[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Become a Patron!

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 236 KB, 676x405, Game_Boy_Advance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
2891883 No.2891883 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Im glad that with the new year passing we can begin to discuss additional consoles since everyone who isnt a pants shitting baby knows that having a permanently fixed point in time as the basis for discussion is stupid and inhibits discussion thus making for an unsustainable community in the long run since all discussion is limited to a fixed period of time will eventually run its course and begin to become stale and boring.

>> No.2891884

I agree with you wholeheartedly but you're just going to get banned by these fucktards, anon. They don't have rational discussions. They don't deal in reason. They don't even live in any discernible plane of reality.

>> No.2891886

Not retro. Never will be retro.

>> No.2891890

/vr/ is nostalgia for 30 somethings, not 20 somethings.

>> No.2891894

What happens when the 20 somethings become 30 somethings and the 30 somethings become 40 somethings.

Retro isnt a fixed period of time. It's based on the passage of time or era

>> No.2891904

Do you see what I mean? This poor man is clearly suffering from a debilitating brain injury.

>> No.2891905

"Retro" on /vr/ has never meant "retro" as in the English word. It's always meant specific old games, which because of their age have a specific style. Arguably 5th gen. doesn't have this style, but 5th gen. is so primitive that it doesn't attract people interested in the wrong style of games and allowing it does no harm. 6th gen. remains 6th gen. with 6th gen. style no matter how old it gets, and it will never be "retro" as the word is used here.

>> No.2891910

Your argument is bad. I just wanted to let you know.

>> No.2891915


Obviously /vr/ has never been about retro games in the English meaning of the word.

>> No.2891916

There is no fixed point in time. The rule specifies a date for platforms, not game releases. The only (unwritten) exception is PC games, because there is no clear way to define "platform" for PCs. There is nothing stopping people making new games for /vr/ platforms.

>> No.2891920

I would say the GBA fits the "style" of retro games. They're pretty similar to anything you'd see on the snes. Maybe the PS1.

It pisses me off that the Dreamcast, a fully competent 3D system, is allowed but the GBA, a mostly 2D system, is not.

>> No.2891926

Dreamcast fits the style better than the N64. It shows very strong arcade influence and little casualization. It really was "retro" in the true English meaning, and that killed Sega.

>> No.2891927

>They don't even live in any discernible plane of reality.
Their parents basement isn't a discernible plane of reality?

>> No.2891930

>It shows very strong arcade influence and little casualization
Just like the GBA.

>> No.2891931

>The rule specifies a date for platform

And it was an arbitrary pointless year that was chosen purely based on the time that this board was created.

Do you seriously think people will have the same idea of retro in another 5 years?

>> No.2891940

I honestly wouldn't care if GBA was allowed, but people would see it as precedent for allowing more new systems, and we'd be at great risk of XBox/PS2/Gamecube being allowed, which are clearly not appropriate.

>> No.2891945


>> No.2891946

To add this isnt to say we should just start adding new consoles to the rules.

It's a slow change, but as years go on the notion of retro will change and will have to accomodate to the climate of discussion.

>> No.2891948

release dates:

March 21, 2001

March 4, 2000

September 14, 2001

November 15, 2001

>> No.2891949

The fact that they're retro makes them pretty appropriate.

>> No.2891950

Yup, this. At the very least it would invite people who want to talk about the GameCube because hey, it can connect to the GameCube, right?

>> No.2891951

not retro
kill yourself
>inb4 muh definition
retro fits within 15-20 years, 20

>> No.2891952

Might be easier to split the board when it comes to that. Generations 1-4 and generations 5+6

>> No.2891957

In March, GBA will be 15.

PS2 is already 15 btw.

>> No.2891959

That would only make things worse. Besides, the 6th generation of consoles are viewed as retro by a great deal of people in this community. It's at least worth having a serious discussion about.

>> No.2891960

you said it
only 15

>> No.2891961

Retro fits WITHIN 15-20. If it's 15 years old, it's retro.

>> No.2891962

>6th generation of consoles are viewed as retro by a great deal of people in this community

go make a strawpoll, lets see what happens
I cant wait for you to stop spitting the same bullshit everytime

>> No.2891963
File: 145 KB, 405x400, 1421620902871.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


These are not retro.

>> No.2891964

If you mean "retro" as in the English word, only the Gamecube is retro. Retro consoles are:
Every Nintendo console/handheld except the NES, SNES and N64
Various obscure handhelds nobody cares about
But this is not the meaning of "retro" used here, see >>2891915

If you mean "retro" as in "in the style of games allowed on /vr/", none of them are retro.

>> No.2891967

i think retro should be 10 years since the release of the last major title

Final Fantasy VI Advance came out in 2007

try again next year

>> No.2891968

>splitting a slow board because of your autism

>> No.2891971

>a great deal of people
Literally you and your two friends who suspiciously talk like you and show up right after you post something you need to get backed up about

>> No.2891972

"Last major title" is arbitrary and makes no sense.

And your criteria is completely retarded because it can't be applied to PC games. Just like any other argument that's gen-based instead of just year-based.

>> No.2891973

>referring to facts as bullshit

hoooookay buddy

whining and pissing all over the floor doesn't make 6th gen any less retro

you have to be at least 18 years of age to access this website

>> No.2891974

For dreamcast Redux was released July 17, 2009.
So dreamcast will be retro in 3 more years.

>> No.2891975

>redefining words to support your argument

>> No.2891976

No, because of /vr/'s not muh retro autism

>> No.2891981



>> No.2891982

make a strawpoll if you want to see the facts, otherwise youre going to get called on your bullshit everytime

>whining and pissing all over the floor doesn't make 6th gen any less retro
the irony

>> No.2891983

Half the posters support GBA, half go NOT RETRO. You can't generalize what /vr/ is.

>> No.2891986

by last major title i mean anything that was sold in stores, and isnt indie/homebrew, shovelware or sports simulator [current year], really.

pc isnt a console, why should console criteria apply to it?

i dont think redux counts by my criteria above

>> No.2891989

>Do you want GBA discussion on /vr/?

This has probably been done before, but I haven't seen one. If the majority is against GBA, I'll personally shut up about it forever here.

>> No.2891991

>i dont think redux counts by my criteria above
Your arbitrary criteria where YOU decide a major release?

>> No.2891994

Dreamcast is Sega Naomi arcade hardware. Capable of outputting 480p for analog 31 KHz monitors. Retro.

GBA is widescreen square pixel no scanlines handheld 32 bit LED digital screen. Not retro never will be.

>> No.2891996


if it was sold in stores, youd at least have an argument

any definition of retro is arbitrary, im just pitching in my 2 cents

>> No.2891997

Dreamcast had online, not retro
GBA did not, retro

>> No.2891998

Post it in a separate thread if possible, to get more people to vote

>> No.2892000

This thread in a nutshell:
"Mods are asleep. Post non-retro!"

>> No.2892001

I may be a big dumb idiot but one thing I am not guilty of is samefagging. That would completely miss the point of my argument. There are a lot of people on /vr/ who consider 6th gen and GBA retro. I don't know what to tell you. I do sort of wish we had IDs like /int/ does though. That would help with stuff like this a great deal.

>> No.2892002

The immense popularity and sales of the PlayStation 2 marked a mainstream acceptance of video games that had never been seen before. This lead to a natural, but huge, cultural shift for the hobby, unparalleled by previous generations.

The world of video games post-Dreamcast is such an incredibly different beast compared to the one before it. In my opinion, it feels like the most distinct line between "retro games" and "modern games."

>> No.2892008

>The immense popularity and sales of the PlayStation 2 marked a mainstream acceptance of video games that had never been seen before
I agree, but let's be real. The exact same argument can be made, truthfully and accurately, for both the NES and the PS1. Just how much it matters and how it breaks retro and not retro is entirely subjective.

The only not subjective method is by counting years. Which people here refuse to do because it'd include games they don't like.

>> No.2892015

Should be 15 years from the end of the consoles life (when general support shifted away, not necessarily end of production), not the beginning. While the PS2 generally fits the definition of retro, there were some big games released for it <10 years ago which don't fit.
Dreamcast is fine, because while it did release just before the PS2, it died early and most of its game are ~15 years old.

IMO, GBA/PS2/GC/Xbox shouldn't be allowed until ~2020.

>> No.2892017

I feel like we should follow the rules, but I also feel we can me exceptions sometimes, and most GBA games are 2D, I say it could be possible.

>> No.2892018

They shouldn't be allowed ever. The most painless solution would be yet another vidya board dedicated for all the systems between 6th and the most current gens.

>> No.2892020

Was in favor of adding GBA but damn that's actually really compelling.

>> No.2892021

>games that become retro should never be allowed on a retro games board

>in b4 things never become retro because I am mentally stuck in 2005

>> No.2892025

Not true.
I'm mentally stuck in 1998

>> No.2892031

Nothing can "become retro" by aging, whether you use the word in the standard English meaning or the /vr/ meaning.

>> No.2892041

dial-up, retro

>> No.2892042

>Retro style is style that is consciously derivative or imitative of trends, music, modes, fashions, or attitudes of the recent past, typically 15–20 years old.
Time passes, anon. Both the standard English meaning and the /vr/ retro meaning takes this into account. When something is 15 years old or over it can be considered retro, and the rules here state "with the release of the 8th generation of consoles...", implying that time passing and new technology being released is what moves things (Dreamcast in this case) into the retro field.

>> No.2892043

Nothing non-retro has been posted so far.

>> No.2892046

Going by that criteria, the Sega Genesis isn't retro.

>> No.2892049

>no genesis
>no dreamcast

Sega btfo

>> No.2892051

>Rules used to be 2000 for PC, and nothing later than 5th gen
>DC fags complained and shitposted endlessly about how the rules were unfair, since the DC was actually 5th gen despite the fact the rest of the world says otherwise
>They argue that it shouldn't be on gen, but year because reasons they are never able to specify
>After much whining, get a special snowflake exemption in the rules, people complain about slippery slope effect
>People are worried about influx of underage fags bringing down quality of board and leading to the underage fags overrunning the board and turning it into /v/2.0
>DC fags = "FUK OFF, end of discussion!"
>Now people are arguing to allow GBA/GCN/XBOX/PS2
>"It shouldn't be gen based, it should be based off of year"
>"This stuff IS retro!"

Still waiting for the apology from the DC fags, which I know I'll never get. Everyone said this would happen, and look what's happening. If anyone wants to know why /vr/ died, it was the obsessive and whiny DC fags.

>> No.2892052




>> No.2892056

>If anyone wants to know why /vr/ died, it was the obsessive and whiny DC fags.

agree 100%

>> No.2892058

Can't fucking second this enough. This, this so bad. They fucked PC over and they fucked consoles too with the stupid slippery slope. Worst part is DC is barely discussed outside of a fucking general (that would otherwise and rightfully belong in /vg/).

They'll never apologize. I just hope mods will change the rules at some point, even if it's when the next gen is released or whatever, and revise them so they make sense instead of being the unreasonable clusterfuck the DCfags left us with.

>> No.2892064

>They don't have rational discussions. They don't deal in reason. They don't even live in any discernible plane of reality.
The rule is very simple: no games after 1999. What's so hard to understand about that you underage idiots?

>> No.2892068

You know who never has to have these bullshit discussions? The other /vr/. From a website that we are not allowed to mention, but is another chan whose number is 4x2. Because they have a rolling 12 year mark. It's perfect.

>> No.2892069

I think 12 years is a bit too small a timeframe, but otherwise a rolling year counter makes sense from every possible perspective, unlike "1999 because DC fuck PC fuck gen divides lmao".

>> No.2892070

Again, nothing not retro has been mentioned, you massive tard.

>> No.2892071

It would seem the word "retro" is the subjective factor here. unless our board's name was officially changed to /v99/ - Pre-2000 Games" then these fagtards will use that inch to try and gain a mile.

>> No.2892075

Retro is not subjective, it's based on "recent past". As time moves forward, things are progressively labeled "retro". This is not a hard concept to grasp. SNES was not retro in the 90's, the only reason it's retro is because TIME PASSES.

Time passes. That's the rationale for the word retro and even for our current rules. Let that sink in and then rejoin this discussion.

>> No.2892079


>> No.2892080

No one is saying there is some absolute definition to the term retro. The only people who care are the ones who want it changed.

The rule works because it keeps out PS2/Gamecube/Xbox. Frankly I dont care about the hardware differences between the systems, because most importantly it keeps out thousands of games that do not need a dedicated board outside of /v/ like Halo, Call of Duty, and the other obvious mainstream titles.

If those consoles were ever allowed on here this board would absolutely become cluttered and unnecessary

>> No.2892085

If 6th gen was formally allowed, this board would finally be good again.

>> No.2892086

This, EXACTLY this. It's a shame that you can't really discuss 6th gen on /v/ for one reason or another, but it's not what /vr/ was made for and we shouldn't bend the rules just to allow that discussion to take place.

>> No.2892087

again? as opposed to when? why cant you just go to /v/ to discuss those things?

>> No.2892091

>The rule works because it keeps out PS2/Gamecube/Xbox.
The rules don't work because it excludes tons of retro PC games, it includes a sixth generation console with full 3D capabilities and online functionality, and make no sense whatsoever ("with the release of 8th gen the Dreamcast will be considered retro but nothing else"? how are both things related in the slightest?)

If 4chan manages to survive 10 years into the future, PS2 will undoubtedly be considered retro by the way. Also "thousands of games" and you only name two, okay.

>> No.2892093

Wrong. "Retro" means "imitating the past". It has nothing to do with age (some people might mean "old" when they say "retro", and that sense might even be listed in dictionaries, but it's misusing the language in a way that harms clarity of communication for everybody, similar to using "literally" to mean "figuratively", so you should resist it). The Dreamcast is retro because it was old-fashioned when it was first released. But all this is completely irrelevant, because /vr/ uses a non-standard definition of "retro", which is listed in the sticky.

>> No.2892095

>but it's not what /vr/ was made for
/vr/ was made for retro games.

Things from the recent past are considered retro.

As time moves forward, sixth gen will, by the very virtue of belonging to the RECENT PAST, come to be considered retro.

Why is this so hard to understand?

>> No.2892101

SNES also since the SuFami had the Broadcast Satellite download service.

>> No.2892103

>Also "thousands of games" and you only name two, okay.
I shouldn't have to name more, anyone who is aware of these things know those three systems total to thousands of games that are 1. already discussed enough on /v/ and 2. are sometimes not even a few years old.

I still havent gotten an answer as to why these things cant just be discussed on /v/. last I went there, plenty of people were having discussion even on N64 games. maybe if you spent less time shitposting and more time making constructive threads about whatever console you want, there might be the discussion you desire

>> No.2892104

>"Retro" means "imitating the past"
Undertale, Spelunky, VVVVV and Shovel Knight are retro now then?

>it has nothing to do with age
>imitating THE PAST
2016 is not the past now. It will the the past, however, 15 years from now.

>The Dreamcast is retro because it was old-fashioned when it was first released
Full 3D capabilities far beyond anything seen at the date and online connectivity? Old-fashioned?

Are you some sort of meta troll?

>which is listed in the sticky
Yeah, it's before 1999 with the implication that time moving forward affects the rules ("with the release of gen 8..."). Exactly what retro is. Only it hasn't been updated in a while. Also the only reason that definition exists is because of DCfags, original rules were different (ie better).

>> No.2892105
File: 602 KB, 942x705, dreamcast was the last retro console.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.2892109

>Undertale, Spelunky, VVVVV and Shovel Knight are retro now then?
Yes, those are perfect examples of retro games.

>Full 3D capabilities far beyond anything seen at the date and online connectivity? Old-fashioned?
In terms of game design, yes. Dreamcast games rewarded skill. The rest of the industry had long since moved over to "interactive experiences".

>> No.2892110

>I still havent gotten an answer as to why these things cant just be discussed on /v/.
Why can't Dreamcast be discussed on /v/ then? It's also sixth gen.

Try making a GBA thread on /v/. It won't survive unless it's Golden Sun or MMBN, and even then it may just slip away.

Modern gamers (ie /v/) don't give two fucks bout stuff like GBA. And it's increasingly being considered retro or outdated.

>> No.2892114

>Yes, those are perfect examples of retro games.
Oh boy.

I think we're done here.

No, wait.
>Dreamcast games rewarded skill. The rest of the industry had long since moved over to "interactive experiences".
What is Shenmue?

>> No.2892117

None of this shit is really retro. However in vg terms it is.

>> No.2892119

I'll support allowing GBA in exchange for banning PS1 and N64. Dreamcast can stay.

>> No.2892121

I'm in support of not adding GBA as long as Dreamcast garbage is banned again.

>> No.2892125

"Retro" as in the English word, not "retro" and in "suitable for /vr/". Obviously I'm opposed to allowing indie-shit here.

>What is Shenmue?
Too little and too late to save Sega. (not that I'd be happy if it had)

>> No.2892126

Honestly I support GBA, but if banning it means getting rid of Dreamcast I'd fully support that. It'd be nice having non-hypocritical rules again.

>> No.2892130


Segatards honestly need to be put in their place (again).

>> No.2892146

>posts picture of Super Metroid thinking to fool real men who value the superior Dreamcast that it's a GBA game

You're put in your places

>> No.2892152


>Dreamcast games rewarded skill

Sort of.

I think Dreamcast actually played a big role in making games more accessible for bigger audiences.

>> No.2892153

Look closer. None of those games are what the titles say they are.

>> No.2892157

That picture is so wrong it ain't even funny.

>> No.2892162

Yeah since they cost $1 per disc to buy off eBay

>> No.2892165

It's right in asserting the indisputable fact that Dreamcast is /vr/ while GBA is not

>> No.2892169

Ok, this thread has been goin on long enough I'm going to delete it in a min like I do all your other Gba threads you been posting the last few days.

>> No.2892173

Did yoy look at the picure? It's not even the proper games that go with it.

>> No.2892174

Don't forget the other one that just popped up also

>> No.2892175
File: 70 KB, 640x439, dreamcast games.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Forgot to attach pic.

>> No.2892176



It's right. Dreamcast is retro and always has been. GBA is not and never will be.

>> No.2892178

You probably have to post pictures of the actual discs within the cases or people will claim it's invalid since the games might not actually be the games that the titles represent.

>> No.2892180

Glorified PS2 for autistic Segababbys

Just a less powerful SNES in handheld format.

You've got the release dates correct, but the aesthetics are vastly different.

>> No.2892181

>GBA is not and never will be.
I wish I could your live in your magical dimension where time never passes.

>> No.2892183

No.... The gamed in the pictures are other games entirely.

>> No.2892184

Why can't you talk about old games on /v/?

"Retro" is a specific style, it's the golden and silver age of gaming and that should never change, not even in 30 years.

If you 20 year nostalgics want, just petition to make /vold/ to talk about games between Retro and the current gen. /vr/ is fine, it doesn't need to change.

>> No.2892190

Since the year has gone from 2015 to 2016, the amount of years it takes for a video game console to be considered retro has also increased by one.

It's just common sense.

>> No.2892194

Time is relative.

Time doesn't apply to /vr/.

>> No.2892195

GBA already has its own board.


>> No.2892202

The GBA was technically more powerful than a SNES actually.

People love parroting how it was weaker than a SNES but in reality it's only major flaws were the crappy soundchip, small display to fit the handheld standard, and the 2 button control scheme to fit with the Gameboy standard.

>> No.2892208

For everything that's not on vr
Simple and everyone is happy.

>> No.2892215

When time passes by again it will give you a letter from me.

>> No.2892220
File: 2.58 MB, 650x366, playstation 2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I think the PS2 break-off point is a more valid argument, if only because it sold a LOT of units.

I remember the "video games are getting too mainstream" sentiment occurring around when the PS1 got popular, but PS2 was on a whole nother level.

>> No.2892254

30 something here, that's fucking stupid

>> No.2892263

So by that logic, the Xbox would become retro before the PS2 despite comming out after it because the Xbox didn't have anything of note come out post 2006 and the PS2 was getting games like Persona 4 in 2008 and had realeases untill 2013?

>> No.2892270

Everyone had to buy three PS2s because they kept breaking and obviating software collections

>> No.2892275

there is no logic currently, they just memed in their "favorite systems"

>> No.2892496

This is /vr/ with 6th gen allowed.

>> No.2892504

Funny how there's only 35 IPs posting yet 123 posts.

>> No.2892505

top fucking kek, anon. great job

>> No.2892513

Need for Speed Underground?

>Unreal Tournament
Pretty sure that's Cawadoody 2

>Skies of Arcadia
Kingdom Hearts


>Metroid Fusion
Super Metroid

>Advance Wars
No clue, honestly

That's the SNES Kirby IIRC

Chrono Trigger

>> No.2892515

No they didn't?
Still have mine from 2002, recently got a Sakura Pink one from a woman who hadn't had a clue about it's worth.
My brother-in-law still has his from 2001, while my old neighbour kid still has his from around 2004, I think.

Only the newer thin ones died faster, but I'm not sure if that was actually true or just something that people said and caught on.

>> No.2892517

>No clue, honestly
It's Super Famicom Wars obv.

>> No.2892518

>You have already reported this post, or someone with your IP has already reported it.

>> No.2892523

Most all of those screen shots are not even the real games, you idiot.

Jet Set Radio is Grand Theft Auto 3? Boktai is Chrono Trigger? Skies of Arcadia is Kingdom Hearts?

Have you ever played a video game, before?

>> No.2892527

Why do some of you want the GBA and PS2 to be discussed? It seems like it has almost reached a personal level (see: pants shitting baby), like you'd take some personal satisfaction just from knowing you got your way or something.

There are so many games suitable for discussion that the only way you'd run out of things to talk about would be if you don't want to explore what IS allowed.

>> No.2892553

What I don't get is they act like there's NO BOARD on 4chan where they can discuss the GBA and PS2.

There's the /v/ board! That's what it's for! Are they stupid? Just post about the freakin' consoles there!


>> No.2892557

For many, it's because /v/ is inhospitable and threads like that are killed on the spot, be it by being instantly drowned out by whatever the flavor of the day is or by being shitposted to death in. It's shitty, but they have to deal with it.

>> No.2892571

>/v/ is inhospitable
>allow /v/ things here
>/v/ posters move here
>/vr/ becomes inhospitable
We all saw how OP chimped out in the other gba thread and the people gave him constant attention. Now imagine that but ten times bigger.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.