worse, iterations. All Xcom games are super replayable with the exception of Xcom 3. Colonization is super replayable and it's only reiteration based on Civ 4 is not worth it.

XCOM 3?

The third game in the series is "X-COM: Apocalypse".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCOM

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#23

Post by spockz »

stoneforger wrote: post #11
shevy-java wrote: post #9

It was a pretty cool game. Not as good as e. g. civilisation but nonetheless fun. I even managed to make profits with my railroads. Young folks can use dosbox etc... but it just does not feel the same compared to how it was "originally". I could not get myself to want to play raildroad tycoon again; I found it easy to play games such as civilization or UFO: Enemy Unknown (oddly enough the first part is more playable…

Of the games you mention it's civilization that's kind of hard to replay for me. RR tycoon had fewer, worse, iterations. All Xcom games are super replayable with the exception of Xcom 3. Colonization is super replayable and it's only reiteration based on Civ 4 is not worth it.

To this day I’ve managed to win in every civ game but still have to figure out how to consistently beat Colonisation.

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#24

Post by spockz »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #10

I loved this game so much. There was a "deluxe" version with small improvements. I would love to play a modern version of this. Probably true for other strategy classics like Master of Magic, Master of Orion 2, Colonization. Edit: ha, I remember that I used a really good tactic of playing with competitors' stocks, gaining majority, siphoning tons of money from them, and then selling the stocks. More profitable than r…

I have been hooked on Transport Fever for a while now. My only gripe with it is that civilian vehicles will take roads intended for cargo/public transport traffic only. So the most profitable way is to disconnect entire cities by road and then use rail or road with disjunct depots to connect cargo to cities. This way you can force civilians to use public transport.

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#27

Post by [deleted] »

shevy-java wrote: post #9

It was a pretty cool game. Not as good as e. g. civilisation but nonetheless fun. I even managed to make profits with my railroads. Young folks can use dosbox etc... but it just does not feel the same compared to how it was "originally". I could not get myself to want to play raildroad tycoon again; I found it easy to play games such as civilization or UFO: Enemy Unknown (oddly enough the first part is more playable…

[deleted]

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#28

Post by jrs235 »

KSteffensen wrote: post #25

Please fix the integer overflow. Total income over the game was tracked in a 32-bit signed int, so if you earned too much money suddenly the total would turn negative and your stocks would crash.

I never found the bug in that direction. I discovered it the opposite way: when starting out, selling shares (or was it taking loans?) all the shares you can. Get around 30+ million in the hole and continue to lose money. Eventually an arithmetic overflow will occur and then suddenly you'll have a net worth of like $30-40 million and have the money form selling stock to build to your heart's content.

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#29

Post by snvzz »

suprjami wrote: post #21
shevy-java wrote: post #9

It was a pretty cool game. Not as good as e. g. civilisation but nonetheless fun. I even managed to make profits with my railroads. Young folks can use dosbox etc... but it just does not feel the same compared to how it was "originally". I could not get myself to want to play raildroad tycoon again; I found it easy to play games such as civilization or UFO: Enemy Unknown (oddly enough the first part is more playable…

OpenXcom adds a whole heap of wonderful conveniences to UFO/X-Com. It's probably my favourite open source game engine clone thing. https://openxcom.org/

Dolls / Girls Frontline 2: Exilium[0][1][2] is a modern take on the XCOM concept.

Free (but gacha.)

0. https://gf2exilium.sunborngame.com/main

1. https://gf2.haoplay.com/jp/

2. https://store.steampowered.com/app/3308670/GIRLS_FRONTLINE_2...

Re: Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990

#30

Post by snvzz »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #20
jrs235 wrote: post #6

Loved that game. And Sid Meier's Colonization.

Not a penny for those heretic swines! No taxation without representation! and Wery well, we shall withdraw our forces! I was really disappointed when the both the remake and the open source versions lost those memorable quotes.

These days it's not PC to say that.

Because representation without taxation is a thing, and pointing at that, even as indirectly as this, is seen as "problematic".

Post reply on HN