/vr/ - Retro Games

>>1546840
Maybe when we reach 2020

>>1546840
2025.

I think for something to be actually considered Retro, it should be over 20 years old.

For me past the 32X isn't retro, retro for me is anything pre 3D era.

>>1546840
2084.

(See what I did there?)

>>1546853
>retro for me is anything pre 3D era
You GREATLY underestimate how long 3D has been a thing. Earliest example of polygons I can name is Alone in the Dark, released in 1992.

>>1546840
Probably next year. 15 years old should be the standard.

/vr/ is barely a year old.
When the board was created the Wii-U was already released and the release for Xbone and PS4 was nearing.
It would be reasonable to expect that the current cutoff won't change until a new generation of consoles gets released. But of course it's moot who makes the rules and not reason.

>>1546863
>You GREATLY underestimate how long 3D has been a thing. Earliest example of polygons I can name is Alone in the Dark, released in 1992.
You know what Anon meant. There have been polygon games since the early 80s, but the 3D era is the PSX onward. When 3D became a craze.

Anyway, I feel that /vr/ should be "20th century games".

PS2/xbox era is still with us. It doesn't really matter how long ago it was, because the games are the same exact stuff in lower resolution.

>>1546865
When this picture doesn't enrage you, then gen 6 will be retro.

>>1546840
By the time my friends and I get jobs were the kids who grew up with the 6th Gen mostly. Some of us are already in college (like myself) but I don't see it being retro anytime soon. Feels like the 6th gen just happened 2 years ago.

>>1546840
Gaming rapidly changed in the 2000s. A game like Wind Waker may be ten years old, but isn't considered retro by most people.

The graphics, for the most part, look how they're "supposed to". It uses very modern hardware compared to A Link to the Past, or even Ocarina of Time.

>>1546939
Yet we consider Windows games released in 1999 as retro.

I consider retro every console that has been discontinued and has been dropped by both the official producers and developers in at the very least 7-8 years. This model has a flaw because there are consoles who lived well past their expiration date, namely the PS2.

retro is not just about an amount of time... what the hell is wrong with this board? retro =/= old

>>1546840
LTTP was considered retro because it was vastly different then the games from 2001/3/4... But those PS2/GC/Xbox games play exactly the same like modern ones, just in lower resolution. Do you also consider music and movies from 2004 retro because a decade passed? Is Snoop Dogs Drop it like its hot and Spiderman 2 retro now? No? Something may be nostalgic to you, but that does not make it retro. Rules in this board may change, but it does not change the fact that PS2, Xbox, and GC will not be retro until something groundbraking happens to gaming again like it did in the time of the CD/3D revolution.

Pic related. Its a "retro" game.

Who else considers the Dreamcast a 5.5gen console?

>>1546962
I don't care about gen naming, but Dreamcast was a home system with one analogue stick controller, and a library consisting mostly of arcade-like games.

>>1546962
Nobody except people who couldn't handle the rules.

>>1546954
Fucking this.

The only difference between games right now and games 10 years ago is now everything is in HD and every gaming platform has some sort of social media aspect shoehorned in. There haven't been any major changes to the way games are played as a whole ever since the 6th gen devs streamlined and polished up 3D gaming.

>>1546965
Rules are rules, man.

>>1546982
Nor there will be in the future. Games are getting more and more narrowed in terms of creativity/risk taking because everything costs so much now. We still need to get past this FPS wave, at least until they stop being bought as much as they are. Only then can the crash begin.

>>1547006
What started the FPS wave? Wolfenstein or Doom?

>>1546945
Have you played Unreal recently? It looks like a blocky 90s game and plays like a 90s shooter.

>>1547006
Let's see if this whole VR thing finally takes off, first.

If you were alive to experience it first hand and you're young enough to be a dipshit then it ain't retro. That's the bottom line and that's what makes /vr/ good.

If someone is being a dipshit in one of our discussions, they get told by those of us who really know what the fuck we're talking about and therein lies the beauty.

hopefully never.

>>1546982
>There haven't been any major changes to the way games are played as a whole ever since the 6th gen devs streamlined and polished up 3D gaming.

You're right about sony and microshit. What you're overlooking is the fact that with every new console, nintendo reinvents the controller and fundamentally challenges the way we think we should play games. They're the only ones innovating on the consoles anymore. The other two piggy back off of them and pcs by copying and watering down any new idea that sees any sort of popularity.

As far as the "when is something retro" discussion is concerned, I feel like the length of time necessary to be considered retro is getting smaller and smaller all the time. Consumer tech advances so fast these days. Smart phones and tablets are in the hands of two year olds now. In ten years anything with a physical button will be considered retro.

>>1546962
"gens" are meaningless to me, but the Saturn was Sega's "5th gen" console, and the DC far exceeds anything the Saturn was capable of.

>>1547046
Unlikely. You can't play a game with any sort of depth with a touchscreen. Enthusiasts will always play with physical controls.

>>1547049
>I don't understand sarcasm

I wasn't being literal. The physical button will always be around as at the very least a fail safe for when touch sensitive controls malfunction. But consumer tech is trending in the direction of buttonless products. Or at least as buttonless as possible.

>>1546845
>>1546853
To far really. Snes was seen as "retro" as early as 2002 which was only 11 years after launch. most 6th gen systems are over ten years old so I could see it happen fairly soon.

>>1546962
That shit left the moment it was allowed here, it was just fags that were losing their shit that their wiafu wasn't allowed on the board and need a justification to post it

I don't know, but the longer it takes, the better.

The main thing I like about /vr/ is that it, for the most part, helped solve the generational gap problem on /v/. Of course, we still got the teenagers who are discovering older games and they're welcome here, but by having overall less young people on here means this board is fairly free of shitposting (compared to /v/)

>>1547126
Were things like the VCS or Pacman considered retro in the mid 80s?

>>1547138
We need some board between /v/ and /vr/ that covers the timespan in between. Too many use the shittyness of /v/ as an excuse to bring non-retro crap here.

>>1547149

It depends on how you perceive time. When you're a little kid, 1 year is a LOOOOOOOT of time.
Probably kids who were little toddlers when the 2nd gen was vigent thought they were very old games by the times games like SMB3 were out, but adult people still considered older games rather recent since it was just a few years.

Same thing with PS2, GC, etc... I still think of them as new-ish consoles.

Hell, it took me some time to accept N64 and PS1 were old.

>>1547138
I disagree, age means nothing to those types. Remember the Dreamcast fiasco?
Really it's just people being people sadly.
The edge here on /vr/ is the same age /co/ had before the comic movie crazy kick in, which is smaller numbers. Fewer people means slower posting which discourages shitposters because they don't want to poke fights that might take all day to get going. Also reports are few in number and as such easier to contain remove threads.
I wish I could say it's an age thing but it really isn't, it's just each group thinks their right and the others are the assholes/shitheads.

Honestly the PS1 and its peers shouldn't be retro yet.

I realize 4chan is slanted towards 18-25 year olds but holy crap, these nuadults need to understand that their childhood that happened no so very long ago isn't fucking retro. They need to discover stuff that happened before they were fucking born.

>>1547149
It was closer to early 90's but that's due to slower growing tech. Pac-Man was relevant for a much longer time than say Crash, Sonic, Spyro, and well, really any non-Nintendo brand of the 90's.

>>1547162

No because I think there isn't any "group" or "others".

You practically said it though, shitposting happens when boards move fast, and who are the people who have all the time in the world to spend all day shitposting on 4chan? teenagers.

I'm not saying all teenagers are prone to shitposting, or that no adult shitposts, but using some logic it isn't too hard to figure out.
/vr/ being strictly about older consoles makes a lot of young people have no business here.

I have been replaying some of the early PS2 titles lately and kinda wish there was a place to talk about them but they are "too modern" for /vr/, /v/ refuses to talk about them as they are "too old". Maybe they should eventually make a 3rd video game board to cover the 6th and 7th gen systems?

>>1547169
We need a board that covers the years 1995-2010.

>>1547180

But I have no problem talking about NES games on /v/... what PS2 games /v/ refuses to discuss?

Also, you can always try /vg/

I don't think they will ever be considered "retro". Actually, it's probably just better we come up with a new term/name for them and possible a new board.

>>1547169
This board isn't about "what games you played during your childhood", it is about games released before 2000.

Also I'm nearly 30 and I played Playstation games when I was a kid, so I think your math is off.

>>1547170
>who are the people who have all the time in the world to spend all day shitposting on 4chan?
NEETs, Desk workers with nothing better to do (I'm posting from my job right now) college kids. My retired dad post on 4chan \co\ and he's 76
I have learned that most people are young once but are immature for a lifetime.

>but using some logic it isn't too hard to figure out.
This is an anonymous image board could be full of 20 year olds or 30 year olds. It's not like Facebook where you can watch trends.

>/vr/ being strictly about older consoles makes a lot of young people have no business here.
Not really. There are several teenagers fascinated with old tech and even more adults that see it as pointless to waste time and energy on old tech.

>>1547194
There are also those that grew up on older tech. Many of my students grew up with Snes and they are all around 20 years old.
There is no age to those that grew up with stuff, and to practice elitism because of age will just turn us into /v/ light.

>>1547191
So something like "intermediary" or "transitional" games? Basically everything after retro but before current gen.

>>1547194
If it was about "what games you played during your childhood" all /vr/ would be about for me was Pong.

It's about what is fucking RETRO. Retro isn't "games that happened not really that long ago". Hell, it hasn't even been quite fucking 20 years yet since even the PS1. How is that retro? The PS1 and its generation introduced the first real leap into modern gaming; before it was a true gap in what gaming was and represented. THIS is the separation /vr/ should consider what is and is not retro.

/vr/ would be so much better without the huge PS1/N64/Dreamcast circlejerk we have today. Not that those are bad, they're just better represented by /v/ and their talk of more modern gaming sensibilities.

>>1547162
>>1547138
Actually it's age of the board as well, short of /a/ most boards after the 3rd year erode greatly in quality, toy,adv,and others were all 'great' when first made but went bad after a community was established because the posters themselves decided what should and shouldn't be allowed, this always opens the gates for conflict.

>>1547213
By your logic then why is Dreamcast here?

Gen six will not be retro. It will be a modern classic.

>>1547213
Yeah, my Playstation library of vertical shooters, turn based RPGs, MS-DOS ports, and 2d platformers sure reflects modern gaming.

Honestly, you're just wrong.

I think the Playstation and N64 are honestly kind of shit compared to the Genesis and SNES, but that's just an opinion based on the game libraries. And I don't use it as an excuse to make stupid claims like the Playstation shouldn't be allowed.

>>1547216
What are you talking about? I'm arguing against having DC, not for it. Why is it on /vr/? Because of the same "I'M EIGHTEEN AND REMEMBER IT FROM MY CHILDHOOD SO IT'S RETRO" mentality kids seem to have, maybe?

If this isn't what you mean, I don't understand your question. By my logic, DC SHOULDN'T be here. At all.

>>1547231
Sorry, I was asking why you think it got green lit as allowed where the others at least apply to tech jumps.

>What's retro?
What do you guys think about games like Mega Man 9, VVVVVV or La Mulana?
If we are going purely by their release dates they obviously aren't retro but if you consider their graphics, music and gameplay they aren't exactly "modern" either and mostly appeal to people who grow up with 8-bit systems.

>>1547229
But you have to have some cutoff, and despite any counterexamples, the PS1 represented a definite movement towards what gaming is today.

>>1547237
Like I said, it got greenlit because of a bunch of dumb kids that think just because it happened during their childhood which wasn't so very long ago that it should be retro and the mods buckled under the pressure which was a terrible thing to do.

>>1547226
>Modern Classic Games

That's a perfect name.

Retro style (which is what we are really talking about here) is something that is dated at least fifteen or twenty years. Style is a big thing of it however the tech being used would be the style of it.
Love or hate it, that should be the boards measuring stick. Not gen, not milestones, just age of the tech.

>>1547248
How bout just "Classic"? That seems fitting enough.

>>1547248
until modern is no longer modern

>>1547250
Metal Gear Solid 2 has no "retro style" that Metal Gear Solid 4 doesn't have. That's what we're talking about. Until there's a real change in how games present themselves, PS2 is modern gaming.

I don't give a shit about the Dreamcast, but given that its libraries is mostly arcade ports and arcades are dead and a thing of the past; that's why its not classified in the same category. Also, more importantly, it fits in the cutoff date of 2000.

I feel like they become retro when they are a console behind so I feel like the PS2/GC/XBOX are now retro with the new generation in full swing and that the 360/PS3/WII will be retro when the PS5/Xbox2 or whatever comes out.

>>1547239
Doesn't matter, they're new games. When we talk retro we mean THE GAMES ARE OLD.

I don't want to talk about new games on /vr/ even if they have a retro sensibility. I want to talk about games from long ago that no one generally talks about.

This is why I'd like a pre-PS1 cutoff date. Even modern gamers talk about the PS1 generation, because *they remember it*. It's overdone and oversaturated. Gaming became "popular" during the PS1 days, and no, I don't care that it became popular, it's just that its popularity meant that it's been discussed way too much and I don't really care to rehash all that. I want to talk about games before that, games that no one seems to talk about or care about any more (except for the big titles that obviously are going to be always discussed).

And with that, maybe people that didn't ever get to experience some of the great hidden gems of the old days might actually get to discover them and play them, and enjoy them. And maybe discover that most games today aren't all they're cracked up to be.

I just don't think you get that when you include PS1 and later.

>>1547258
I also feel like if the games in a consoles library are getting remakes and rereleases then it could be in the retro classification.

>>1547261
see
>>1547239
Are we going by style or date? Can La Mulana and Fez be talk about here? If no, then we need to go by date and tech, if yes then we need to go by present.

>it fits in the cutoff date of 2000.
There were many games made in 2000 that would meet Metal Gear Solid 2 tech.

>>1547261
What makes Metal Gear Solid 1 retro style? The polygon count? It plays the same as 2 with just better rendering.

>>1546840
I judge what's 'retro' based on the medium of release. If the medium is still in general use and is widely available to the general public I don't consider it retro.

Examples:
Game cartridges are not used for games (or really anything else) anymore. They are retro.
CD's may be used for music, but they aren't really used for games anymore since we've moved on to DVD's. CD games (Sega CD, 3DO, Saturn, etc.) are retro.
DVD's are still used widely for films, but also for games (Wii, PC games), they are not retro. This excludes the PS2, XBOX, and GameCube from being retro at the moment, as well as many PC games. When DVDs are completely phased out of the market in favour of Blu-ray discs I'll consider them retro.

I will never consider digital downloads to be retro. Only physical mediums can be retro, in my opinion.

>>1547272
It really doesn't, though. MGS 1 doesn't have the first person combat.

A thread dedicating to raising awareness about the crippling social problem of autism?

I support this progressive movement.

>>1547259
>Doesn't realize that what's considered "retro" changes with each passing year

Stay autistic.

>>1547274
That's the cut off? It has a first person view at times so that makes it a no?

>>1547275
So what, you wouldn't consider old games that are mostly digitally distributed nowadays to be retro? Stuff like Star Control 2 and Arena? Because if that's the case, I'm sorry to say you're retarded.

>>1547275
But by your thinking GameCube is retro because it uses micro discs

>>1547280
You just didn't even read what I wrote, did you?

I honestly believe that schools over the past 15 years or so stopped teaching kids how to read with comprehension. That's the only explanation.

>>1547275
By that logic wouldn't the GC be retro cause it uses the mini disks and the only other thing I know that uses those still are old camcorders. Also why wouldn't a digital download be considered retro if it is the same game with no changes made but displayed on a different format now?

>>1547274
But MGS 1 had the capability

If it was up to me we'd had 3 boards:

/vr/ - Retro Games for 4th gen and older systems
/vmc/ - Modern Classic Games for 5th and 6th gen games
/v/ - "Video Games" for general shitposting, meme of the month and occasionally talking about 7th and 8th gen games

This might keep the number of posters on their respective boards small enough to discourage shitposting but still mean the boards would be active enough to have new posts more often than once per day.

>>1547296
>Gets called out on being a dipshit
>u-ur dum ;~;

Again, stay autistic.

>>1547302
Oh look, attacking me instead of addressing the fucking issue.

Welp, I win.

And this is why you kids begging to put your Pee Ess Double shit games into /vr/ need to get the fuck out and stay in braindead /v/ where you belong.

>>1547298
That would be lovely I mean where can I talk about the PS2 Resident Evil collectors edition I got for a clean deal at the local market. Its too new for here and too old for /V/.

>>1547305
>Whelp, I win.
>Pee Ess Double shit

Confirmed for both autistic and underage.

>>1547294
>>1547295
It's still DVD technology, just a different size. That's why I don't consider it retro.

>>1547293
>>1547295
I don't care how they're distributed now. I care how they were originally released. Yes, you can download retro games now and they are still retro, but only because they were originally released on a now obsolete medium.

>>1547310
I'm out. Children can't seem to intelligently discuss anything.

I've always thought it was silly that dreamcast gets a pass on this board. It was by no means retro. I mean shit, one of the reasons it failed so hard was because it was too ahead of it's time. It had a fucking web browser in the late 90's. Are you shitting me? 1/3 of the people in the U.S. didn't even have the internet at that point. That's what should be the cut-off.

>If a console has the capability to access the internet for whatever reason, it's not retro.

The internet is literally the exact opposite of retro. Sorry dreamcast fanboys. Your console may be a misfit, but it isn't retro.

>>1547318
>I'm out

Hopefully for good!

>>1547298
I'll second this.

>>1547313
It's still DVD technology is still CD technology it's not something greatly different till Blu ray.

>>1546871
>Xbone
>x-bone
>bone

>>1547207
transitional games/systems sounds about right... or I'm a faggot, but I for one like that name.

>>1547341
Yeah. I consider all disc-based media to more or less be the same, but I break them down into different categories for the sake of distinction. Most of what changes in disc-based media is just the width of the laser that is used to read and write data, which isn't anything too amazing in my opinion.

Still, even if it's really the same technology upgraded and repackaged, I consider CD, DVD, and Blu-ray to be separate mediums for the sake of categorization.

It's all just a personal point of view on what's retro, of course.

>>1546982

Another thing to note "back then" was that Nintendo's GameCube had decent third party support, but lacked the big name third party games like MGS or GTA (even though it had a non-canon remake of the former). That can't be said about the Wii or the Wii U, the GameCube was AT LEAST marketed to a game enthusiast and not a Nintendo fanboy. Nintendo's games on the GameCube varied from title to title, to the point where it didn't matter if it had little third party support since it had such a wide variety of games. I wouldn't trade my GameCube and it's multiplats for anything on the PS2 or Xbox, and some of those games were also on the Master Race.

>>1547046
>Nintendo is the only one that innovates
>by using previous generation technology

When will Nintendo stop with the Wii line of machines? Will the 9th generation Nintendo be a Wii machine that's barely more powerful than the PS4? God, I can't take it anymore. I was alive during the NES era, but I feel like the GameCube was Nintendo's swan song of consoles. It was so...unique. Such a nice design, and it looked better than some big black box or an even bigger black box with two disk drives.

>>1547318
So much for winning

>>1547320
>Sorry dreamcast fanboys. Your console may be a misfit, but it isn't retro.
I would cut Dreamcast to this middle board with xbox/ps2/gcn.

There should be like a pass/fail set of questions one would ask about a console to determine if it was retro or not. I'm thinking...

>Does the console feature a controller with multiple analog sticks?
>Is the console capable of graphic fidelity greater than 32 mb?
>Can the console access the internet in any way?

If you answer yes to 2/3 then it's not retro.

>>1546840
Maybe by the end of the decade. It'll take 6th gen longer to become "retro" because the graphical leap isn't great enough. Look at the difference between SNES and GC, then compare that to the difference between GC and Wii U. They don't look old enough compared to what we have today.

>>1546863
>Earliest example of polygons I can name is Alone in the Dark, released in 1992.

I, Robot. 1983.

It all has to do with the level of technology you're currently on.

Is the late 90's and 200's retro? I don't think so, but to a degree yes. Graphical capability has changed to a subjective level, but input hasn't.

When the technology leaps, the early 2000's will be considered retro.

>>1547031
There's no age limit on being a dipshit. Even if you're the oldest guy on the board, you can still be an elitist with nothing to bring to the conversation except criticisms of what other people actually bring to the conversation.

I saw someone "NOT RETRO" a USB controller for emulation the other day.

All of the current generations will earn their retro wings once VR takes off.

>>1547440
And that's just flat shaded polygons. Wireframe polygons even older.
Ultima Underworld was the first practical use of texture mapped polygons as far as I know. It's the game that eventually started the 3D boom by inspiring Wolfenstein and Doom

>>1547156
I think people need to just calm down about the "not retro" thing. If someone starts a Halo thread, fine - that's clearly outside of this board's intended subject matter from the get-go, but if someone brings up Pac-Man Championship Edition in a designated Pac-Man thread, does that guy need to be run out of town? I mean, getting hostile over someone briefly mentioning a post-1999 game that's relevant to the discussion of a retro game is honestly less relevant to retro games than the post in question. If you're that hardcore about not letting a word slip through that isn't directly related to a pre-2000 game, meta discussion about what should or shouldn't be on the board is equally - if not more - off topic.

If people are so proud of the maturity on this board, why can't anyone have a mature discussion about retro games that allows the odd post here and there about sequels to retro games or modern games in the style of retro games. I'm not saying Steam indie threads should be okay, but if we're talking about Tempest, it stands to reason that someone might recommend Typhoon 2001 amidst the discussion of the arcade original and the Jaguar sequel.