/vr/ - Retro Games

what the fuck

RIP Pokemon Gold

>dead at 55

>>2534451
/v/ is experiencing critical meltdown right now.

The end of a skilled man.

Reminder that Iwata is not some hot shot business CEO that came from outside gaming to run a gaming company. He was there from the beginning.

https://vimeo.com/97681625

Here you can see him discussing coding Balloon Fight.

>>2534451
Rip ballon fligth

so who's in charge now?

>>2534506
Mario.

>>2534494
>subtitles are in taconese

come on, anon

>>2534494
He's also credited for re-coding Pokemon GS so efficiently that it left room for (almost) all of Kanto.

RIP man.

>>2534494
Nice subtitles asshole.
Ruined my whole night.

>>2534494
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3FyDMP7OAc

Fuck man, I loved Earthbound...

I hope he goes DIRECTLY to heaven.

>>2534514
I knew Iwata was a coder for Nintendo back in the day, but I never bothered to look up what he did exactly.

Pokemon aside, I know I probably owe this man thanks for the hours of entertainment he helped bring to me as a child and an adult.

You've done a lot of good for us. Thanks for the good times, and rest easy, old friend.

Do we have any idea who could be his successor as CEO?
Nintendo's probably been prepared for this for months.

Go to /v/ right now. You don't have to read any posts, but just go. The music.

Fuck me. ;_;

>>2534530
I should've also mentioned that before Iwata stepped in, half of Johto's programming filled the game cartridge to capacity. This either indicates that he lived up to his "genius programmer" praise or whoever else were working on the game were really green.

He's gotten a lot of criticism in recent years, perhaps not entirely undeserved, but he's also responsible, directly or otherwise, for a lot of quality gaming experiences.

>>2534538
It's a mix of both.
Iwata is an excellent programmer and Gamefreak is incompetent at programming.

>>2534541

>is

>>2534506
Bane.

>>2534536
Why does everyone keep posting "F" there?

>>2534546
Press F to pay respects

>>2534546
It's from a scene in CoD:Kevin Spacey Edition

>>2534546
Someone posted the "press F to pay respects" image from CoD, so everyone is saying "F".

>>2534546
It's a reference to the (latest?) Cawadooty game that had a funeral you attended. The PC version had a "Press F to pay respects" action marker or something.

It's become a meme of sorts.

>>2534536
I dont hear anything

>Shigeru will someday die

>>2534552
It doesn't play on the catalog.

>>2534552
Seems to only work in non-catalog mode.

>>2534554
I'm really going to feel bad when that happens.

>>2534554
Don't say shit like that. They're going to preserve him in the vault with Ura Zelda.

Please. I hope so. I can't take any more after today.

>>2534557
>>2534558
yeah im using the standard layout, but aint working. thought it might be cause of 4chanplus, but nothing played even after i opened it in explorer

>>2534525
This is good.

>>2534494
>Reminder that Iwata is not some hot shot business CEO that came from outside gaming to run a gaming company.

I think I might know who you're referring to...

>>2534547
>>2534548
>>2534549
>>2534550
That explains while I'm out of the loop. I'm not sure if I think the game mechanic is benign or mildly amusing.

>>2534554
I respectfully offer condolences to those who grieve, I recognize this as tragic and sad news, and I respect Iwata, but I can't say his death affects me at a gut level. Miyamoto, on the other hand... I know that's going to be a tough day for me. I don't get too starstruck, but his creative vision shaped my world, especially in my formative years.

>>2534571
>mildly amusing.

It's definitely this one. I don't think the game even takes it so seriously.

The thing I liked about Iwata was he made gaming personal and meaningful to the audience. Not many execs think their audience is really worth that kind of time but in a consumer-based industry like gaming more should be open to it.

>Turn 30 yesterday
>The next day this happens
Well, if this isn't a sign that life is gonna suck from here on out, I don't know what is. Jesus, this is terrible.

>>2534585
>This man's death is actually about me! Thanks for RUINING my birthday, MAN WHO FUCKING DIED.

>>2534591
wut, it wasn't even his birthday m8, can you read?

>>2534591
I think you have some serious problems with reading comprehension, mate.

>>2534543
He's not wrong. They're still awful at programming. Maybe not as bad as back then, but they still are.

>>2534591

That's not what that poster said, and you seem to have anger issues, probably due to your communication issues.

Source: i'm a shrink.

>>2534597

Yes, but I don't know if you can still say Iwata is an excellent programmer.

I miss you

>>2534604
Oh god why. Knowing Iwata himself worked on that...

Well, I feel especially bad, because I never knew that he actually worked on games. I only ever knew him as the CEO.

>>2534603
He admitted that he'd gotten pretty rusty as a result of not directly working on games anymore.

>>2534613
Iwata was probably one of the best programmers in videogame history.

>>2534595
>>2534596
People die every day. If the response to someone's death is "well gee I guess my life is going to suck from here on out," that's awfully self-centered. The fact that he also regards turning 30 as something negative suggests a tendency to blame his misfortune on things beyond his direct control.

>>2534602
A good shrink knows they can't make an accurate diagnosis of a person's mentality based on a single post, or is at least familiar with the concept of projection.

>>2534623
He already turned 30 m8
You should seriously consider reading slower

>>2534620
I was big on Nintendo games when I was a kid, but never really kept up with who worked on them, and things like that. Unfortunately, after the N64 was released, I stopped caring about Nintendo, for the most part.

Gamecube was pretty cool, though.

Small list of Iwata's work.
He apparently worked on a whole lot more.

>>2534554
please do not do that

>>2534620
>Everyone involved in its production would spend all night playing it

It really shows the whole team cares about the game, unlike some other developers that just make a game and release it without properly playtesting it.

>>2534638
>Pokemon Stadium
>Coded the battle program in a week
>my literal reaction when

Not retro.

>>2534647
See
>>2534638

>>2534638
Well Balloon Fight isn't mentioned and he clearly worked on that per his Game Center CX video.

>>2534647
He worked on plenty of retro games.

I think that qualifies.

Plus, there is discussion of retro games.

>>2534647
Iwata has been with Nintendo since before you were born and worked on many /vr/ titles as pointed out by >>2534648

Go away forever.

>>2534640
then again back then the whole team would be 4 guys

>>2534623

That's why I said "you seem to", i'm not giving you a diagnosis.
Anyway, anger issues or not, you do have reading comprehension issues.

>>2534514
I'll pay my respects to the man, but I doubt his compression was anything special. Considering a highly arbitrary version of Kanto is in the game, and Johto is spread incredibly thin, I wouldn't doubt if he just re-arranged the game.

By comparison, Rare's NES games employ an obscene method of compression, and very few of their games have been cracked.

I haven't bought a Nintendo game or console since the SNES era, so I couldn't give half a shit. I hope Nintendo tanks even further than they already have this generation.

truly an american icon.

>>2534672

Nobody really cares about your own experience or console warrior thoughts, man.
Also, if anything, Iwata had worked on more NES/SNES games than any other system.

It's a damn shame. Guy was a powerhouse employee, and his programming interventions are legendary. Far as the /vr/ era goes, Iwata did well.

>Back then, I made a Star-Trek themed game by myself. I managed to get over the calculator's restriction of only allowing 224 steps per program by using 6 different magnetic cards. It was a masterpiece of calculator programming! The people at Hewlett Packard's Japanese Agency were really surprised. It was a ton of data to send. By that point, I was no longer worried about the HP-67's documentation.

>>2534672
>I haven't bought a Nintendo game or console since the SNES era, so I couldn't give half a shit.

That's exactly why you should give a shit. He was a programmer back then. He worked on a number of Nintendo's memorable titles.

I know this is 4chan, but you don't have to go out of your way to be negative at every single opportunity.

>>2534667
I think the sentiment is more that he actually worked hands on in video games, which has become increasingly rare in CEOs in the industry, who are mostly just businessmen that have little first hand experience in development.

>>2534672
>all this newfaggotry
Millenials ruin everything

>>2534672
Don't lie to us, we all know your first console was the Xbox 360

>>2534542
why must you hurt me.

guys, before this thread goes the /v/ way: stop shitposting (or replying to shitposters).

If people want to post in here with negative feelings, let them. Karma will do its work alone, it doesn't need you.

Anyway, RIP Iwata.

>>2534684
True, but consider that Iwata is pretty much of one of the only to do so. Yamauchi was in the army, Lincoln was a lawyer, everyone had non-gaming backgrounds. Usually only small Japanese companies, formed by the remnants of failed companies, do this. Toaplan's people, for example, making CAVE and Raizing.

>>2534623
>don't judge a person's mentality based on single post
>proceeds to judge an anon based on single post

You're contradicting yourself.

>>2534513
it's portuguese you stupid fuck

F I'm sorry, someone was going to.

I really thought he would've lived far longer to be honest. RIP Iwata.

>>2534681

Now I will feel sad every time I use this.

Iwata really was a great guy. His name is all over classic games. He will be sorely missed.

so ... who will succeed him? I honestly can't think of anybody other than iwata running nintendo. he was basically part of nintendo.

>>2534731
I'm sure someone is ready to step in.

>>2534731
Miyamoto is now president of Nintendo

>>2534682
Well, maybe he should have stuck to making games, because under his leadership Nintendo has floundered.

>>2534731
>I honestly can't think of anybody other than iwata running nintendo.
This doesn't make any sense; how old are you?
Yamauchi ran the company during the period they were actually good, so this statement seems pretty odd.

>>2534616
Well he has plenty of free time now

>>2534686

Most people on /vr/ are millennials.

>>2534721
Been a while since I've seen that.

What has Iwata actually done as President?

>>2534747
Presided over the company.

>>2534746
Don't speak for everyone, kiddo.

>>2534742
Nobody seemed to like Yamauchi, but the company certainly did best under his leadership. With Iwata we got gimmick consoles and Amiibos.

>>2534536
What song is it?

>>2534749
>Don't speak for everyone, kiddo.
how old are you

>>2534749
>kiddo

"Millennial" includes anyone up to age 35.

>>2534756
>>2534757
37, married, and I don't have a retron.

>>2534747
>What has Iwata actually done as President?

Abandoned support for the GameCube. Lincoln and Yamauchi were in talks with DMA Design, and were talking about porting GTA3 to the GameCube. Plan fell through as soon as Iwata and Reggie replaced them.

>>2534747
He made the best thing to put RetroArch on.

>>2534761

Thanks for all that irrelevant information.

>>2534724

Love this pic. Kamiya's inner kid must have been excited to meet all his videogame developer heroes while working with Nintendo (he was also amazed when he learned that yamagami -the guy who produced W101 and Bayo2- was the creator of Panel de Pon/Tetris Attack)

>>2534774

Ness and Poo kinda look like Iwata and Itoi.

>>2534662
Everyone who says that hasn't actually volunteered the mis-comprehension. I'm glad that you, "a shrink," get your jollies by insulting people online, intending to hurt rather than help.

>>2534774
I W A T A

IT HURTS...

>>2534774
>amiibo

Goodnightto sweetou princu

>>2534701
The difference is I don't claim to be a shrink, let alone a good one, in an attempt to qualify my remarks. I never said "don't do it," either.

>>2534749
>With Iwata we got gimmick consoles and Amiibos.
B-but surely he led Nintendo in a positive direction?

>>2534781
Just let it go, man. I don't think any poster so far had tried to insult you.

>>2534797
Well, we did get the VC. That's something right?

>>2534796
But you were obviously uncomfortable enough with that anon's post enough to criticize his opinion in a defensive manner.

The post that you first responded to (the one with the picture of Claude Frollo) didn't say anything in the greentext that you wrote in the following post. You were just imagining what he was thinking.

>>2534546
It's a meme that came from the newest COD, where Kevin Spacey's son dies and there's a funeral level where the only interactivity is this.

>>2534535
A few months ago I would have said Miyamoto was a shoo-in but his star seems to have faded a bit with the tanking of the Wii U.

>>2534828
Do you not understand what reading between the lines is? You've never witnessed people providing alternate takes on a post? You're even doing it yourself:

>But you were obviously uncomfortable enough with that anon's post enough to criticize his opinion in a defensive manner.

You're imagining the "uncomfortable" and "defensive." It's not in the post you're responding to. It doesn't even make sense to go from generic objection to specific "you're uncomfortable and defensive." I guess it's okay when you do it.

It feels unreal. I'm not even the biggest Ninty fan or anything, but it just is so sudden. He was a programmer originally, and worked on a bunch of well known games, like Earthbound, Baloon Fight. He wasn't just another one of those suits. The CEO of Capcom for comparison, is some businessman who got his fortune in Super markets.

I'm glad. Nintendo singlehandedly destroyed gaming.

>>2534856
This is nonsense. Few would directly attribute the Wii U to Miyamoto. Before today, most were thumbing their noses at Iwata regarding the Wii U.

I don't get the sense that Miyamoto would want the job, anyway. He's too busy doing his thing to run a company, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

>>2534451
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63mG4k-VIyY

>>2534802
A VC without Sega consoles, NeoGeo, or TG16, with less than half a dozen N64 games, with hardly any Wii titles, no arcade games... yeah, we got VC.

>>2534535
There's two paths, Shinya Takahashi or Tatsumi Kimishima would follow the steps of Iwata in the sense that Nintendo should try something different, now if a member of the Yamauchi family or one of the stock holders is elected they would make Nintendo go mobile or go full Sony/Microsoft.

>>2534875
Literally all of those things are on the last gimmick console.

>>2534880
And technically available on the current

>>2534727
>This is it. Goodbye, Mr. Fils-Aimé.
>I... understand. I finally understand. Goodbye, Iwata-san.

I find it surprising that /v/ is having better and more civil threads about this than /vr/.

>>2534885
It's hilarious that Nintendo's last two consoles are only worth owning for modding them to play old games.

>>2534724
I would love to kick Kamiya's ass. Dude is fucking annoying and has clearly never been punched in his life. He really needs a hard kick to the jaw.

>>2534879
>they would make Nintendo [...] go full Sony/Microsoft.

You mean Nintendo controlling the market like they once did? Sounds good to me. Part of the reason why the market is the way it is now is because Nintendo was dethroned, and Sony gave third parties all the leeway they wanted.

>>2534741
Besides, you know, Wii being the best-selling game console of all time.

>>2534905
It's amusing that you militantly believe that.

>>2534902
I respectfully disagree. I've seen a few tasteless console war threads "celebrating" the news. Though I've only been in the sticky threads, so those would probably mostly have people who wish to pay respects.

>>2534902
Probably an influx of /b-kiddy hipster teens who found out about old games through Game Grumps and JonTron.

I don't spend a lot of time on /v/, but it's always amusing to see how retarded they get whenever any major news comes down the pipe. I swear, the median age of users there must be 16.

Wow, /vr/ is just as bad as /v/.

>>2534913
>Wii being the best-selling game console of all time.
Nope, that would be the NDS, and then after that the PS2.

Also, the Wii was a shitty waggle shovelware console that paved the way for the Microsoft and Sony's domination of that gen.

>>2534920
are you realizing that just now?

>>2534902
Not really, I'm seeing a lot of SONY WON and edgy "I'm glad he's dead" posts on /v/.

>>2534923
I honestly wonder how things would've been different if Nintendo made a competent console. Sony shit the bed so hard with the PS3, to the point where people were going crazy over FF13 going multiplatform. Nintendo and MS would've effectively pushed Sony out of the market for good, and then Nintendo and MS would fight eachother. That is, what if the Wii had hardware comparable to the Wii U's, but still had the motion control gimmick?

>>2534920
it's not quite there, yet
but unfortunately it's heading in that direction, yes
I'm just hoping all the true /vr/ troopers will stay and fight this influx, and we won't have to jump ship

>>2534506
Shigeru Miyamoto

>>2534902

Other than Shrink and Associates, this thread has been entirely reasonable. Maybe if you cherry-pick one of the 88 threads (I counted) on /v/ about Iwata, you can find better discussion, but /v/'s reaction is embarassing. I rarely visit /v/, but every time a major bit of news drops down the pipe, I drop in just to remind myself why I don't. I swear the median age there must be 16.

ITT: all the /v/ faggots finally come out in the open
please stop coming here
you're ruining our community
we separated from you for a fucking reason

>>2534941
There is barely any shitflinging going on in this thread. I don't know why you people keep coming in here making these comments.

>>2534506
Right now, Miyamoto and Genyo Takeda (StarTropics, Punch Out) are temporarily in charge.
In the coming days a new president will be elected.

>>2534867
>Few would directly attribute the Wii U to Miyamoto
He's been sort of attributing it to himself. Not as much as the 3DS, which was apparently all his idea, but it's clear he was a big force behind the Wii U as well.

The last thing Iwata publicly did as Nintendo's president was apologize for E3.

Nintendo's lackluster E3 performance literally killed Iwata.

>>2534860
>You've never witnessed people providing alternate takes on a post?

Only in instances where people misread what was written or poster was vague.

>You're even doing it yourself:

Reading in between the lines is based on context clues. What you did was completely pulling stuff out of your ass. You're right, I'm doing something similar, but you extrapolated a lot more from a post than I did. It doesn't help by the fact that you're bad at reading comprehension, as other anons have pointed out.

>>2534945
>you people
>the true people of /vr/
it doesn't fucking matter
it reeks of /v/ and it makes me angry
YOU people are ruining our fucking board.
"go back to /v/" is a meme for a reason
we don't fucking want you here
go away.

>>2534957
>"go back to /v/" is a meme for a reason
People only say this when people post things they don't like. Just like the people who call everything they don't like "edgy."

>>2534948
Having a hand in its conception is still just a small part of the bigger picture. He isn't responsible for marketing, third party support, ensuring games not under his direction are quality, etc.

>>2534957
delicious tears
let me taste them

>>2534960

>X is just a buzzword that means 'I don't like it'

Parroted ad nauseum by people who are incapable of detecting nuance.

>>2534957
>I drew this line in the sand! How on earth is that not preventing you from breathing MY air?

>2013
>Yamauchi dies
>Yamauchi lived to see Nintendo rule the market before Sony knocked them out, and lived to see successful use of 3D in the 3DS
>2015
>Iwata dies
>Iwata did not live to see the Wii U succeed, nor did he live to see third parties being friendly with Nintendo again

>>2534960
no, you're terribly wrong
they say it to people they suspect to be from /v/, because we LOATHE /v/ on this board.
because it's filled with fucking 16 year old idiots and SJW liberal shitheads
we're oldfags here, or at least we were
one of the last remaining boards with a nice small community of people who don't act like complete fucking idiots
If I really have to repeat myself again: we don't like or want your kind here
i'm asking you all nicely to please return to your containment board and have your discussions there

>>2534971

>we cannot be stopped. We are legion

>>2534957
Who are you even talking to? Because I've said nothing but positive things about Iwata in this thread.

You need to go for a walk and calm down or something.

>>2534974
>one of the last remaining boards with a nice small community of people who don't act like complete fucking idiots
Your post contradicts that.

>>2534974
>of people who don't act like complete fucking idiots
Yourself not included in this, obviously. You're lashing out at everyone here, including those who haven't even said anything disrespectful.

>>2534978
I'm talking to ALL OF YOU
you don't seem to get it
it doesn't matter what you're saying
it matters that you're from boards.4chan.com/cancer/

at the very least stay contained to this thread and don't go snooping around spreading your shit smear of a presence anywhere else

this board is already in ruins, why do you insist on destroying it further?

>>2534976
This is what line-drawers actually believe

Some people on /vr/ have their heads stuck WAY too far up their ass about how "good" this board is.

>>2534992
it was, it really was
it was a safe haven away from the rest of 4chan
it's definitely not anymore, thanks to you

>>2534987
You think you're helping?

>>2534987
>it doesn't matter what you're saying
So you're just screaming at people for the mere act of *posting on 4chan*. Not just people actively shitposting, but anyone, anyone at all posting here, on this very website.

Well, okay. That will be my last post to address the shitposter here.

>>2534974
>we're oldfags here
If you say you're an oldfag, you're not an oldfag.

>>2534995
Somebody has to do something! If everyone still left here just ignores them, they'll think its okay to do this
You're letting this happen

>>2534994
You were foolish to believe you can establish a "safe haven from 4chan" ON 4chan. If you don't like 4chan, you honestly need to find someplace else to go. Carving out a tiny piece of it and spending your day screaming "DON'T TOUCH MY PIECE!" is absolutely futile. Your piece was only ever as pure as the turd you carved it from, anyway.

>>2534565
I don't... Peter Moore?

>>2535001
If I was at a bar, a guy standing on the bartop and screaming "HIPSTERS PLZ GO" at all times--even when there weren't any hipsters around--would ruin the atmosphere far more than the so-called hipsters ever would have.

>>2535002
yeah, maybe you're right
well, thanks for destroying the only place on the internet I've been able to call a home for the past 3 years.
it was fun while it lasted

>>2534987
nice job saving this videogame forum on the internet, i hope they pay you well

>>2534604

>>2535006
I'm screaming "/V/ PLEASE GO"
and there's most certainly /v/ here, nobody has even tried denying it
and since this thread is already complete fucking cancer, my screaming isn't going to "ruin the atmosphere" anymore than it already is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzN-6zYmdAw

>>2534451
sad news, but it's not retro

>>>/v/

>>2534749
>With Iwata we got gimmick consoles and Amiibos
>Virtual Boy, ROB, Super Scope were all tings under his watch

>>2535014
See >>2534638

>>2535016
So? Unless he died before 1999 its off topic for this board.

>>2535012
keep it up I'm masturbating to these posts

>>2535014
>>2535017
take my word for it, you're gonna get nowhere

Who is this dude anyway lol

>>2535014
For the last time, Iwata was at Nintendo DURING THE /vr/ APPROVED YEARS. In fact, he was probably programming games at Nintendo before you were born or while you were in diapers.

He probably had some role in a few of your favorite Nintendo titles.

>>2535017
>Post was made on July 12th (13th), 2015
>Not posted before 1999

Why did you post here, this is for retro shit

>>2535021
see
>>2535017

If you want to talk about the games he made before 1999, sure go ahead. If you want to talk about the things he's done after 1999 (including his death), well, then you need to go to another board.

>>2535002

Boards are hugely variable in quality. Regardless of how long this stupid shit flinging goes on in this thread (until it 404's by the look of it), /vr/ is still degrees better than /v/, and /vr/ isn't even one of the best boards. It turns out that hobby boards that don't cater primarily to teenagers has far less teenage shitposting. Yes, it's pointless to call shitposters out for 'leaving their containment boards' when it's the responsibility of the board topic to keep them out. If it can't, then retro games clearly aren't the mature games for mature gamers such as ourselves that some people here take it to be. The idea that 4chan is inherently shit is nonsense precipitated by bottomfeeders that only hang frequent bottom-tier boards.

>>2534647
>>>/v/

>>2535012
Your dedication to trolling is... "impressive" is too strong a word, I don't know. I'm glad you're having fun

>>2535032
maybe I'm not trolling, and I'm just THAT intent on defending my only home on the internet from you fucking piss-mongrels
maybe it's in vain, I don't care
I'll fight against you scum till the fucking end

>>2535029
The attitude exuding from your post is demonstrative of how the "quality" of /vr/ is only quality in relation to /v/, not quality in and of itself. You're basically saying, and demonstrating, that your shit stinks less than other shit. I'm sorry, it's still shit. It may not be as bad as /v/ but /vr/ has problems all its own. The board would improve if its own members attempted to resolve its own problems instead of pointing fingers at /v/ boogeymen, but it won't. Because it's 4chan, and on 4chan, it's always some "Other's" fault.

>>2535046
> /vr/ has problems all its own

name 5

>>2535046
fuck you, we were doing just fine until you people decided to show up
we've always had a few cross-boarders during the summer, but this is the worst I've seen it

>>2535042
>you scum
You don't even know who you're lashing out against. Basically anyone who doesn't see things exactly the way you do is "/v/ cancer."

>>2535046

It doesn't matter. The whining is noise. There are quality threads on this board. There aren't on /v/. I enjoy being here. I don't enjoy being there. Talk about hidden implications all you want.

>>2535051
I don't understand how you can't wrap your mind around it
PEOPLE FROM /V/ ARE /V/ CANCER
Are you denying you're from /v/?
You'd be the first one to do so

>>2534987
This is some next level shitposting.

>>2535029
Ding ding ding, winner winner chicken dinner.

>>2535062
>implying this entire thread isn't shitposting

>>2535060
I am not from /v/.
"/v/" is not "Board where all people who disagree with me originate." I don't understand how you can't wrap your mind around it.

>>2534761
>implying everyone younger than you doesn't have original hardware

>>2535068
no, I wasn't using /v/ as a metaphor. I meant literally /v/. People who come from /v/, where everyone is a fucking retard
I refuse to believe that you aren't new here, or from there if you are really okay with this thread and whats happening to this board

>>2535047
Retron, "not retro", "back to /v/", that guy posting above us, snes/genesis console wars

>>2535074
damn son if you aint trolling thats just sad
you need to find some higher purpose in your life besides whining about old games on the internet, kiddo

>>2535081
I see so you are one of the /v/ shit posters. The retron threads can be overkill, but all the other stuff is fine.

>>2535084
I'm not whining about old games, I'm whining about /v/

>>2535089
that's even worse

>>2535090
Well, maybe so, but at least get it fucking right

>>2535092
so do you like balloon fight?

>>2535095
I'll humor you, yes, are you going somewhere with this?
Do "only fgtz lik balloon fight LOL" ?

>>2535097
it's a bit like joust, there's a gameboy spinoff that plays like your usual action adventure game, I think it's balloon world if I recall right

>>2535095
I SAID DO YOU LIEK THE VIDYA

>>2535103
balloon kid actually

>>2535103
I dont think Iwata worked on that though

>>2535103
This is pretty great
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw_TS7-ff3w

>>2535089
That is why you are reduced to whining and complaining as you post.

>>2535047
1. More concerned with what's "not retro" than game/console discussion, to the point where it is done facetiously just to stir the pot. People respond to even passing allusions to non-retro material with abject disgust as if (a) it's impossible for the two to be related and (b) to like retro, you must hate anything not retro. More time is spent splitting hairs over whether something is worthy of discussion than the original topic of discussion. Personally, if I don't think something is worthy of discussion, I don't contribute; instead, most posters here will go down with the ship arguing about the acceptability of the topic.

2. Routine troll threads.

3. Fucking console wars. Seriously. Nintendo vs Sega, SPC vs Yamaha, US vs European shells... it'd be fine if it was reasonable discussion that popped up from time to time, but its constant, and it's generally more about out-screaming the other side.

4. Tech wars. If you don't have a CRT with the perfect specs, "you're shit." If you don't have the right iteration of the hardware, "you're shit." If you emulate with something less than "the best," or emulate at all, "you don't belong here." If you don't have the technical expertise to completely modify any given console, "you don't deserve to play retro." Aside from spewing this shit, threads centered around these topics boil down to "look how big my dick is" photos and "my dick is bigger/you're dick's not so big" replies. In any given topic, much more discussion revolves around niggling technical details than it does games/gameplay.

5. "/v/ is the boogeyman," "kid," etc.

6. Disagreeing with an opinion is typically framed as "your taste is shit" rather than "my taste differs." Disagreeing with the content or structure of a post is typically framed as "you're dumb/I am smarter than you" rather than addressing the content or structure. Your basic ad hom.

A lot of this boils down to elitism and insecurity, which feeds into persecution complex.

>>2535115
if you care about any of these points you have way too much free time in you're hands
Watch this and unwind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcsl_hN-UEg

>>2535123
>if you care about any of these points you have way too much free time in you're hands
You could say that about all the people I'm talking about, too.

>>2535126
too true

>>2535123

I thought his criticisms were fairly valid, but I can't argue with Talking Heads.

>>2535115
>not retro
This is a retro games board. If you don't want to talk about retro games, what are you even doing here. It is important to have a board culture that calls not retro stuff out, or otherwise we'll find ourselves taken over by not retro posters, and the board will just become another /v/. It is better to be overly strict than to be overly lenient.

> troll threads
This is a problem with 4chan (and the Internet) as a whole, not a specific /vr/ issue.

> console wars
Anyone who was alive back in the day knew that the console wars were ever present. Console wars are classic retro discussion.

> tech wars
This is a problem with 4chan (and the Internet) as a whole, not specific to /vr/.

> /v/ is the boogeyman
Have you been to /v/ lately? It's total shit. I don't want to have /vr/ turn into /v/, do you?

> disagreement means your taste is shit
This is a problem with 4chan (and the internet) as a whole, not specific to /vr/.

>>2534865
fuck off

>>2535141
>If you don't want to talk about retro games
I DO want to talk about them. I DON'T want to read a bunch of longwinded threads talking about whether or not they're truly retro. That was the crux of my point: people spend more time bickering over technicalities than they do the games themselves.

>not specific /vr/ issues.
Still issues, mate, and indicative that /vr/'s not quite as highbrow compared to the rest of the site as it pretends. You can't argue that /vr/ has higher standards and then say "well everyone else does that too."

>Anyone who was alive back in the day knew that the console wars were ever present
Key words: "back in the day." We were kids then. You're defending arguing with the same mentality of our childhood selves. Highbrow.

>tech wars is universal
Not really. Elsewhere on 4chan, people aren't as concerned with obsessing over their inputs and the inputs of others. Elsehwhere on the internet, people are a lot more civil.

>Have you been to /v/ lately?
It sure is, but that's not what I'm talking about. /v/ is the scapegoat for anything a poster here objects to, whether it's actually attributable to /v/ or not. It's a very basic us-versus-them, not-with-us-against-us mentality.

>>2535115
I'll add to that:

7. The notion that not having full, complete knowledge of a subject makes you an idiot (which often ties into the "you don't deserve this" sentiment)

>>2535165
>not retro
Actually the rules for retro/non-retro are very simple. Was the game made before 1999? Then it's retro. Was it made after 1999? Then it's not. There should be no debate at all, the rules are lack and white. The problem is the lack of moderation to ban/warn users for engaging in off-topic discussion, then it comes down to the community to call others out. If anything you should blame the not retro posters, who are usually from /v/. The correct response to saying something non retro is to apologize, and maybe delete your post. Not to derail the thread arguing about something where you are clearly wrong. I don't care if you played GBA as a kid. It was made after 1999, so it's not retro.Deal with it, and go somewhere else if you want to talk about it.

>not specific /vr/ issues
Sorry even /vr/ can't fix human nature

>>tech wars is not universal
Go to /g/ or /tv/ you'll see plenty of people saying other people's monitors/mice/computer/movie quality (blueray, hd, whatever) is shit because its not the best

Anyone know where the Iwata thread is?

>>2535179

You can find ~90 on /v/.

>>2535175
>Actually the rules for retro/non-retro are very simple.
But the applications aren't. For example, a thread about Out Run might lead to someone recommending the 3DS port. Cue thread derailment over whether or not this is sanctioned or even if the port is "really" Out Run.

>There should be no debate at all, the rules are lack and white.
They're definitely crystal clear for all circumstances, and even if they were, you know that wouldn't stop anything.

>Go to /g/ or /tv/ you'll see plenty of people saying other people's monitors/mice/computer/movie quality (blueray, hd, whatever) is shit because its not the best
You mean, boards where tech is a focal point? You don't say! You forgot /mu/. Check out their non-4chan equivalents and you'll see a lot more "you should take advantage of that S-Video port, here's where you can find a good cable" and a lot less "you should kill yourself using the composite cables as a noose."

>Sorry even /vr/ can't fix human nature
>He thinks 4chan behavior is "human nature"
Again, you can't argue that /vr/ is of a higher calibre and then defend its shit flinging because neanderthals do it too.

>>2535184
Thanks

Unironically, literally crying irl.
And a thunderstorm just started outside.

My eyes hurt

>>2535190
Ports made after 1999 are not retro, end of story.

>>2535195
>Unironically, literally crying irl.
Serious question, why are you crying? I just can't understand why, you knew nothing about the guy. You played a couple old games he helped make. Do you cry at commercials too?

>>2535209
Jesus Christ. A man is dead anon, show a little respect.

>>2535203
>implying you call the shots for /vr/

>>2535209
He helped make games that I played a lot in my formative years, so he's responsible for a lot of good memories/nostalgia. He remained a great, funny person to the end.
I understand it doesn't affect everyone. That's fine. But it's hitting me hard.

>>2535215
If you seriously think a 3DS game would be on topic for /vr/ then you are part of the problem.

>>2535221
"people disagreeing with me" is not a problem

>>2535209

Empathy, something sorely lacking in 4chan and the world.

>>2535213

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand. I don't cry every time a person dies, and Iwata barely ranks above random schlub for me. It's sad that he died at 55, but not any sadder than any other person dying at such a relatively young age.

Miyamoto's death is going to fucking destroy me

>>2535221
if it's a fucking PORT yes it should. It's not that hard to wrap your head around it.

>>2535227
Well, there you go. He's not important to you personally, so you don't care. That's perfectly normal.

>>2535229
>This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games. Retro gaming means consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other forms of video games on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier. With the release of the 8th generation of consoles, the Sega Dreamcast will now be considered "retro", though the remainder of the sixth generation (Xbox, PS2, GameCube) will not.

>>2535234
>any other forms
Like a port.

>>2535203
This is not specified in the rules. You're demonstrating another problem: you believe your interpretation of the rules are absolute, and think that dominating the thread by fruitlessly trying to enforce your interpretation on a thread is a better contribution than letting the discussion of the game continue--a thread that that might have continued to flourish if you could just bring yourself to not lose your shit over the passing mention of non-retro hardware in a topic focused on retro games. "If you have a 3DS you can play it on that too" is not something that ruins the integrity of a dicsussion; it's advocating the play of a classic game in a manner that some may find convenient. This doesn't ruin a thread, but a shitstorm "justified" by an overly militant view of a social board's purpose definitely does.

>is provided with a list of /vr/ problems
>refuses to acknowledge any of them

Found another /vr/ problem.

>>2535239
Fake and old.

>>2535238
>on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier.

Read the rest of the sentence, moron.

>>2535227
If you don't respect a particular person, of course you don't care if he/she dies.

>>2535246
Yes? A port is another form of the game that was originally on a pre-1999 platform. Why the name-calling?

RIP in piece, sweet prince

;_;

>>2535243
Just because her liberal agenda conflicts your liberal agenda, doesn't mean it's not real.

>>2535242
Yup. If they'd just ignore it or explain their position I might respect it, but there's no sense in listening to people who resort to yelling "moron" in a tribute thread.
Really shows a lack of class and just hurts their cause. Maybe it's a "false flag" or something.

>>2535234
>implying I'm new

Let me guess; in your view we also can't talk about emulating on our PC's because they're made after 1999 huh?

>>2535248
It doesn't matter where the port "was originally launched". If the port was not made before 1999, it's not retro.

>>2535242
>>is provided with a list of /vr/ problems
>>refuses to acknowledge any of them

I actually discussed all of the problems here:
>>2535165
>>2535175

>>2535262
please don't feed the troll

>>2535246
>launched
This doesn't exclude necessarily exclude future releases of the same software, just specifies that a game launched after 1999 isn't eligible. Super Mario Bros. was launched in 1985, so it can be argued that the game, regardless of platform, is eligible. On the other hand, Capcom Vs. SNK 2 was published in 2001 but is a Dreamcast title, and Dreamcasts count. Eligible, or not?

You're just demonstrating that the rules as they exist are unclear and open to interpretation. If you really want the rules to be obeyed, lobby for official clarification; attempting to unofficially enforce your interpretation doesn't contribute anything worthwhile. If you really spend more time worrying about whether or not a specific iteration of a game "counts" rather than enjoying discussion of the game itself, you're probably a worse fit for the board, especially if you're trying to argue that /vr/ is a more sophisticated board.

>>2535263
That's one interpretation, but I don't agree. The "another form" is poorly written and vague, but to me it means that modern ports are included.
I won't argue this further in a thread about a dead guy. Sorry.

>>2535248
>>2535263
I think a good way to better define ports would be people playing diametrically opposite versions and still be able to act as if they're playing the one and same, because sadly, some ports do alter game aspects.

>>2535265
Actually the rules are perfectly clear. That was the sticky I posted. The rules are this:

>1. This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games. Retro gaming means consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other games on platforms launched in 1999 or earlier. Sixth generation and later consoles are not considered retro.

>>2535265
>>2535263
>launched
The launched in that sentence obviously refers to the console.
>on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier
Work on your reading comprehension.

>>2535263
Yeah, and you maintained either:

a) not /vr/ exclusive and thus don't count and we shouldn't bother trying to address them
b) other people are worse/it's okay when we do it
c) aren't really problems

You never once said "yeah, that is something we need to address." That's a /vr/ problem; "they" are perfect and any problem that exists is either not a problem or a problem perpetrated by someone other than "them."

>>2535278
Your only retort to "the rules are unclear" amidst clear proof of this is "yes they are?"

If you're really going to maintain that you're Right and everyone else is Wrong, there's really no point in continuing,

>>2535276
Which just adds to the grey area. How big of a change is needed until a port is no longer retro?

>>2535278
"games on consoles"
"it obviously refers to the console."

I wouldn't go around criticizing reading comprehension if I were you.

>>2535175
>Was the game made before 1999? Then it's retro. Was it made after 1999? Then it's not.
What a fucking arbitrary year to select as a cutoff. It doesn't account for advancing technology, nor where we'll be twenty years from now in video games. Hell, even N64 games like Paper Mario and Banjo-Tooie don't fall under "retro" because they came out after 1999.

It'd make more sense to allow discussion of a console and its library of games a number of years after the console's discontinued. Older games are discussed here because they'd hardly every come up as discussion in /v/, and if they did they'd get bumped off the board twenty posts in.

>>2535289
I told you, until two or more people playing different versions can have a chat without one of them going "this isn't the game I played". Of course, pre-1999 inaccurate/revisioned ports would be inevitably allowed.

Why are people bitching about the rules?

Holy fuck

Get over it, dick

>>2535280
Well if you had mentioned any actual problems that need to be addressed then I would say "yeah, that is something we need to address." But you didn't.

>>2535273
The "other form" clause in that sentence clearly refers to other forms of video games, and does not override the 1999 clause.

>>2535289
There is no change needed.
Was the port made before 1999? It's retro.
Was it made after 1999? It's not retro.

>>2535292
You are leaving out the most important part of the sentence.
>games on platforms launched in 1999 or earlier.

Here I'll group it for you in case you still don't get it.

>games on (PLATFORMS LAUNCHED IN 1999 OR EARLIER)

Games aren't launched, platforms are.

>>2535294
I don't make the rules, I just follow them. The rules have a cutoff date of 1999. If you don't like it, go to a different web site.

>>2535294
"More than X years old" would also easily keep the definition in the context of our times. There's a lot of people here who argue that certain undefined levels of audio and graphical quality will "never be retro," demonstrating the what constitutes "retro" is not well defined, making the vehement defense of the integrity of the definition utter nonsense.

>>2535303
Once again, you're pretending /vr/ is without fault (unless someone else drags it in). I said this earlier.

>(GAMES ON PLATFORMS) launched in 199 or earlier

It can be grouped more than one way. Hence, different interpreations fueled by a lack of clarity.

>Games aren't launched, platforms are.
Your semantics game just isn't supported by the gaming industry.

RIP Iwata Satoru.

>>2535303
>clearly refers to
Clearly not, if there's so many interpretations.
The rules are vague.

>>2535313
Except your way of grouping does not make any grammatical sense. I don't mean to be insulting, but is English even your first language? There is no ambiguity or confusion here, there is only one interpretation that makes sense.

>>2535320
I've seen multiple interpretations itt that make sense. It's really weird that you insist on one.
You really don't think "another form" is vague?

>>2535320
>There is no ambiguity or confusion here
If that was really the case you wouldn't be having this debate with multiple participants. If people are approaching this with multiple interpretations, you cannot claim that there is no ambiguity.

>>2535320
It makes grammatical sense. It is unclear whether "games" or "platforms" are under the clause "launched in 1999 or earlier."

It would be less ambiguous just to break up the sentence like so:
>1. This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games. Retro gaming means consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other games. These games must be on platforms launched in 1999 or earlier.

>>2535336
Yup, that would clear it up.

>>2535327
No because it doesn't even say "another form" It says
> any other forms of video games on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier.

Which is self-evidently clear.

>>2535336
>1. This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games. Retro gaming means consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other games. These games must originate on platforms launched in 1999 or earlier.

Would be even clearer, IF that's the intent. But then, so would "this includes ports on later platforms."

>>2535346
But could "another form of video game" refer to things like Tamagotchi (pre-1999 "video games" which did not fit any of the more specific criteria; this was dismissed as not counting in another thread btw), or could "another form of video game" refer to a rom or port of a 1999-or-earlier game? Ambiguous.

>>2535348
>But then, so would would "this includes ports on later platforms."
I know that should be a rule, but it's not explicitly stated from rule 1 that should be a rule. That doesn't stop people from discussing which port of Dragon Quest to play.

>>2535335
There is not actual "multiple interpretations" in good faith. Instead there are people delibarately misinterpreting the rules, or pretending like the wording is vague so that they can break the rules and talk about whtever they want. Then they act like they found this big loophole, because "oh the wording is so vague", when it is perfectly clear to any rational person what the intent is.

>>2535356
I know, buddy, that's why I wrote "IF that's the intent." "If" was even in capital letters.

>>2535354
It doesn't say another form of video game, it says any other form of video game.

>>2535359
You fit that description pretty well, you know.

>>2535362
What's the difference?

>>2535362
You're splitting hairs. If anything, "Any other form" opens MORE doors, not fewer.

>>2535359
English is notoriously vague and the rule is too. There's even been suggestions on how to make the rules clearer. How would you fix it?

>>2535367
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_as_a_second_or_foreign_language

>>2535360
You said "IF" with regards to intent behind the original rules. Nothing in my post suggested that was what I responded to. I even quoted the sentence I was responding to, and yet here you are saying "that's why I wrote IF that's the intent."

>>2535359
>>2535372
Looks like he's given up.

>>2535372
That's not an answer, that's a cop-out. It's quite telling that you chose to insult their English language skills in lieu of articulating your argument.

>>2535378
>>2535376

I don't have time to waste explaining what the difference between "another" and "any other" is to someone.

>>2535372
>Someone is trying to understand your position
>Insult them
Huh?

Even if you think they're secretly trolling, you can only benefit by making yourself clearer. Come on now.

>>2535375
The second sentence is directly related to the first; it's the continuation of the same idea.

>goes to /v/ to check out the reaction to Iwata's death
>filled with maymays and shitposting
>hightails it /vr/ instead
>it's worse

rip Iwata, you don't deserve this.

>>2535381
But you spent the time pointing out the difference is there. Why the sudden retreat?

>>2535381
I do. "Another" refers to a singular alternate form and isn't specific. "Any other" refers to a potentially infinite number of alternate forms, none of which are specified. Neither make an appreciable difference in the rule as written or this person's argument.

>>2535359
Even if it's not in good faith, the fact that they can quote the rules means they're vague.
If the rules were clearer, nobody would be disagreeing with you

>>2535381
>I have time to say "ur wrong" but not say why
Holy lol

>>2534451
Now cracks a noble heart.—Good night, sweet prince,
And flights of angels with balloons sing thee to thy rest!

>>2535385
I originally though he was just being lazy and wasn't reading the entire rule. But if the poster truly doesn't understand the difference between "another" and "any other", then they probably wouldn't be able to understand any explanation I would be able to offer, thus making it a waste of both of our time.

>>2535390
They're not quoting the rules correctly. They're trying to be sneaky, by cutting off rules after half a sentence, or leaving the most important part of the rule outside of the quote. I agree the rules aren't the best written rules in the world, but their meaning and intent are obvious to anyone not looking for a loophole to get away with something.

>55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERWREcPIoPA

>>2535384

I feel bad for whatever role I played in this. This is a fucking embarrassment, the flaming belligerents know it, and they simply don't care. This is 4chan at its worst.

>>2535396
All right, sorry if I seemed a bit hostile.
Do you think the loopholes should be closed, though?
Would >>2535336 be better?

"Any other form" isn't even in the site rules. THIS is clear. Doesn't it supersede the sticky?

>>2535384
>>2535402

I'm pretty sure that even in life, Iwata never gave a shit about 4chan threads about him.

>>2535407

This is about US, dammit! Don't you understand!?

>>2535402
Seeing as how the OP itself was off topic, I don't see why you'd be surprised the replies were also off topic shit.

>>2535396
>but their meaning and intent are obvious to anyone not looking for a loophole to get away with something.
Are you kidding me? If the rules weren't ambiguous, people wouldn't have multiple interpretations of them to begin with. While you're firmly set in your definition of the rules, there's no reason why a person can't see the rules any different. People aren't malicious with their interpretations to the rules, though you're certainly trying to enforce your definition as much as possible. There is no single correct interpretation the way the rules are laid out now.

>>2535408
The last time I made that snarky observation I was told that I have poor reading comprehension and anger issues.

>>2535396
I think that modern ports of retro games follow the spirit of the rules, and the wording allows it. That's why I quote it.
If you really want me to shut up, get the rules changed and I will. I promise.

>>2535406
Well the site rules imply that Dreamcast is not retro. But the sticky says that Dreamcast is retro. So I guess the sticky has precedence?

>>2535406
I always thought stickies were the highest law of the land, so to speak.
They're made by mods, who enforce the rules. The site rules are ignored on half the boards.

>>2535414

To be fair, this thread has derailed in ways that that early, naive little thing that had the audacity to call itself a derailed thread could only have imagined.

>>2535415
I don't care what you think, the rules are the rules. If you don't want to follow the rules, go to a different website.

>There is no single correct interpretation the way the rules are laid out no
Yes there is, and I have explained it to you. Moral relativism does not apply to /vr/'s rules. Why do you even want to talk about non-retro games on the retro games board, anyway? If you want to do that go to another video game discussion site.

>>2535424
Boy, did you run out steam fast.

If you want ironclad rules, go to a different website. If you're powerless to amend the rules, you are powerless to enforce them.

>>2535417
No. The rules say that 6th generation and later consoles aren't allowed. But dreamcast is not a 6th generation console, it is a 5.5 generation console. There is no conflict, dreamcast was always allowed, the sticky is just clarifying this fact, it is not overriding the rules.

>>2535424
So, you boil down to "I'm right because I say so".
Me too! Guess we're both staying.

>>2535424
>Moral relativism
Not a factor in any of this debate, at all, but it sure sheds light on where you're coming from. Keeping fighting that crusade, noble warrior!

>>2535424
Why is your interpretation correct, and other peoples' are "sneaky"?
If the wording allows it, it's valid.
Fix the wording, then we'll talk.

>>2535430
>5.5 generation console
How is this defined and determined? The PS2 came out more than a year earlier than the GameCube; why don't we call this "generation 5.8?" The whole thing is fucking arbitrary.

>>2535430
>But dreamcast is not a 6th generation console, it is a 5.5 generation console.

>>2535434
"I'd explain it to you, because I totally have an explanation, but you wouldn't understand so I won't bother. Yeah, that's the ticket!"

>>2535434
The /vr/ rules are not a legal contract. They are a set of guidelines to keep the discussion on the retro games forum (/vr/) about retro games (games made before 1999). Just use your head: if your interpretation of the rules would allow posting about non retro games on /vr/, then your interpretation is probably wrong. Quit trying to language lawyer the rules to justify violating the spirit of the board.

>>2535430
Dreamcast is clearly closer in capability and date of release to PS2 than N64 m8.

>>2535438
>>2535437

Arbitrary delineation aside, the sticky is unambiguous about the Dreamcast, so there's nothing to discuss on that front.

>>2535430
>With the release of the 8th generation of consoles, the Sega Dreamcast will now be considered "retro", though the remainder of the sixth generation (Xbox, PS2, GameCube) will not.
The sticky defines the Dreamcast as a sixth generation console by stating "the remainder of the sixth generation" isn't retro.

>>2535437
I declare the Wii U a 5.9 generation console. Splatoon thread coming right up

>>2534525
Aaaah, fuck I needed this, anon. It's such a fun interview.

Rest easy, Mr. President.

>>2535442
Wasn't the original argument that modern ports ARE retro?
That's the point of issue here.
A person who thinks that agrees with you, but happily discuses modern ports.
How do you fix that?

>>2535442
>games made before 1999
Right, or any other form of them, like a modern port.

>>2535257
Its still not real though. All it does is feed into the persecution complex of insecure manchildren who construct their entire identity and sense of self worth on playing the "right" games the "right" way.

>>2535454
Modern ports aren't retro because they were made after 1999.

>>2535456
any other forma of video game on platforms launched IN 1999 AND EARLIER

>>2535442
I wish they were a legal contract. Contracts are clear.
I see merit to both sides here, but this will never be settled unless the wording is changed.

>>2535442

The community has been and always will be self-moderated. It's understandable that there's a purist and a 'relativist' camp. As a member of the latter group, I'll lend more credence to the complaints of the former once reductions to absurdity such as >>2535450 hold weight in reality, but assuming that such scenarios remain absurd, I'll continue to insist that everyone use their best judgement and not pick a fight every time someone skirts the boundary of what you personally consider kosher. Choose your battles, and maybe threads about dead game designers won't derail into arguments about rule interpretations. I don't know, maybe that's what you want.

>>2535445
No one is debating the "legality" of the Dreamcast here. They're using its inclusion to highlight what a clusterfuck the rules are (and also how ridiculous the guy who pulled "5.5" out of his ass sounds).

The rules state:
>platforms launched in 1999 and earlier
The Dreamcast launched in 1998 ('99 in US), so it should be included without any special clauses. Evidently, it was originally EXCLUDED for arbitrary reasons. Now it is INCLUDED for equally arbitrary reasons. Instead of using the built-in 1999 rules, the mods went out of their way to say:
>With the release of the 8th generation of consoles, the Sega Dreamcast will now be considered "retro", though the remainder of the sixth generation (Xbox, PS2, GameCube) will not.
(this also invalidates the "generation 5.5" argument, guy)

They specifically cited the dawn of a new generation as a reason to include only one portion of an earlier generation, with no explanation as to why. Like I said, the whole thing is fucking arbitrary, and probably boiled down to the mod who wrote it saying "but I really like the Dreamcast!"

>>2535458
The 1999 game was made on a 1999 system.
Isn't a 2015 port just another form of it?
The "on a 1999 system" isn't being modified here. The original game certainly was. Now it's in another form, as per the rules.

>>2535313
Dude, if that was the possible grouping, there would've been a comma after "platforms" word. Since there is no comma, there's no ambiguity, and even if it was there, there would've been no ambiguity either. That's one of the basic grammar rules. You haven't read a lot of books, have you?

>>2535437
>The whole thing is fucking arbitrary.
Console generations (especially from the pre-16-bit era) are arbitrary by nature. Is SG-1000 3rd gen like the Mark III? What about the PC Engine (it came before the Super Famicom and Mega Drive and uses a an 8-bit CPU)?

PLEASE MODS
IF YOU'RE OUT THERE
CLARIFY THE FUCKING RULES

>>2535458
So now the game has to be produced after 1999, not the platform? There goes most of Dreamcast's library.

>>2535463
You can't just ignore half of the sentence and pretend it doesn't apply. Any other form is fine, as long as that form was created in 1999 or earlier.

If you still pretend like you don't understand this, I'm sorry,, but I will have to consider you a troll and stop replying to you.

>>2535469
The 3DS was made after 1999.
The port to it was made after 1999.

Father, you left me but I never left you
I needed you, you didn't need me
So I, I just gotta tell you
Goodbye, goodbye

>>2535402

This is 4chan, it's shit.
There has never been space for polite or rational discussions.

>>2535464
>Since there is no comma, there's no ambiguity, and even if it was there, there would've been no ambiguity either

Then the comma wouldn't have made a difference; you just invalidated your own argument.

A person who feels compelled to insult a person's intelligence far beyond what the situation calls for is indicative of that person's insecurity. Good luck. You'll get there.

>>2535473
>Which version of Ocarina of Time should I play?
>NOT RETRO, FUCK OFF TO >>>/v/

>>2535465
>Console generations (especially from the pre-16-bit era) are arbitrary by nature.

Then you'd agree that they have no place in defining board rules, right?

>>2535473
>>2535458

Then emulation isn't retro either, because those emulators were made after '99, yet more than half of the board is dedicated to emulation, both hardware and software. Sourceports can be considered emulation too, in a sense.

You are a retard

>Retro gaming means consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other forms of video games on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier.
At first glance, the 1999 does seem to be a hard ceiling on the platforms, but that damn phrase "any other forms" blows the ceiling right off.
This is the shittiest rule I've ever seen.

>>2535486
Ocarina of Time on N64 is retro
Ocarina of Time on 3DS is not

Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

>>2535257
But it is fake though, go check twitter.

>>2535473
Out Run was made in 1986.
In my mind, a port of a 1986 game counts even if the port came out after 1999. Until the rules are crystal clear, you're going to have to deal with it. You should also ponder the fact that you long for a board with such extreme restrictions.

>>2535472
I thought 1999 applied to the launch platform, not the form. That's kind of a backwards reading.

>>2535498
Ocarina of Time is retro. This is very simple to understand; the rest is just arbitrary details.

You dummies. "Any other form" means tiger electronic games, game and watch games, tamagotchi, pong consoles, etc. It doesn't meany ports.

>>2535498
Because you're framing it as "I'm right, you're wrong". Your opinion is no more right than any other allowed by the rules.
Hell, the mods don't even support you. Modern emulation threads are allowed and my computer is a lot newer than 1999.

>>2535514
>ANY other form
>means specific things
???

>>2535505
>In my mind, a port of a 1986 game counts even if the port came out after 1999.
Well then your mind is wrong. You are willfully ignoring the rules because you want to talk about modern ports of games.

>You should also ponder the fact that you long for a board with such extreme restrictions.
Yes, I'm literally Hitler for wanting to talk about retro games on the retro games board.

>>2535518
>etc...

>>2535521
How does a port make a game not retro?

>>2535521
>This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" movies. Retro movie means movie players, movie media (including Betamax recordings) and any other forms of movies launched in 1999 and earlier. This does not include ports of retro movies; discussion of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray releases of retro movies is strictly forbidden.

>>2535525
>et cetera (in English; /ɛtˈsɛtərə/; Latin pronunciation: [ɛt ˈkeːtɛra]) (rare: etceteros) (abbreviation: etc. or &c.) is a Latin expression that means "and other things", or "and so forth".
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here

>>2535484
>proved lacking basic reading comprehension
he said that there's ambiguity
I said that for it to have a meaning he tries to apply there has to be a comma, and since there's no comma - there's no other meaning to it, but even if there were a comma there woulnt be any ambiguity either and basically you are both retarded.

>>2535527
No it's more like

>Discussion of remakes of retro movies is strctly forbidden.

>>2535514
Those examples do imply that the platform must be pre-1999. I agree with you.
But as long as the slippery phrase "any form" exists, modern shit can technically be discussed. There's nothing we can do.

>>2535535
Remakes and ports are completely different though. A port stays as faithful as possible to the original, retro game.

>>2535521
You're a shitty person for wanting people to adhere to your specific vision in a board you have no actual control over or even a hand in creating.

>Well then your mind is wrong.
Sure. Again, until the rules clearly exile talk or ports, you're just going to have to live with it.

>You are willfully ignoring the rules
Am I? Keep in mind for that all your chest-thumping, mods don't stamp out their discussion, or even create a hamfisted addendum to explicity ban them.

>>2535526
The original game is retro if it was made before 1999.

The port of the game is not retro if it was made after 1999.

>>2535539
Guess Paper Mario's not Retro, then.

>>2535536
A port isn't a "form" of a game. Form only applies to physical form, which is why the examples listed in the sticky includes console carts, PC (disks), arcade cabs, and pinball. A port has the same physical form as an original game, and therefore is not a separate form, and not covered under the "any other forms" clause.

>>2535535
No, it's not. The person I'm addressing isn't arguing against the discussion of game remakes, he's arguing that even straight ports on post-99 platforms aren't retro. By that same logic, Clue on Blu-Ray is not retro because Blu-Ray is post-99, regardless of whether or not Clue is pre-99; the same content is disallowed because of the medium rather than the content itself.

>>2535539
No, I asked HOW, not just...declare things

>>2535543
>Form only applies to physical form
Jesus Christ, you are desperate. But, hey, sweet: Super Mario All-Stars on Wii is officially retro guys! I love playing it with the Wireless Wii Remote, which is one of the best controller ever!

>>2535543
If form only applied to "physical form", the rule would say so. But the absence of that one word allows a whole universe of meanings. If I drew Pong on a napkin right now it would count as any other form. "Form" is incredibly vague.

>>2535539
>an old, classic literature book was published in paper in year 18XX.
>same book published as an e-book in year 200X

It's not an old book! It's completely new stuff, since it was published on a new medium!

>>2535542
>platforms launched in 1999 and earlier.

>The Nintendo 64 (Japanese: ニンテンドー64 Hepburn: Nintendō Rokujūyon?), stylized as NINTENDO64 and often referred to as N64, is Nintendo's third home video game console for the international market. Named for its 64-bit central processing unit, it was released in June 1996 in Japan, September 1996 in North America, March 1997 in Europe and Australia, September 1997 in France and December 1997 in Brazil.

>>2535553
Kek, I didn't even think of this.
All the classics on my Kindle are modern trash!

>>2535539
Again, there goes most of Dreamcast's library.

>>2535552
If you drew it in 1999 maybe...

>>2535554

>>2535539 said "the original game," not the platform. Now you're arguing the platform. You can't even keep your own argument consistent, so how can you declare your shifting interpretation to be absolutely correct?

Charles Martinet will die in your lifetime.

>>2535553
Now watch as he unironically maintains that this is actually true.

>>2535554
That's not how your definition applied to games here >>2535539. You're contradicting yourself by saying original games are retro if released before 1999, but still referring to games on the consoles released before 1999.

>>2535553
It's different and you know it. The means of interaction don't matter with a book. They do with a game. When you port a game to run on different hardware, with different sound system, graphics, and (especially) controls it is a different game altogether.

>>2535558
That doesn't matter. It's a new form of a game that was on a 1999 platform.

>>2535565
Fine with me. I wish that somehow prevented Nintendo from using their vast Martinet sound bank for voicing Mario well into the future.

Full Definition of FORM

1
a : the shape and structure of something as distinguished from its material
b : a body (as of a person) especially in its external appearance or as distinguished from the face : figure
c archaic : beauty
2
: the essential nature of a thing as distinguished from its matter: as
a : idea 1a
b : the component of a thing that determines its kind
3
a : established method of expression or proceeding : procedure according to rule or rote; also : a standard or expectation based on past experience : precedent <true to form, the champions won again>
b : a prescribed and set order of words : formula <the form of the marriage service>
4
: a printed or typed document with blank spaces for insertion of required or requested information <tax forms>
5
a (1) : conduct regulated by extraneous controls (as of custom or etiquette) : ceremony (2) : show without substance
b : manner or conduct as tested by a prescribed or accepted standard <rudeness is simply bad form>
c : manner or style of performing or accomplishing according to recognized standards of technique <a strong swimmer but weak on form>
6
a : the resting place or nest of a hare
b : a long seat : bench

(1/2)

>>2535556
Well, going by >>2535539 logic, they are

Also based on that same logic 80% of this board should be wiped.
How does it hurt them to see all this non/vr/ stuff on /vr/ every day for several years?

>>2535571
>>2535562

>/vr/ is one person

>>2535581
7
a : a supporting frame model of the human figure or part (as the torso) of the human figure usually used for displaying apparel
b : a proportioned and often adjustable model for fitting clothes
c : a mold in which concrete is placed to set
8
: the printing type or other matter arranged and secured in a chase ready for printing
9
a : one of the different modes of existence, action, or manifestation of a particular thing or substance : kind <one form of respiratory disorder> <a form of art>
b : a distinguishable group of organisms
c : linguistic form
d : one of the different aspects a word may take as a result of inflection or change of spelling or pronunciation <verbal forms>
e : a mathematical expression of a particular type <a bilinear form> <a polynomial form>
10
a (1) : orderly method of arrangement (as in the presentation of ideas) : manner of coordinating elements (as of an artistic production or course of reasoning) (2) : a particular kind or instance of such arrangement <the sonnet is a poetical form>
b : pattern, schema <arguments of the same logical form>
c : the structural element, plan, or design of a work of art — compare content 2c
d : a visible and measurable unit defined by a contour : a bounded surface or volume
11
: a grade in a British school or in some American private schools
12
a (1) : the past performance of a race horse (2) : racing form
b : known ability to perform <a singer at the top of her form>
c : condition suitable for performing (as in athletic competition) <back on form>

(2/2)

>>2535581

Before you post the second half, I'd just like to say I hope you're proud of yourself for this.

>>2535589
>: a grade in a British school or in some American private schools

SEE: THE /VR/ RULES ARE CLEARLY REFERRING TO ANY GAME YOU PLAYED WHILE YOU WERE IN SCHOOL MORANS

>>2535584
It hurts them so badly they have to shit up a memorial thread with their ideological crusade.

>>2535572
>When you port a game to run on different hardware, with different sound system, graphics, and (especially) controls it is a different game altogether.
Ironically, this was true of many pre-2000 ports, and not true of many modern ports.

SNES Street Fighter Alpha 2 was a different game altogether from its CPS2 counterpart; PS2 Street Fighter Alpha 2 is identical to the CPS2 counterpart.

What is a "game", really?

>>2535596
>PS2 Street Fighter Alpha 2 is identical to the CPS2 counterpart

No it's not. Show me where I can plug my dualshock 2 into a CPS2.

>>2535590
I am.

>>2535587
Of course not, but there is one guy tirelessly insisting "my interpretation is absolute and correct."

>>2535598
I'm pretty sure basketball was invented before 1999. Basketball is obviously a game.

Who /sp/ here?

>>2535603
>He plays Alpha 2 with a DualShock 2

I can show your where to plug an arcade stick into a PS2.

>>2535607

Not me. How did they react to the Nips getting BTFO in the finals?

I can't fucking breathe
This thread is golden

>>2535614
Well, considering it's /sp/, there was a lot of surprisingly civil discussion on the differences between international attitudes towards soccer and well-reasoned arguments on each side.

>>2535616

Sometimes, I wonder why I continue to come here with all the undiluted autism in full bloom, and then I remember that's exactly why I come here.

>>2535616
And people pretend /vr/ is any better than /v/

>>2535603
>>2535612
This sounds like the setup to a dirty joke

>>2535635
It is. It would be even better too if people stopped breaking the rules.

>>2535635
That's actually what kicked off this derailment.

>>2535089
>I'm not whining about old games, I'm whining about /v/

/v/'s not a retro topic though.

>>2535646
Not this time you MONSTER

>>2534918
>16
You're giving them too much credit. It's hard to believe the median age is above 14

>>2535248
Personally I think the gray area is too vague. I mean if it's a completely straight port like Kid Icarus 3D (which is literally the original game with the FDS soundtrack, updated backgrounds, a better save system, and stereostopic 3D) then there's no reason for it to not be allowed, but something like the Final Fantasy VII remake, which seems like it's going to heavily change both the plot and the gameplay from how the director is talking about it, probably isn't allowed, unless maybe you frame it around how it compares to the original. (Which, said thing can be done for a lot of things like fangames and I've seen good threads come of it). It's something that really can't have a conclusion drawn without a mod going "okay so it's definitely [this]," and I'm not sure if I want that because I remember the shitstorm that happened when the Dreamcast was banned and then later unbanned, it really hurt the quality of the board from all the shitposting.

>>2535494
>not still playing on Nesticle

>>2535668
>unless maybe you frame it around how it compares to the original.
This is almost always the context in which these games are brought up here, and it still triggers people. These people treat "PS2 Phantasy Star remakes thread" and "the original games are generally preferable, since the PS2 versi--" as the same grave offense. It'd be nice if the rules were clarified, but the real problem is that these people aren't going to go away.

>>2534451
RIP in peace.

Was Iwata married or had kids?

>>2535042
>>2535012
>>2534994
>>2534987
>>2534974

Fuck off, retard.

Courtesy of one of the primary repair thread contributors.

RIP Nintendo