[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 81 KB, 320x288, shantae-usa.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3537797 No.3537797 [Reply] [Original]

Is shantae retro?

>> No.3537802

Why shawldn't it be?

>> No.3537808

>>3537797
It's a GBC game so, yes.

>> No.3537829

according to most people: yes. anything up to gamecube / xbox could be considered retro nowadays

by /vr/ standards: yeah, also. it was a fairly late release for the gbc, but the gbc is retro (1998 release date), the dreamcast would be the cut-off for retro status here

>> No.3537852

>>3537829
So the age of the software doesn't matter aslong as it runs on pre 99 hardware? But i though this was retro video game board not retro hardware :^) (but i would love to talk about amiga modules)

>> No.3537857

>>3537852
Yep. Yet another reason why the sticky is full blown retarded. But them's the rules.

>> No.3537858

>>3537852
>>3537857

Cry some more fags. Yes this game is retro, what more do you want, a candy?

>> No.3537864

>>3537852
Retro is just a shorthand to refer to the rules of the board.

>> No.3537898

>>3537797
>>3537857
Fuck off.

>> No.3537915

>>3537858
>>3537898
Wow my bait is working :O

>> No.3537954

yes by any standard that isn't the rule of the board
i think retro should avance with time. i think that by the year 2036, games from 2016 should be considered retro.

>> No.3538031

>>3537857
>>3537954

It's mostly to keep the floodgates closed.
This board is so nice and cozy with actual discussions BECAUSE it is relatively niche with a small userbase.
The day it is opened for say XBOX and people start threads about Halo is the day this board dies.

>> No.3538038

Is Shantae still absurdly expensive now that the character has gone mainstream?

>> No.3538040

>>3537797
Nope. Retro is an imitation of something old. This is just old.

>> No.3538092

>>3538038
the original is expensive because it had such a low print run, it has nothing to do with mainstream

>> No.3538104

>>3537852
The word retro doesn't even mean the right thing around here. Don't get too confused, kiddo.

>> No.3538119

>>3538040
A "copy" of a game is an imitation of the original master. Therefore all "copies" of old games are retro.

>> No.3538120

>>3538031
So we'd just have another Doom general? Except nobody actually plays the original Halo anymore so we probabally wouldn't even have that.

I we'd probably get some occasional threads about certain games. And maybe a survival horror general because of all the Silent Hill fans.

>> No.3538124

>>3538031
This place isn't niche enough we need to cut off the 5th gen.

>> No.3538125

>>3538119
Retro isn't about copying it's about inspiration from an earlier era. If a new song is based heavily on a song from one or two years ago that would be an homage (to give it the benefit of the doubt) but not retro. If it's based on a song from 10, 20, 30 years ago and is also an homage to that style of song which is no longer common... that is retro.

>> No.3538132

>>3538031
>The day it is opened for say XBOX and people start threads about Halo is the day this board dies.

I disagree. I think the thing thins place needs is more room for discussion and to bring more posters with more ideas in. It's a board to talk about old games. We should let more games in as they get old to keep the discussion fresh.

>> No.3538134

>>3538124
You're making me imagine what a 2006 /vr/ would look like...

I hate all these 3rd gen casuals!
Atari 2600 games only! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>> No.3538141

>>3538134
That's what forums in the 90's were like, no joke. Of course they didn't say say "casual" and "REEEEEE" but the basic attitudes that new shit sucks and everything was better before were identical.

>> No.3538148
File: 15 KB, 360x253, 1475261751367.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3538148

>>3538141
Yeah.

Everyone thinks video games were better during their younger years.

>> No.3538151

>>3538148
Also, I just noticed

>arguing about video games at 5am

Truly, nothing has changed.

>> No.3538156

>>3538132
I agree wholeheartedly If anybody else in here was actually around when the board was newer, they'd know it was much more warm and open and civil. Shit posting was at a minimum. It was a new frontier. As the board has grown older, it became stale. We ran out of shit to talk about and thus turned inwards and began to drive more people out and become far more hostile. Bringing in a new gen would allow for new discussion and ail this, at least to an extent.

>> No.3538169

>>3538156
>As the board has grown older, it became stale

This is pretty much my feeling. Now almost any thread that gets posted, you can predict what many of the replies will be because many of us are the same people and we've all butted heads about Castlevania too many times.

I encourage 5th generation games enticing more people to come here. It brings more discussion which is always good, and someone who actually is a "halo baby" may start to get interested in earlier games as well.

>>3538148
I remember getting into genuine flame wars with guy who called himself Fiction Blue and was deadset convinced that every game after Atari was shit and all anyone cared about anymore was graphics.

>> No.3538174

>>3538156
At this point, it would fragment the board even more.

Console wars would worsen, any 6th gen console thread would get shitposted to hell and back by angry idiots that think it isn't retro even though "retro" is completely arbitrarily defined.

I'm all for it.

>> No.3538181

>>3538156
>>3538169

The board is not stale and if anything the shitposting happens because it is more active than it used to be.

Stuff like Castlevania shitposting is mostly 1 or 2 trolls samefagging a lot. Check out the current CV thread, it's surprisingly civil.
Allow 6th gen and the shitposting will multiply by 128. I doubt anything positive will come out of it.
/v2k/ seems like a better idea, throw everything that isn't current-gen there and leave /v/ for current gen shitposting only and off topic as always. 6th gen would have its place, and /vr/ will continue to be retro.

>> No.3538184

>>3538174
I don't think it would fragment the board. If anything it would help bring it back together. It's already deeply fragmented here as is, a larger population and fresh discussion would help balance the career trolls that come here.

>> No.3538190

>>3538092

I realize that but wouldn't that effect the prices? If anything it is probably more expensive now.

>> No.3538191

>>3538181
>Allow 6th gen and the shitposting will multiply by 128. I doubt anything positive will come out of it.

I think completely the opposite. Also as someone who posts on many board on this site, /vr/ is more hostile on average these days than /v/ is.

>> No.3538192

>>3538181
That makes no sense at all.

There's literally no argument for why 6th gen ISN'T retro, other than people having to admit that it is indeed old.

This board was made during the 7th generation of games, and 5th generation games were allowed. Now that we're into the 8th generation, it's only logical that the defintion of retro be moved up to accommodate.

If you think the definition of retro is static, that games newer than 2000 will never be considered retro, then not only are you objectively wrong, you're also showing that you're just biased towards games released during the 90's.

This board isn't supposed to be muh nostalgia board, it's supposed to be old games, whether you like it or not.

>> No.3538196

>>3538191

I also browse many boards and /vr/ isn't more hostile than the average 4chan board, every board has its memes and "team A" vs "team B" bullshit.
/v/ is less hostile for retro games threads though, that is true. They're less aware of it all so they don't know how to shitpost about older games, it's kind of cute and funny, but they're still shit with lots of offtopic memes, ironic baits and so on.

You will increase traffic if you allow 6th gen (and again I think /vr/'s traffic is just right, I wouldn't want it to be faster than it already is). But you won't solve the shitpost problem, on the contrary.

>> No.3538202

>>3538192
>There's literally no argument for why 6th gen ISN'T retro

I think it comes from people who think retro should be what they played in their childhood. But some of us already have to deal with that. I was in my 20's when PS1 was released in North America. But there's no way that system isn't retro by now.

I still think we should switch to a 15 year rule. Allowing discussion of anything 15 years and older. Keeps the content old, but also allows for a steady stream of new things to discuss.

>> No.3538207

>>3538192

Right, it doesn't make sense. But 4chan isn't a public service, and it is not democracy.
Ultimately, Hiro has the last word.

I'm not arguing about semantics of the word "retro" or "old", or saying that I think 90s games better. In fact, my first console was a PS2.
But I understand this board, /vr/, has its own rules and its own culture. Sure a lot of threads are repeated, console wars are rampant, but every now and then we have really good threads, and that's why I keep coming here.
Allowing 6th gen would just bring more console wars/bait, a bigger traffic and faster movement, and less quality content.

Whatever happens will happen, I won't be angry if 6th gen gets in, but realistically I don't expect it to be a solution. As I said, I think /v2k/ board to throw everything that isn't current gen could go there. Discussing 7th gen stuff can be hard already on /v/, so /v2k/ would get more to talk than just 6th gen. Also I think 6th and 7th gen are very similar in many ways, many franchises from 7th gen started on the 6th, God of War, Halo, Devil May Cry, Kingdom Hearts and many others. I feel threads of any of these would fit better on /v2k/ than on /vr/.

>> No.3538210

>>3538196
Different experiences I suppose. /vr/ isn't bad the way /co and /tv/ are, but I do find it worse on average than /v/. I would welcome more traffic here with open arms.

>> No.3538220

Cave Story and Shovel Knight are retro. Super Mario Bros. and PacMan are not retro.

>> No.3538226

>>3538220
Then go email NotMoot and tell him to change the name of the fucking board.

Do it right now.

Otherwise you're just a contrarian idiot bitching about shit for no reason other than to sound smug.

>> No.3538247

>>3538226
What's his email.

>> No.3538273

>>3538247
You can DM Hiro on his twitter. He responded to that guy trying to buy 4chan yesterday via DM.

>> No.3538313

>>3538181
>EVERYONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME IS ONE PERSON SHITPOSTING

Kys

>> No.3538325

>>3538313

I don't even participate in the shitpost, not talking about agreements or disagreements.

>Kys

Nothing personal, kid.

>> No.3538328

>>3538325
>Nothing personal, kid

Ooookay, Coldsteel.

>> No.3538338

>>3538325
That is a common attitude around here though. "I disagree with you so you're a kid" "I disagree with you so you're a faggot" "Everyone who disagrees with me is the same person samefagging" They're all just useless arguments that don't say anything of value.

>> No.3538345

>>3538338

It's a common attitude in 4chan, it's what anonymous brings. It is true that a lot of the shitposting in many cases are made by 1 person. There are some people that dedicate their life to shitposting.
Every board has their Australia-kuns.

>> No.3538356

>>3538338
No one on this board can actually argue, it's either "you're a child and therefore wrong" or "you're bad at games and therefore wrong"

If someone is criticizing a game, no matter how legitimate it is, you can sweep the criticism away by simply insinuating the person lacks experience and thus is not fit to comment on your precious game.

Thus, no one can ever challenge you at all, your taste in games is supreme. Just strap on those nostalgia googles so tight it cuts off the oxygen flow to your brain, and you go into a coma and dream about a world where your opinion is the only one that matters.

this is /vr/

>> No.3538372

>>3538356
>No one on this board can actually argue, it's either "you're a child and therefore wrong" or "you're bad at games and therefore wrong"

That was more the general problem I was getting at. Not that there are 1 or 2 trolls who are shitting up everything, discourse in general has fallen away. I think the problem is we still have this notion that someone's taste in games can be good or bad. No one seems to look at someone who likes something they don't and wants to understand why they have a different opinion, they just want to tell them they're wrong.

>> No.3538407

>>3538190
unlikely, most people would sooner emulate the game since its a lowly GBC game, then pay out of pocket for a physical copy.

the first game isn't even that great compared to the sequels, which vastly improved upon the original, so most people probably don't give 2 fucks about it, it remains purely a collector trophy.

>> No.3538449

>>3538356
Let's not forget that old is automatically better.
The original is best and anything the sequels do different is bad.

>> No.3538459

>>3538449
Harder is also better by default.

Nothing else matters.

Things like "good game design" and "fun" mean nothing to /vr/.

>> No.3538623

>>3538148
>the Nintendo is a piece of right wing garbage akin to the IBM PC

But how are either of those things right wing?

>> No.3538639

>>3538151
>>arguing about video games at 5am

what are time zones?

>> No.3538691

>>3538148
But was IBM PC in 89 even worse than Amiga?

>> No.3541051

Retro is not just "old"
Retro is a specific time period
Xbox 360 will NEVER EVER be retro no matter how many years pass

>> No.3541079

>>3541051
>Retro is not just "old"
Correct
>Retro is a specific time period
Semi-correct
>Xbox 360 will NEVER EVER be retro no matter how many years ast
Incorrect

>> No.3542565

>>3537797
By /vr/ definitions, yes, because it was released for the GBC, even though it came out in 2001, the same year as the GBA.

But only the first game. You talk about Risky's Revenge or anything later than that, and we're gonna have problems.

>> No.3542605

I wish Shantae was more... fun. It seems like all the pieces are there in each of them for a fun adventure platformer but with all three by mid way through the game I've had to force myself to keep playing because it's just boring for some reason.

>> No.3542753

>>3537954
That's exactly the point, this whole "it's not retro enough" or the worst, "it doesn't feel retro" is bullshit, retro is just a shorthand for or older games or games from the past, everything will eventually be retro because everything gets older.

>> No.3543186
File: 184 KB, 652x526, wink.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3543186

I could never get very far in the first Shantae.

>> No.3543469

>>3538148
But then again times also change. Something like the original Thief series or the original Deus Ex would struggle to come out these days.

>> No.3543648

>>3543186
It's not worth playing so you didn't miss out.

>> No.3543673

>>3538156
>they'd know it was much more warm and open and civil. Shit posting was at a minimum.
I've been on this board since day 1, you're talking out of your ass. There was fighting about what should be "retro" since day 1. The shitposting has only increased because idiot kids come from /v/ to make shitposting threads because they know you lot will shit your pants at the sight of bait.

On that note, fuck the Doom general. There's a god damned board for general discussion. Take that shit there.