To elaborate on what
@danno posted, some games might run with the OpenBOR 4.0 engine, because there are not that many breaking changes between it and 3.0 at all.
The catch is, "3.0 " refers to nearly a decade of incremental releases. Backward compatibility was a maxim at the time and maintained as much as possible, but little changes here and there inevitably did happen. So, a late 3.0 release vs. 4.0 probably just needs a tweak or two, whereas an early 3.0 release would take quite a bit of work to run on the later 3.0 versions, never mind 4.0.
Fixing them probably isn't super difficult from a technical perspective, but in practical terms, falls squarely under "not going to happen”. The creator would have to go in and tweak themselves. There might be a one line code change. Might have to take something to ground. Either way, still not happening. Most older games are one and dones to begin with - the creators are long gone and haven't shown their faces in the community since. The ones that are still here have probably moved on to other projects. Of those, very few are interested in supporting multiple platforms. They either stick with the older version for everything (e.g.
@O Ilusionista), or the newest possible (myself,
@Kratus).
I consider all the confusion about what OpenBOR is (an engine) and how it works to be a very severe side effect of the dogmatic mentality on backward compatibility support we stuck with for years. That, along with the engine's native multiple game menu support and referring to games as "mods". We are working to right that ship, but it's going to take a few years to filter through the community, and quite a while after before the outside world catches up. Reminds me of scripting - when for roughly 3-4 years after script support became a thing there were active anti script camps that tried to posit asinine, byzantine, and unstable workarounds to avoid writing a single line of script code that would do the same job.
DC
