/vr/ - Retro Games

>>6341071
enjoyed the shit out of it back in the day, but i doubt it's aged very good

>>6341071
It's fun but the thread will get deleted regardless because all the mods here are illiterate.

How well can it run on pre-2000 hardware?

>>6341087
nah. it's very clear that it's retro. and besides, it's 20 years old at this point, pretty retro to me

awesome game too. I played the remastered edition on xb360 and it was great

Technically it's not retro, it wasn't released for win 98 but for win xp (released 2001, halo released 2002). But i get the same feeling for a game like BF1942, eventhough technically it's not retro (also released 2002) it's got that retro feeling to it...

>>6341093
Of course it's clear, it's in the rules. But the mods don't actually read the rules. They're console fanboys.

>>6341097
MS says minimum requirements are win98, win ME, win 2e, win2000, or winXP
https://support.microsoft.com/en-ca/help/829479/minimum-system-requirements-for-halo-combat-evolved

>>6341097
It runs in Windows 98 even though XP was recommended at the time.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-ca/help/829479/minimum-system-requirements-for-halo-combat-evolved

>>6341097
>>6341107
>>6341113
proofs

>>6341093
>it's 20 years old at this point
Is there any universal rule that says that things that are 20 years old are "retro"?
I don't think it has to do with a set amount of years passed, I also don't think there's an universal rule for the usage of the word Retro.
On /vr/, retro is not about the passage of time ("if X years have passed, it's retro"), it's a lot more simpler than that: if it's from before the year 2000, it's retro.

>>6341115
And yet we have source ports and .wads for Doom that were released just weeks ago.
If it was released for a pre-2000 platform, it's retro, at least according to the sticky.

>>6341114
But if theres a game, lets say from 2008, that still runs fine in win 98, does that make the game retro too then?

Love this game, many great memories

>>6341115
>muh changing the definitions of words argument again
Tranny gender bender faggot mentality.

>>6341124
It seems like a lot of people hate this game because they feel it ruined FPSs or casualized the industry. I never played it; do you think this holds water?

>>6341120
>And yet we have source ports and .wads for Doom that were released just weeks ago.
Yeah afaik mods and hacks are fine as long as the base game is retro and can run on original hardware/platform.
>If it was released for a pre-2000 platform, it's retro, at least according to the sticky.
That is true, in that case, if Halo can run on hardware from before the year 2000, it's allowed here.

>>6341121
>But if theres a game, lets say from 2008, that still runs fine in win 98, does that make the game retro too then?
Yes, considering we've had threads for late PS1 and N64 games released after the 6th gen started.

>>6341121
Yes. Same reason why Pier Solar, a Sega Genesis game from 2010, can be discussed here.

The Platform (hardware, OS, etc) determines what is retro, not the game's release date.

>>6341093
>nah. it's very clear that it's retro.
Didn't it come out in 2001? How is that retro

>>6341126
He's doing the opposite of trying to change the definiton of the word. He's saying there isn't a set definition other than "old style", which is vague as hell as it could mean anything from something that is actually old, to something that just imitates old things.
People who say "20 years is retro" have no source to back it up, some random kid could also come and claim 3 years is retro.

not retro

>>6341120
think that has more to do with fact that game is running on the same 27 year old doom engine, or atleast a derivative of it. wad files are also just levels for that same old doom engine so its valid i guess

>>6341132
see >>6341131
Platform is what matters

>>6341121
As for how the rules are written, absolutely yes.

>>6341134
I mean it's completely arbitrary the way it is defined, I wish the mods would give a more concrete definition, but it seems like all you can get out of the seething asshats that invoke "not retro" every time they see something they dislike is a bunch of opinions and projections.

Imo I feel like the oft spoken 2000 retro rule is asinine. As time changes the mark changes, in 2015 what was made in 2000 may be retro, but in 2020, why is 2005 not the cutoff? The logic just isn't there, if the mark never budged eventually you'll have more media that isn't retro than is. In fact I feel like we are already reaching that tipping point, especially considering I see the exact same fucking threads in here week in and week out. A new year of material entering the board every year might actually liven up conversations rather than complaining about SCART vs s-video and which Final Fantasy between 1 and 9 is the best for the 200th time...

>>6341156
The one thing the rules aren't very clear about is when it comes to PC hardware.
Can Halo actually run on a computer from 1999? I imagine it can, but asking out of curiosity.
If it does, then it wouldn't hurt anybody to discuss it here, it'd still be a little fringe, but if it really can run on pre-2000 hardware, it'd fit the board's criteria regardless, even if nobody is really playing it on a pre-2000 computer.

>>6341071
It came out on the Xbox first though, which is a non-retro platform.

Pretty sure non-retro ports to retro systems don't make the games actually retro.

>>6341168
>Can Halo actually run on a computer from 1999? I imagine it can, but asking out of curiosity.
>>6341114

Talking about non-retro games isn't what makes non-retro or questionably retro game threads bad, it's the hundred or so "not retro"s and seething arguments that follow that are the problem...

>>6341168
>Can Halo actually run on a computer from 1999? I imagine it can, but asking out of curiosity.
I think so, but I've never tested it.

>>6341180
The real problem is that the rules are so badly written that dumb debates like this can happen in the first place

>>6341167
>every time they see something they dislike is a bunch of opinions and projections.
The same could be said for the pro-6th gen group, though.
>The logic just isn't there
When you think about the grand scheme of things, being on the internet discussing old video games isn't very "logic", it's an entertainment and there's not much depth to it.
The rules could be whatever, rules ARE meant to be arbitrary, that's the point of rules.
This has been discussed many many times before. Allowing 6th gen would be the floodgate for incessant shitposting AND also it would never be over because once 6th gen is allowed, then people who want 7th gen here will begin complaining too. You say that 15 years or 20 years should be considered retro, well, for some other person, your own arbitrary definition of retro could also be unfair, as they feel that 5 years is enough to be retro, and who would you be to prove them wrong?
The rules are fine as they are. It's not necessary to "accomodate" to the passing time, just as how people who are interested in studying ancient egypt don't necessarily need to study modern egyptian society.

There is a solution to end all of these retro/non retro discussions, make a few subboards under /vr, categorizing all games by their release date, so there will be a board for 80's games, 90's games and perhaps early 00's games regardless of platform

>>6341187
The solution has been proposed before, and it'd be a /v2k/ board: all games released from 2000 onwards, except for current gen. As new gens roll around, more will be added to v2k.
>but too much vidya boards!
Not really, since video games are probably the most discussed thing in 4chan, having 4 boards in total wouldn't be too crazy.
/vg/ for FOTM containments
/v/ for shitposting and off topic
/vr/ for 20th century gaming
/v2k/ for non-current 21st century gaming.

>>6341115
>Is there any universal rule that says that things that are 20 years old are "retro"?
People were calling 80's games retro by the fucking mid-90's. So yeah, I'd say something 20 years old is retro if people have been known to refer to something from less than 10 years prior as retro.

>>6341183
>Allowing 6th gen would be the floodgate for incessant shitposting AND also it would never be over because once 6th gen is allowed,
Yes, because /vr/ certainly never has had a problem with incessant shit posting and derailed threads.

>>6341127
Not him but it - at worst - may have casualized fps as a whole. But also kinda not really.

Anyone who says a game casualized the whole gaming industry is full of shit unless maybe they’re talking about following space war with pong.

As for fps...halo was not the first popular console fps. But it was the first extremely popular dual stick fps that I know of. Didnt invent the control scheme, but was certainly more popular than the Alien game that did.

So now you have a big console market of fps kiddos, and for the first time you have a control scheme that makes designing for both pc and console relatively easy. The xbox line has itself always been basically pcs in a box with a green x on the outside, which also GREATLY facilitated this. It ushered in the beginning of pc fps games now trying to cater to console players. For example, for way too long fps games would start limiting you to two weapons (not too bad, part of game balance) or giving even pc gamers a weapon wheel rather than hotkeys (genuine greivance), mostly because they were now being made with controllers in mind.

The other big thing is console fps will almost always subtly snap your reticule to an enemy, whereas mouse you rely totally on your own aim. This is about the only objective form of casualization I can think of. Some haughty pc gamers get mad seeing console kids think they’re pro gamers when the game sort of plays itself.

Besides that, fps was now just much more popular. So some studios now make much dumber games to cash in on lowest common denominators. Still plenty of good fps if you know where to look, but maybe some once beloved devs have to cowtow to publisher demands and dumb down the newest game in a series. Pretty typical stuff, which coincided with the rise of the AAA studios that would gradually happen over the next five-ten years.

Oh, and devs who didnt understand why halo’s healing shield health worked would make shitty copies of the mechanic

>>6341180
The real problem is that the rules are badly written enough that it leaves room for semi-literate people to complain abd derail threads.

>>6341210
>People
That's not a rule, that's anecdotal evidence.
Also, as you guys say, time changes. Back in the 90s, we went from having still fairly primitive 2D, to having fairly good 3D. it was a hectic time with a lot of changes.
Not much has changed between gens 6, 7 and 8 other than resolution and pure technical aspects. There was no wild new concepts other than maybe the advent of mobile gaming, which can't really compare to how wild it was to go from 2D to 3D during the 90s.

>>6341071
>Windows 98, it is a videogame for a platform released in 1999 or earlier, so it's retro.
From the start pc games have been allowed only by release year.

>>6341215
>Yes, because /vr/ certainly never has had a problem with incessant shit posting and derailed threads.
Proving him right. Imagine the multiplied shitposting if the rules are added (by both sides, not even blaming you guys only).
The lesser of two evils is to leave /vr/ as it is.

Can't believe Gearbox fucked it up so badly. Oh well, none of this shit matters in online mp anyways.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6nZPrMSu0w

combat evolved is one of the best video games ever created, going down in the annals of history with mario, zelda, doom, and dark souls 1.

this game bought everyone together to splitscreen all day back when it came out. it was great. i remember getting it, going over to this chicks birthday party, telling my friends that i got it, and half the people ditched her on her birthday to come play halo over my house lmao. it was that good. for years we talked about the possibility of a halo movie but it never came :(
some faggot even admitted to my face he used me just to play it.

>>6341221
(Cont)
Hit text limit but my point is in a lot of ways halo’s casualization of things was mostly coincidental to a lot of things happening at the time.

Also, JRPGs are dumbed down CRPGs and are much more popular. Both can be beloved genres because they suit different needs.

Old usenet posts show a lot of pc gamers mocking nes and specifically super mario bros for casualizing and dumbing down games, for not being sophisticated enough. Now it’s hard to think of a game that defines ‘classic’ as much as the first SMB. Those people were just against action games period.

Blockbusters are often stupid, but a lot of the people who rant angrily about that are snobs not actually any better than the people they mock.

Halo grew the fps market immensely. Everything that followed is basically what always happens when a market gets huge. You see more dumb games, and more gems that wouldve otherwise not been made. A lot of copycats who dont know what theyre doing. Etc.

So I guess maybe it did casualize things, but the biggest hits nearly always do? I dunno, halo is a solid fucking game and a ton of the people who used to hate it were mad about dudebros coming into what was at the time sort of a nerd safespace.

Ive kind of lost my point so im just gonna stop now.

>>6341182
What would be a better system? An age limit, say a game's retro if it's older than 20 years?

>>6341242
probably spent more time on multiplayer and fucking with the game's mechanics/trying to find secrets/ram the warthog in every crevice and crack/get out of bounds than i did playing the campaign

spent hours just exploring the ocean on silent cartographer, looking back, it was so easy to be immersed even without crysis-tier graphics. also being a kid helped.

>>6341248
i agree. 20 years.

>>6341248
>>6341253
why not 10?

>>6341237
6th gen was the generation where PC versions of games often lacked console-specific visual effects; San Andreas is the most notable example. Who knows why, maybe it was hard to convert the effects? Maybe they thought it wasn't worth the effort? Maybe they thought it looked better? Most likely scenario is that they just didn't care, the PC game market was worth under a billion dollars in this gen, so it's not surprising if companies just said "lol who cares" when making these ports.