/vr/ - Retro Games

>>2347183
>and never will be retro

I don't think you know the meaning of the word there. Nice troll attempt though. :)

But Spongebob was genuinely funny.

You're right that they should never be considered retro though, there's a definite difference between consoles pre and post Dreamcast.

>>2347190
Its the heavy arcade influence. I think a new term should be coined for consoles pre ps2.

Reminder that OP is actually falseflagging and is the one butthurt gen Z kid who actually wants 6th gen to be discussed on here.

He's also MAD that N64 is liked by people, but that PS2 and Xbox aren't allowed on here (for some reason he thinks it's unfair that early 3D games like the N64 ones are considered retro, but PS2 games aren't). He's so fucking butthurt about this that he keeps making daily N64 hate threads/6th gen threads, now he started falseflagging because he's running out of ideas and people started noticing his futile troll patterns.

Go home, dude. You don't fit in this board, and never will. Not because of your age or your taste, but because you are a fucking retard.

>>2347183

I agree mostly with what the trolly OP post said, but I will provide a reason for them not being retro.

The 6th generation is when games were completely De-arcadified (which is where video games began). Retro games are games that are arcadey, and the n64 and ps1 were really the beginning of them not being arcadey at all.

but the only arcade type games on the 6th generation console that WEREN'T THE DREAMCAST (btw this is why the dreamcast is allowed), are compilation type games and reboots

>>2347190
There's a definite difference in between every generation. The gap between Atari and Dreamcast is way larger than the gap between Dreamcast and PS2 or even PS3.

Retro just means it's old, from and earlier era. In 30 years the 360 and PS3 will be retro. I'm sorry if that upsets you, but it's simply true.

If you want to be specific, refer to the individual generations. That's why we've categorized them how they are.

>>2347183
The GBA is not really any different from the SNES in terms of games and graphics, why will it "never be retro"?

>>2347183
Why did you put this fantastic NES/GB emulator in your image?

>>2347214
>Reminder that OP is actually falseflagging and is the one butthurt gen Z kid who actually wants 6th gen to be discussed on here.
You're probably correct.

>>2347215
>Retro games are games that are arcadey

This is simply not correct. It's not what retro means at all. You can't just change the meanings of words so they suit what you want them to mean. Retro means it's old.

Rogue is as retro as anything and it's not arcadey in the slightest.

>>2347225
>You can't just change the meanings of words so they suit what you want them to mean. Retro means it's old.
Apparently you can, because that's not actually what "retro" means.

Even so, re: Rogue

>no plot
>high score list
>no handholding or save-reloading until the game lets you win

It fits a little better than you might think

>>2347221
>Why did you put this fantastic NES/GB emulator in your image?
>fantastic

But It's a shit NES/BG emulator.

>>2347231
From the OED
>Retro
>Esp. of fashion, music, or design: characterized by imitation or revival of a style from the (relatively recent) past; (more generally) backward-looking, nostalgic, esp. affectedly so.

I was being reductive, but saying it means old is a hell of a lot closer than saying it means arcadey.

I agree with OP.
In fact, anything 3D should be banned from /vr/

>>2347241
>I agree with OP.
samefag false flagging again

Woah woah, hold up OP.

You didn't like Avatar?

I think another split in a few years would be reasonable. One board for discussion of gens 1-4 and another for gens 5-7 by the time 7 starts to become retro. That won't be for at least a good decade though so we have plenty of time.

>>2347221
>fantastic NES emulator
>has smaller screen resolution.

This is dumbest post I've ever seen on the board. Congrats.

They could make a seperate board just for PS2/PS3 because they are the most successful systems of all time and there are too many games to discuss.

>>2347262
Hi, OP.

>>2347262
The 360 was more successful than the PS3, dude.

>>2347183
Actually, Gen Z is like 2000 onwards.
1995-1999 is still Gen Y, millennials.

>>2347273
Not really.

>>2347273
>>2347279
A "generation" is ~20 years.

>>2347273
>>2347279
>>2347290
It's really up for debate though, most of the time it doesn't mean shit until you get up to ~10 years or so age gap.

>>2347273
The millenial generation is anyone born roughly 1982-2001. So probably almost everyone here. Sorry to burst your bubble, "Gen X'ers."

The magazine Ad Age invented the term Generation Y and defined it as anyone younger than 11 in August of 1993. Newsweek subsequently defined their range as anyone under the age of 21 on 9/11. Some publications define millenials as anyone whose parents were Baby Boomers (1946-1964).

>>2347185
I was going to say the same.

For such a benign subject, there are heated threads everyday

>>2347279
Yeah, kinda.