What is "age doesn't define a 'retro game'" supposed to mean? Really?Both 20 years old, both "not retro". Why?
>>697478618who said they aren't retro? /vr/?
>>697478672Mostly, but it's also a matter of perception.They "can't be retro" because...I don't know, they came out when you were 19? Only kids who grew up in the 90s get to define retro gaming?
6th gen will never truly be retro to me because game design more or less standardized at that point take your average AAA game nowadays and dumb the graphics down and for all intents and purposes, it's a 6th gen game the reason 5th gen / PS1 / N64 era is retro is because it was still trying new things and is clearly different to the sort of games we get today
retro games is anything pre videogame crash
>why isnt this car from 2003 retro/vintage
>>697478618>Why?Retro is a design philosophy, not a time frame and consoles made after gen 5 tend to have similar games.
>>697478618When did meainstream game design completely stagnate?Then. That's when the cut off should be.
>>697478864Yeah its less about strictly the number age and more the "age" or era of design philosophy at play. The current era really is PS2+3
>>697478941Ah there we go...just what I wanted to see...
>>697478618go and play hl2 (2004), aside from graphics not being 4k and it having loading zones (and no aim down sights) it plays like any other shooter to this day which makes it hard to say "oh this is old style (or 'retro')" on the other hand I would call the ds (2004) retro because it is old style and you can tell while playing games for it they were really limited with what they can do
>>697478618Retro has always been about style, not age. A bowler is a retro hat, a baseball cap is not.The defining line between retro and modern in games is 2D and 3D. The only kind of blurry line would be "2.5"D like a lot of stuff on the DS.The mainline Pokémon games on it, for example, are technically a 3D game world but everything is still 2D in art. That's a modern stylr of game using retro style art.
>>697478618Retro isn't defined very well anyway.
>>697478618I would say retro games are those that are severely restricted by hardware. 5th gen era definitely still counts as retro with how much programming wizardry devs had to do to get 3D working properly. And even then many N64 games are just filled with bugs if you poke at them a little.You can maybe make a point for 6th gen also being kinda retro, but games were already way more streamlined and devs learned how to create 3D environments. 6th gen consoles can also render enough objects to actually do something with.
>>697478618they just dont want younger people fucking with their board
>>697478618It's like how Elvis is oldies but ZZ Top is not oldiesThere used to be a point where eras were fixed in place, but at some point younger people getting older decided that eras should be sliding, which is why there are people calling Nickelback "classic rock" right this instantThese are the same people who want Wii U to be retro. They're retarded and think things should change for them even though that's not how it worked previously
>>697479497>That's a modern stylr of game using retro style art.No it's not. The DS graphics were cutting edge for handhelds at the time. Sprites + 3D was the era, nothing about it was retro.
There’s no official definition for what’s retro in context of video games, so everyone makes their own one.For me, it can’t solely be X amount of years, because by that way, you get utterly silly results one way or another. For example, Final Fantasy III absolutely was retro when compared to Final Fantasy X, or Super Mario World when compared to Sunshine, and those were 11/12 year differences. But when you apply that to today, you get silly results like calling Portal 2 or GTA V retro - doesn’t make sense, because either could basically be released today and feel like modern games. So, the gap has to be about design philosophy, not about years, and it means that it can’t be linear.But on the other hand, all the>games made in year X will NEVER be retro, all made past Y will be considered as part of the same era forevermentality reeks of people who refuse to accept that decades fly by, and our generation won’t be there do define cutoff points forever, so I can’t subscribe to that either. It’s just that when gaming moves forward slower when it is an established medium, the cutoff point also moves forward slower.
If you can emulate it, it's a retro game
>>697480236So the original Xbox isn't retro? Despite the GameCube being retro (and older)?
>>697478618Basically "my childhood was special" cope from an increasingly older and sadder cohort of people. 80s and 90s kids are the worst for this.
>>697480236I can emulate the PS3...
>>697478618PSP and DS is retro, I played those as a young child and I'm almost 30 now
>>697478618Retro is anything that runs in a resolution below 720p
>>6974806273DS is retro?
>>697480329"If you can emulate it, then it's retro" does not imply that "if you can't emulate it, therefore it is not retro". Genuinely low IQ reply anon, you're smarter than this
>>697480563I believe they are too, but "retro" is so I'll defined there's not really a definitive answer.It should be more like "vintage" items. Over X years, you're retro.
>>697480558>18 year old console Yup, it's retro
>>697480659Yes.
>>697480667>Can't emulate original Xbox>It's still retro despite not being able to be emulated.>"If it can be emulated, it's retro".It doesn't fit the definition, therefore it's not retro.
>>697480709anything 20 years old is definitely retro. But maybe they can make boards based on decades instead. pre-2000s, 2000-2010, 2010-2020, and current /v/ which is gonna be 2020-2030
>>697478864>take your average AAA game nowadays and dumb the graphics down and for all intents and purposes, it's a 6th gen gameI fucking wish
>>697480236I can emulate switch games that haven't even come out yet. Now we're calling games with a negative age retro
>>697480236isnt there a ps4 emulator? sure, its not good, but its there.also>switchalso>switch 2
>>697480810>anything 20 years old is definitely retroYou can say that sure, but there's literally no reason to assume this is true.Again, retro isn't very well defined. Some people think retro is an era, and games from after the 80's can't be retro.
>>697478618Retro is like a nice way of saying "dated, Games from 20 years ago have more in common with current gen games than 20 years did to those from 30 years agomaybe most people only think of the generations they weren't alive for as "retro"So its different for different ages of people?Gamecube isn't "retro" to me, I got to see it release, but someone who is 18 now would have been born around the time the wii was releasing.
>>697480809anon...
>>697480847>ps411 year old console? Yeah, it's retro. By the way, when the PS4 came out in 2013, games from 2000 were definitely considered retro>switchIt's a console that runs on retro hardware. If you release a 16 but console today, the games that come out definitely aren't going to be old but they'll still be retro, in the sense that they have a retro aesthetic
>>697480982>Gamecube isn't "retro" to me, I got to see it release,GameCube is retro to me and I got to see it release.
>>697480809I take it back, you're not smarter than this. God bless you
>>697481063>It's definitely retro>It runs on retro hardware!Define "retro" in your next post. Cite sources for your definition, thanks.
>>697481114Explain why I'm wrong. Go ahead. Should be easy for a genius like you.
If it doesn't allow saving or saving requires a separate device or saving is done by writing down a code or saving can stop working because batteries die THEN it is retro.
>>697480236you can easily emulate switch games
>>697481265thats just your own retarded arbitrary definition. will the xbone still be "modern" in 20 years time?
>>697482021If the saves stop working on your console for any reason, your console is not retro according to this guy.I wouldn't worry about his flawed opinion.
>>697482117i dont know why i entertained his shit post. thanks for your wise words
>>697482021It's neither arbitrary nor retarded. Do not use words you do not understand.>>697482117 (You)I never said any reason you pathetic samefag
>>6974788646th gen graphics is all we'll ever needanything more is an insult the the medium
>>697478618Because games haven't changed much from the PS3/360 era. On the other hand, there is a distinct difference in presentation and gameplay between games up to the PS2 era (retro games) and everything afterwards (modern games). If we're gonna nitpick, not all games on the PS2 are retro either but let's not open that can of worms.
Pre-HD is retro, first revision xbox-360 excluded.7th gen is not nor will it ever be retro because the industry stagnated so hard after.
>>697482021If games don't significantly change or advance then yes the xbone will still be modern 20 years from now, just like how the 360 still is modern today.
>>697482475This is how I personally feel but I'm not imposing my will on others.
>>697482475this. it's quite simple.
>>697482342it is arbitrary, how you save your progress is not how games are judged and is something you simply decided. youve presented something subjective as fact
>>697482660You really do not know what arbitrary means do you?
>>697482342>I never said any reason you pathetic samefagI'm not a samefag, want me to post my (you)s?Also to quote you>If it doesn't allow savingThat means I was correct :^)
>>697482730Why do you think your definition isn't arbitrary? Go ahead.
>>697480827See >>697481063
>>697483274I'm still waiting for you to define "retro".Go ahead.>>697481152
>>697481152>relating to, reviving, or being the styles and especially the fashions of the past : fashionably nostalgic or old-fashionedNotice how "relating to" and "reviving" are also in the definition.https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retro#:~:text=ret%C2%B7%E2%80%8Bro%20%CB%88re%2D(,fashionably%20nostalgic%20or%20old%2Dfashioned
>>697483459So you think the Switch is "definitely retro hardware"...why? It's using modern parts that are produced today.
>>697483459I have to admit, you're literally just correct. That's that then, good job
>>697483459My new phone is "related to" the first ever phone. Does that mean my new phone is retro too?
>>697483540There are a bunch of retro products which are produced brand new as retro products. This does not contradict the provided definition at all. Again, "relating to" and "reviving".
>>697483661>>697483459Obvious samefag is obvious.
>>697483692How would you feel if you hadn't had breakfast this morning?
>>697483758So yes, you think the newest iPhone is retro. Thanks for confirming your own retardation.
>>697478618I don't like being reminded of how old I am.
>>697483815I haven't had breakfast this morning and I feel fine. What's your point?
>>697478864>take your average AAA game nowadays and dumb the graphics down and for all intents and purposes, it's a 6th gen game yeah I remember playing online multiplayer hero shooters and free for all 100 person battle royales on my PS2
There is certainly a logic behind the “its not about time but feeling” argument. While “feeling” might not be the most useful word to describe whats going on, there is undoubtedly a truth behind it, its just like how a ancient greek could probably understand 16 century european society but you place him in the 18 century, post Industrial Revolution and he would be completely confused. Its the sane with consoles, there are desing choices that just feel ancient because they are not part of the “meta” of modern game development. For example a turn based strategy game that uses squares, or a FPS that lets you hold an infinite amount of weapons and you cycle through them by pressing the numbers in the keyboard.
>>697480847"Emulation" means "can take the place of the original hardware with minimal compromise", I'm sure you're aware.
>>697483893Guess he didn't have one.>>697484526>"Emulation" means "can take the place of the original hardware with minimal compromise"Where did you pull this definition from? Your ass? A game being poorly emulated is still being emulated by definition.
>>697484526Since when is that what it means? Most emulation is spotty for years before reaching a point where there's minimal compromise
>>697484635It's the functional understanding of the term. That's what matters when trying to communicate with others.
>>697484723How would you feel if you hadn't had breakfast this morning?
>>697478618I'm a retro streamer and my personal cutoff for retro games is the HD era rather than age. I think that's what majorly changed core game design philosophy in the seventh gen, chasing graphics and a more cinematic experience to show them off and justify the money spent, with bloated budgets and less focus on gameplay and fun.
>>697484893Kind of annoyed.
>>697484723>Asked what point he was trying to make>Doesn't answer the questionWhy not? Can't do it?
>>697479340Does it have yellow paint though
>>697478931retro != vintage
>>697485054No one who asks "can I emulate the PS4" is asking "can I boot into the system BIOS", they mean "is it possible to launch and play Bloodborne to a degree that not having the console is an acceptable tradeoff".
>>697485297It is
>>697485297>It's only emulation when it's goodAgain, where did you pull this definition from? Your own ass?>No one who asks "can I emulate the PS4" is asking "can I boot into the system BIOS"They literally are. Why do you think nobody wants that?
>>697485447We're end users, not fucking devs.You might get an ANSWER that "we've only been able to launch the BIOS" if you ask if it's possible to emulate a console but to ask about the state of emulation as an end user pertains to the games you could use it to play, not how far along the replication process is. Being able to get into a low-level system process via an emulator has no functional purpose unless you're interested in building something to interact with it, which isn't something like a mainstream emulation community would want to know.
>>697485609>Dodged the question>AgainAre you a Muslim by chance? You "argue" exactly like one.Please don't dodge my question again.>>697485447>"It's only emulation when it's good">Again, where did you pull this definition from? Your own ass?
>>697485740Yes, I am defining this in my own rationalization.So don't fucking disregard it. It's a perfectly valid comprehension and one I am fully justified in applying unilaterally.
>>697478618Because we're a stuck culture. Sometime around 2008 everything just froze. We're talking about the same franchises, same musicians, same tech. Nothing new is being made.
>>697485987>Yes, I am defining thisOh good, then you are admitting it's not factual. Concession accepted, thanks for admitting you were wrong and had to make-up your own definitions for words.
>>697486069I JUST SAID DO NOT DISREGARD IT, YOU FUCKING COCKSUCKER.JUST BECAUSE I MADE UP THE DEFINITION DOES NOT MEAN IT'S INCORRECT.
>>697486154>JUST BECAUSE I MADE IT UP DOESNT MEAN ITS NOT TRUEThis is what schizophrenic people actually believe lol.Concesson accepted, that means you lose and I win.;^)
I 100% assure you I will be making a thread specifically dedicated to this issue. Remember this conversation, because I want to see you there.
>>697486154You literally argued that the definition is based con consensus, if you just made it up on the spot it can't be correct
>>697486274Well I can't deny that it's something I had to contrive.But it's based on evidence I observed and believe I can apply to every situation.
>>697486225Who are you talking to? Why are you so scared you have to run away and make another thread, instead of replying to the person ITT you are fighting with?Seems cowardly and feminine.
You know what, I am sorry, I shouldn't try to make up definitions for other people.I withdraw.
>>697486341>But it's based on evidenceSo supply the evidence.If you can not prove this to be 100% true in your next post, guess what? It's not true!Go ahead. Prove yourself right, or die like a dog.
>>697486410There isn't any, I was desperate to overturn the argument and I started coming at it from a place of facetiousness.
>>697478618Take me back.
iirc depends on the technology. all hdmi products are retro
>>697478618To begin with, retro video games are game that are emulating a style of older games. Like all of these faggy Earthbound knock-offs that indieshits make. Those are retro. Old games themselves are vintage if they are twenty years or older, but hey are not retro, unless they were emulating an even older style of vidya at the time of release. "Retro Gaming" on the other hand could be interpreted as the playing of old vidya.
>>697478618I think it's better to define them as periods rather than a weird moving time frame that has somehow become "10 years". Pre-2000s/Post-2000s was actually a pretty good definer for a while and I'd argue is still pretty good today.It's better to just have set definitions for vidya like how generations are, it's just weird for (current year - 10) to be retro when it just starts to stretch out the whole "retro" definition. Old? Sure. The PS4 is 11 years old, that's a decade ago, but retro in the same class as the NES? It's just strange. Like why is it only for games? Do we call movies or cars "retro" because ten years have passed? Should I consider Birdman in the same vein as I do The Godfather because they're both older than ten years? It's like that joke in Futurama where Fry is listening to I Like Big Butts and Leela chimes in that he can't just listen to "classical music" all the time. It just seems weird to have this one definition be a moving time frame as opposed to a period.
Most people who scream that "NOOOOO THIS ISN'T RETRO!!!!" are still stuck with a belief that the n64 released merely 5 years ago.Decades may pass and the same people will still have a meltdown that the PS2 is a "modern console" and not retro
What console were considered retro 20 years ago?
>>697487447NES and Atari.
>>697487447Unironically the N64 and PS1 were considered retro in 2004
>>697487865Mmm...really? Because that was just one generation previous.Though I could also see the merit. The graphical leap between the PS1 and 2 was substantial. Textures had defined images on them, faces could actually move, the graphics no longer felt pixelated but with genuine definition (despite being somewhat soft, which got fixed up in the HD gen).
Rediscovering the PSP library and it is genuinely an awful handheld.>watered down ports>sports>jrpg #8012>sportsWhat the hell there are only a handful of decent games
>>697487986Locoroco
>>697488048Wow 1 game. Ok patapon is pretty cool too, I was excited to get back into playing the PSP only to be massively disappointed
The problem with this logic is that the seventh console gen fucked it up, that era was abnormally long so it's hard to categorize everything in it as retro.Take the PS3 for example, even though it's "599 US dollars giant enemy crab riiiidge racer" launch feels ancient, The Last of Us doesn't, and both happened within the same gen.
Retro =/= Outdated
>>697487147I actually agree with this, but the problem is that retro is just an insanely badly defined term and most people see it as equivalent to ”old”, so it’s unlikely that you could realistically nail the term down to some particular era. I’d be all in to have better terms for different eras and design movements, though, such as in music.Good example being something like ” New wave of British heavy metal”, which might be a long and cumbersome term, but at least it is clearly defined and there are no issues with people trying to stretch it to dozen different meanings, everyone knows what you mean when you say it.
>>697488253PS3 had 256 mb of ram, a 60 gig HDD, and a GPU with 256mb of DDR3 RAM. A PC with similar specs would be considered "retro" these days.
>>697481228 ‘Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.’
>>697478618defining retro by passed time is retarded.a 360 game is exactly the same dogshit we have right now.
>PS4 games will be retro in a few years>games still look and play exactly the sameYou can call me grandpa all you want, gen 5 was the last true retro gen. Either deal with it or make up a new term
>>697488253Yeah, it might not be a popular opinion on /v/, but I see both>6th gen and early 7th gen, games are mostly released as ”ready” self-contained packages and made with more modest budgetsand>late 7th gen to today, games become updatable services and are designed as such, budgets balloon up to massive extentas completely separate eras. It’s not even about controls, graphics or platforms, but about design philosophies.
>>697488616Yeah the fucking slopfest that was announced during the game awards is just like 360 era games
>>697487986>>697488191>Three good Monster Hunter games (one japan only but you can download a translated version) with good graphics for PSP>2 full God of War games with REALLY good graphics>One pretty good Ace Combat game>Def Jam: The Takeover (not as good as fight for ny but still a good game)>pretty much 1 to 1 port of The Warriors>metal gear games>all the various yu-gi-oh games>pangya
>>697488758>>697488782Is there an acceptable term for "made with different design philosophies that are no longer used" that isn't "retro?" Anything else made fundamentally different from how it is made now would be called retro in any other context.
>>697488796lol ninja gaiden was already way out by then.its not even a good cherry picked example.
>>697487147Pre-NESNES to 20002001-2006I'd say those were the time periods before mainstream gaming settled on to what it is today, besides things like GaaS
>>697488914Here's another. I'm sure Intergalactic is going to be just like this old 360 game in terms of design philosophy
>>697489061halo is absolutely the type of babby moron console shooter we have everywhere now.imagine unironically calling halo3 retro jesus christ. its laughable and sad. you missed out on games being actually different.
>>697478743This so much this! Ages constantly shift forward! We should move the middle ages up to 1800s, and make the 1980s the renaissance.
>>697478618"retro is a specific time period" niggers are the same subhumans who think that loli is a body type. pay no heed to their psychotic ramblings.
>>697489325Aside from halo infinite that released half a decade ago what are you actually referring to?
>>697489405That would be an apt comparison if people wanted to change console generations, not entire concepts of historiography
>>697489598gay baby shooters made for gamepad are all we get right now. everything is galo now.intergalactic is just uncharted which is also gaylo.everything else is basically assassins creed now. the 360 era is terminal and never ending.
>>697489697Then replace middle ages and renaissance in my example, with baroque and neoclassic.
>>697489832Uncharted plays nothing like Halo. Even modern third person shooters play nothing like the original Uncharted
retards will call the piss4 retro soon while kids still play PS4 games like fortnite and act like things are so much different.
>>697489832Have any examples of games that play like Halo 3 though? I want to play them since I quite like it.
>>697489930yeah man. totally.
>>697490047Whatever the newest Call of Duty is
>>697490278Even Halo doesn't do all the sliding and reverse-running...
>>697490278The newest Call of Duty doesn't even play like its Xbox 360 entries let alone Halo which is designed totally differently.
>>697489061Halo 3 already went into the modern design philosophy box by being designed with map DLC in mind hand having extensive online forge/theater functionalities. It has more common with games of today than with games of 6th gen for example.
>>697490473>it's totally different guys I swearIt's just Call of Duty 4 released for the 20th time. Games today are exactly the same as they were during the 360
>>697490548Paid DLC is pretty antiquated at this point you usually get new maps for free plus a battlepass in new games.
>>697478618What? No, it means that just because something is x years old it doesn't magically become retro. Pre-6th gen is retro, anything after is a different category entirely. Simple as that.
>>697490615Cope
>>697490615>Paid DLC is pretty antiquated at this pointLOL
>>697489405>>697489918This is such a false equivalence. Saying that something should be called retro is not the same as saying it should be called a different era entirely, that doesn't even make sense.
>>697491176It's like saying that because acdc is classic rock that means it's 60s psychedelia. Like no retard, both 60s and 80s classic rock fall under the umbrella of classic rock, just like the ds and ps1 are both retro systems despite being from different eras.
>>697478618Because "retro" gaming is a specific period of time where standards in both controls and general features weren't set yet, where visuals were constantly advancing, where even basic things as menus weren't wholly figured out, where people were constantly experimenting with genres and ideas because it was still an open season, and where the entire mentality of how a game was made was completely different.A very simple example is the silent movie era leading into black and white era leading into the very early color era of television and movies. Filming styles were all over the place, filming practices were completely slapdash, the standards that did exist were all over the place and unregulated most of the time, animals were killed on set, etc. Citizen Kane literally cemented so many staples we see in filmmaking today.Another simple example is the Silver Age of comics compared to, what was it, the 50's or 60's when they finally got off their backs with how a comic was supposed to be done?OoT is essentially gaming's Citizen Kane as it started standardizing a lot of control schemes, gameplay structures, and mechanics we'd see become basic and commonplace today. In my opinion "Retro gaming"'s cutoff is around the GBA or DC back. By the point of the PS2 we already had standardized everything, devs were very quickly moving away from PS1 standards, Xbox came into the picture, Nintendo even with the GC had a fairly standard set of controls, subgenres were starting to cement like Metroidvanias, graphical quality leaps weren't enormous from that point forward (They're notable but not huge like before), PSP and DS games both were still fairly standard with their practices even if they still experimented with the limitations or gimmicks of their system, etc.It's not just age or graphics, it's everything that leads up to standardization when it comes to entertainment. Playing an NES game is nothing like playing a PS2 game but similar enough to a Genesis game.
>>697489405Wow good point grandpa, let's get you back to bed now.
>>697491401>Because "retro" gaming is a specific period of timeWhich period of time?
>>697490593LMAO, it's really fuckin' not. It's so much more bombastic and spastic now.
>>697492367From Pong or the Magnavox Odyssey to around the DC or GBA.All of those games from that era follow more or less the same design ethos, they have non-standard control schemes, they don't utilize dual analog sticks as a standard nor to they utilize the single stick they might have in a way we'd use them now, their attempts at 3D are still rudimentary with the DC being the main stepping stone to actual 3D gaming we see going forward, many of the games are developed akin to arcade design principles which became much more of a rarity around gen 6, there were no patches at all, online gaming only became a thing around PS2 and GC outside of PC, and so on.A great example is that you regularly saw arcade-esque games even in 3D on things like the DC with Space Channel 5 or Crazy Taxi but that fell off hard going forward and while you had the occasional Contra or Metal Slug it was relegated to a much smaller niche instead of the main way gaming is done. You can even argue that the point from where games stopped actively displaying scores for non-arcade games is the cutoff which would be roughly PS1.
>>697493106>From Pong or the Magnavox Odyssey to around the DC or GBAVery interesting, do you happen to have a source for this particular claim?
>>697493262Me. It is a claim I am making. Why are you trying to make this so serious?
>>697493106>You can even argue that the point from where games stopped actively displaying scores for non-arcade games is the cutoff which would be roughly PS1.ZeldaMetroidDragon QuestFinal FantasySuper Mario Bros 2Mega ManMetal GearThis isn't even going into any remotely niche stuff, these are just series from among the best selling NES games of all time which did not display or track scores
>>697478931You can get vintage plates on any car older than 20 years so basically you’re a fuckin retard
>>697478965Probably around 2007 or 2008
>>697478618retro means something new made to look like something from the pastvintage means it's a genuine item from that era
>>697493645>which did not display or track scoresMega Man absolutely displayed and tracked scores.Super Mario Bros 2. tracked scores, but I know you mean DDP/SMB2 and not the normal SMB2 so fair enough.The point is that a huge chunk of games in that period of time showed completely pointless scores for killing enemies, beating stuff on a time limit, beating levels without getting hit, etc. Ninja Gaiden is a very simple example of a major game series that did.
>>697494265Well in some games score points also contributed lives or continues.
>>697494369True, and that's another way to point to a great example of where you can start seeing where the split is. "Lives" as a concept started dying out around gen 6 as well with the GBA being the main one keeping it around while the PS2 and GC started moving away. Sure, there was stuff like I-Ninja and Crash, but for every one game that did it so many weren't.
>>697491176Retro refers to a specific era of games, it doesn't mean old.
>>697495997Well, alright, but then what of the stuff that came out "after" that era? It's just "games", doesn't matter?
>>697478618cause vidya doesn't follow your rules, man
>>697493106So you don't have an exact date? So you don't have an exact definition.So we're no closer to solving this.
>>697496219Yes, it's just games. You can make a new term for them if you'd like, but you have to figure out the glue that brings them all together, because there's not much that defines everything after that that you can conglomerate them into compared to the "retro" games. Everything after the "retro" period has access to patches, downloads, microtransactions, online multiplayer, online servers, mods, etc. There's nothing that really differentiates gaming after the "retro" gaming period because it's so standardized and there's no notable major leaps. Even in that crossover period of gen 6 to what would now be "modern gaming" it still primarily leaned far more towards what is standard now than what was before, and it wasn't such an enormous leap in visual quality compared to the enormous leaps we saw from something like the SNES to PS1.>>697496395>So you don't have an exact date? So you don't have an exact definition.I gave you my exact criteria. It's either the original Table Tennis on that oscilloscope, Pong, or the Maganavox Odyssey depending on if you want to start with the very first game ever created, the very first game released to the public, or the very first game console released to the public. The end point would be based on either the Dreamcast or the GBA because both still have not made the giant leap in graphical fidelity, standardization, or from arcade gameplay and didn't dabble in things like online gaming which all three of the gen 6 systems did.You can't just blanket say everything sixth gen backwards is "retro" because the PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube would be ridiculous to call "retro" as that was the point when everything was starting to standardize, we started losing mechanics that were staples for decades like the lives and score systems, their graphical quality was pretty much the point where things started to slowly improve rather than be giant leaps over each other, and so on.
>>697478618The biggest debunk is ps1 to ps2 is larger than ps2 to ps5.
/his/ got a update/gif/ got killedbut we can't get /v2k/early xbox360 is retro.
>>697490278I can play halo3 WITHOUT giving my email to activision.YOU CAN'T PLAY current call of duty without an email.
>>697478618The DS and 3DS literally use code from the N64 in several of their games.
any 18 year old or younger is absolutely going to call the 6th gen old as fuck. which might as well be calling them retro. i think a lot of it is just the inability for older zoomies and all millennials to accept the fact that they're all old lame dad ages now and it gives them a sense of dread they want to avoid.
>>697496386Seems more like other people want rules to exist but struggle to explain them.
>>697501189You literally needed an email to subscribe to Xbox Live back in the day
>>697502878what? you can play halo 3 without internet connection. You can play co-op couch halo 3 without online connection.You can't do that in current vidya.
>>697496976>I gave you my exact criteriaYour "exact criteria" didn't have any exact dates. Please post them for me.
>>697501234Which ones? How can you prove this? I'd love to see.
>>697504784What part of me talking about how you can't give dates makes no sense to you? You can't give dates, that's the entire point. You point at the systems which is why I'm pointing at DC and GBA. If I give you dates then that would mean PS2, GC, and Xbox would all fall under them because the GBA lived for a good several years into gen 6.
>>697504871Star Fox 64 3DOoT 3D Majora's Mask 3DSM64DSDiddy Kong Racing DSThe list goes on
>>697505004So you admit you "can't give exact dates" and you haven't posted the exact definition of retro...so why are you pretending like you have?
>>697505241And you can prove this...how? This isn't proof of anything anon, it's just a list
>>697478864>the reason 5th gen / PS1 / N64 era is retro is because it was still trying new things and is clearly different to the sort of games we get todayI agree to an extent, but when I go back to the GameCube, I get a similar feel from the games, though they are undeniably closer to modern design approaches.The same is also true for the Wii/PS3/360 era to a much lesser degree. I won’t deny that a lot of slop was flying around. Pretty much the beginning of the end if I had to pinpoint one.
>>697505462the beginning of the end was when we lost the blades 360 dashboard. fact.
>>697505309>and you haven't posted the exact definition of retroI've given you my exact definition of retro. It's gaming before it was properly standardized and had noticeable leaps in technology and quality with each release. I've given you my exact timeframe, it's GBA and DC backward. So GBA is retro, DC is retro, the rest of gen 6 is not retro. Everything prior to GBA is.
>>697505415They are literally N64 ports, what code do you think they're running on?
>>697505656>My exact definition>My definitionOh, so you admit it's not a real definition, and you made it up? Thanks for confirming it's not the actual definition of the word.
>>697505734You haven't proved anything yet anon, why not?
>>697505963I have proved it though
>>697506189Where? Quote the post that has any proof in it.You have only posted conjecture and theories, no evidence has been posted by (you). Why not?
>>697478618It means retro isn't defined by age, but a distinct change in style. Modern games aren't that much different from 15-20 year old ones, but both are vastly different from 30 year old games.
>>697506292Here >>697505241
>>697506398>Modern games aren't that much different from 15-20 year old onesif that was the case then /v/ would actually play video games. what is this cope.
>>697506406That proves nothing anon. You are saying that it's true, but it's proof of literally nothing.Why can't you prove yourself correct? If it's true, it should be easy to prove it.
>>697506583I have already proved it
>>697506398In some ways, you’re right, but the past 10 years have been exceptionally bleak for gaming. It’s not as if the Wii was a high point for gaming, but you can’t honestly say the Switch has more charm or less bullshit than the Wii.
>>697506549>>697506842Right, I meant more in terms of the fundamentals. Gameplay, controls, mechanics, NPC AI and so on, all that has been the same for a long time and all we've had are incremental updates in graphical fidelity. As for themes and content, I agree that games have gone to shit more recently.
>>697506398>Modern games aren't that much different from 15-20 year old onesyes they are...
>>697507105nowadays you get>AAA movie game>GAAS always online multiplayer slop to milk zoomies and streamers>indieslop pixelshit>gachaslopwe'll get a decent actual game once in a blue moon but the vast majority of releases are this.
>>697507328But Astro Bot doesn't count.
>>697486643You'd think Tiger would have what it takes to pull off a good handheld system. Tiger was in this incredible position to have access to so many different licenses. To be honest, Game.com did have some well known ones like Resident Evil 2, Sonic Jam, Duke Nukem , Fighters MegaMix, Jurassic Park, Mortal Kombat and even had a Symphony of the Night in development. Tiger had access to every IP you could think of. Yet they managed to produce this bizarrely mangled handheld system called the game.com. The system has a 10MHz 8bit CPU that was made by Sharp. On paper it looked better than the GameBoy. https://youtu.be/PwwjEgqznSY?t=34
>>697507585astro bot is too expensive so i haven't played it yet but it seems like an okay platformer. the>ALL THE STARS ARE HEREaspect of it when sony doesn't actually do anything with 99% of their IPs or classic franchises is kind of gay though.
>>697478618they are definitely retro at this point, but allowing 6th gen on /vr/ was a mistake. board became unusable for months because of PS2fag spam and posting quality never recovered.should've made /v2k/ as many suggested, but the damage is already done.>but that would make the boards slow!!!!slow boards are good if you actually care about discussion and don't just want quick (you)s.
>>697508121yeah and while we're at it just rename /v/ to crying about wokeshit and make it a nsfw board. this board hasn't been about video games for a long time so just save our amazing moderation staff the trouble of pretending even slightly that anything here is enforced.
>>697506658No you have not. If you think you have, you do not know what the word "proof" means.
>>697509525I have, I even linked you where I did it. I can't force you to accept it, but I proved it and that's all there is to it
>>6974786186th gen is not really retro because game formulas more or less standardized around the time and all the small studios that made cool shit got eaten up by the big goys.
>>697510487>game formulas more or less standardized around the timeYou keep repeating this, but it's blatantly not true
>>697510652>shooters solved>rts solved>action games solved>survival horror solved>mmo's solved>[name the genre] solved
>>697508121Yeah, I don’t really give a shit about term definitions, boards should be split on whatever is best for discussion.
>>697510832Battle royale games solved in the PS2?
>>697511147Neither was gacha. I wonder why.
The video game industry is effectively a newborn fresh out the womb compared to many other forms of entertainment that have existed for thousands of years.Video games have only been around for 50 or 70 if you really want to be like that, which is a micro blip in human history. This is the reason people have so much trouble calling certain games and console generations "retro"
>>697507621>You'd think Tiger would have what it takes to pull off a good handheld system.Their experience was exclusively in shovelware with two buttons meant to keep a kid's attention for ten minutes on road trips, what exactly did you expect? It's like expecting the Leapfrog people to make a GBA competitor because they have experience in a very specific field.
>>697511432There's no reason why games as a medium should arbitrarily only start counting when the "vídeo" part was introduced. Remove that limitation, and it's older than writing
>>697478618Retro IS the stuff that came out 20 years or more ago, because retro means not contemporary.The fact that the change is as fast as it is makes me wonder if 20 years is not too much.>Muh design>Muh high definition>Muh 3d graphics
