/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.5967790]

Are the DreamCast, GameCube, XBOX and PS2 considered retro yet?

[Anonymous No.5967792]

[Anonymous No.5967794]

No. Go to back to /v/ with your cancer.

[Anonymous No.5967795]

>>5967790
Yes, feel free to post here.

[Anonymous No.5967798]

No because of autistic idiots on this board that won't admit they are getting older.

Of course they're fucking retro. These systems are as old as the original systems considered retro when these boards began

[Anonymous No.5967801]

>>5967798

[Anonymous No.5967802]

>>5967798
>two wrongs make a right
zoom zoom zoom

[Anonymous No.5967805]

>>5967790
Are they considered retro? Yes
Are they suitable for this board? No (aside from Dreamcast). While the year 2000 seems arbitary cutoff point, the premise of this board is to capture certain period of gaming, before online play and more modern games. For example, first Halo has more to do with current console shooter than something like Goldeneye.

[Anonymous No.5967806]

The theory is that if they were allowed this board would just become /v/ or attract too many people from /v/, which is dumb considering 95% of all threads on there are about current gen stuff.

[Anonymous No.5967807]

>>5967790
no boomers that run this board wont ever allow this theyre beyond saving but dont worry bro they have to die eventually and someone else will have to take over this board and it will be us 6th gen chads

[Anonymous No.5967808]

DC was released in 1998, you can talk about it on /vr/.
Also not having 6th gen on /vr/ is a good thing, 4th and 5th console war shitposting is already bad enough, we don't need another generation of that.

[Anonymous No.5967810]

>>5967790
No and it should probably stay that way, maybe at some point we can get another board for 6 and 7th generation console discussions

[Anonymous No.5967813]

>>5967790
Considered retro by who? Other people maybe, but never this board. It's ok for different people to have different opinions.

[Anonymous No.5967815]

>>5967810
>we can get another board for 6 and 7th generation
delusional

[Anonymous No.5967817]

>>5967798
I mean they're almost twenty years old at this point

[Anonymous No.5967820]

Allowing the DC was a mistake. Slippery slope fallacy is real and sixth gen shitposters will never give up trying to force the rest of sixth gen on this board.

[Anonymous No.5967826]

>>5967805
>before online play
ban quake

[Anonymous No.5967827]

>>5967805
That is absolutely fucking retarded. Seriously. So things should stop being retro because a very very specific group of balding middle aged autist won't personally feel comfortable with a 2 decades old system being considered retro?

Fuck off with that absolutely low IQ logic. In 50 years the Wii isn't retro on neo-/vr/? Fuck off

[Anonymous No.5967831]

>>5967805

You know online play existed before the 6th gen, right?

[Anonymous No.5967837]

try back tomorrow

[Anonymous No.5967840]

>>5967827
nobody said anything about in 50 years

[Anonymous No.5967845]

The Dreamcast was added to retro 5 FUCKING YEARS AGO

These systems are almost 20 YEARS OLD. It's time to accept you're aging, men. Time moves on. Those young whippersnappers and their new fangled gamesphere and that Microsoft sex box. Back in my day sonny I tell you we had manys a good game! They don't make them like that anymore!

[Anonymous No.5967846]

>>5967827
In a matter of speaking, yes
Quit trying to augment board rules. You're free to discuss everything non /vr/ on /v/.

[Anonymous No.5967847]

>>5967845
Imagine being this mad just because you can't discuss your shitty childhood 6th gen GTAs, Halos and Melees on /vr/

[Anonymous No.5967850]

>>5967845
witness the quality posts we're missing out on by not allowing 6th gen on this board
brings a tear to my eye

[Anonymous No.5967852]

since there’s a thread already, is GBA retro? Shit is almost 20 years old with gen 4 graphics. Surely we can discuss GBA games here, right?

[Anonymous No.5967854]

>>5967847
I don't even want to discuss them it's just insane that 20 year old systems won't be allowed because a small very vocal group of retards can't accept they're old as fuck systems.

[Anonymous No.5967856]

>>5967852
>>5967792

[Anonymous No.5967857]

>>5967852
No zoom zoom.

[Anonymous No.5967859]

>>5967854
>I don't even want to discuss them
then fuck off you worthless busybody

[Anonymous No.5967863]

>>5967859
No because there are people who DO want to discuss them and I agree they should be allowed to. And faggots like you are gatekeeping with your delusional bullshit

[Anonymous No.5967864]

>>5967856
>>5967857
explain why not? it fits the age requirement and has retro graphics. you realize people that grew up with it are pushing 30 right?

[Anonymous No.5967865]

>>5967854
FIY, the word "retro" doesn't even have an official definition. Some sources claim something needs to be at least 50 years old to be retro, for example.
Your own subjective perception doesn't really mean anything.

[Anonymous No.5967867]

>>5967847
This desu.

It's not like you can't do it literally anywhere else, but no, dumb zoomie and his special snowflake syndrome need the entire board to accommodate for them because who cares about the status quo as long as he's happy.

[Anonymous No.5967868]

When's /v2k/?

[Anonymous No.5967870]

>>5967864
>1999 or earlier
Let's read with diligence!

[Anonymous No.5967871]

>>5967863
good thing you don't get to decide shit, jew

[Anonymous No.5967872]

>>5967790
They are in most places since the kids who grew up with them are in their mid 20s now.

[Anonymous No.5967874]

>>5967863
Gatekeeping is a good thing. Without it, communities invariably go to shit.

[Anonymous No.5967875]

>>5967868
halcyon gaming

[Anonymous No.5967878]

I legit think the only console that should get a pass is Game Boy Advance.

[Anonymous No.5967882]

not yet
/thread

[Anonymous No.5967886]

>>5967863
>/vr/ needs flesh blo-

[Anonymous No.5967889]

>>5967870
GBA is older now than most retro consoles were when this board was made. So aside from the arbitrary rule you just quoted, on what basis is the GBA not retro and why should that date not be altered? Grumpy autism aside, it’s as retro as practically anything else discussed on this board.

[Anonymous No.5967892]

>>5967889
it's not the color retro

[Anonymous No.5967897]

>>5967889
A 2D console with tons of arcade and console ports on top of tons of kino original games. It belongs here.

[Anonymous No.5967898]

>>5967889
>two wrongs make a right
ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM

[Anonymous No.5967901]

Why are some so insistent that their childhood consoles be up for discussion on here? You can discuss them on /v. Is it to fit in better on the "cooler" game discussion board? To feel like your childhood was more special? I was born in '88, so these consoles could be classified as part of my childhood (and I do indeed have all of them, even special shit like an NR Reader), but if I really felt the need to discuss them on 4chan I'd go to /v to do so instead of trying to force it on another board.

[Anonymous No.5967903]

>IT'S BEEN OVER 10 MILLION YEARS ALREADY WHY THE FUCK ISN'T THE CRETACEOUS PERIOD PART OF THE JURASSIC PERIOD BY NOW

[Anonymous No.5967905]

>>5967886
you'll lose that v card someday

[Sage No.5967908]

You know I had to sage and report it to em.

[Anonymous No.5967909]

>>5967898
your old man paranoia about the evil zoomers isn’t an argument. on top of that, people who grew up with GBA are either in their 30s or close to it at this point. I’m honestly asking because I can’t think of a valid reason for why at least the GBA shouldn’t be welcome here. I’ll even accept that the home console games from that generation are too modern in style and graphics, but GBA is as retro as they come by any reasonable criteria. Here’s hoping someone other than a bitter old cunt who can’t come to terms with time marching on gives me a real answer, thanks.

[Anonymous No.5967910]

>>5967790
Yes. Unfortunately, they are still off topic because mods are fags.

Also, something something go back to /v/ even though the average /v/irgin in 2019 didn't grow up with these systems something something /v2k/ despite hiroshimoot saying no more vidya boards something.
>>5967798
>No because of autistic idiots on this board that won't admit they are getting older.
Unironically this.
>>5967865
>the word "retro" doesn't even have an official definition.
No, you're just too lazy to read a dictionary.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retro
>>5967805
>before online play
Amazing how this shithole complains about zoomer shit and has posts like this.

[Anonymous No.5967912]

>>5967817
Are the Spice Girls considered classical music? They’re over twenty years old at this point.

[Anonymous No.5967914]

>>5967827
ZOOM ZOOM FAGGOT

[Anonymous No.5967915]

>>5967903
Theres no such thing as a retro videogame period anon

[Anonymous No.5967917]

>>5967915
sure there is, did you read the rules before posting?

[Anonymous No.5967918]

>>5967915
Yes there is, it's from the very first videogame to 1999.

[Anonymous No.5967924]

>>5967790
>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.

[Anonymous No.5967925]

Mods really need to clarify in the sticky that PS2, GC, etc. will never become retro no matter how many years pass to keep this sort of shitposting from happening all the time on the board desu

[Anonymous No.5967929]

yes

but spergs here won't allow it for whatever reason

[Anonymous No.5967930]

>>5967925
I'd assume that most people understand that this is the rule, but that they just don't care and will still insist that the rules be changed.

[Anonymous No.5967932]

>>5967901
>Why are some so insistent that their childhood consoles be up for discussion on here?
Yeah, as someone who grew up with genesis, we should ban 4th gen too dumbass.
>You can discuss them on /v/ where the thread will fall after 2 hours because no grew up with them
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.5967937]

move the threshold back one generation
that'll show 'em

[Anonymous No.5967939]

20 years after release should be the rule.

[Anonymous No.5967940]

>>5967930
>will still insist that the rules be changed.
Already happened with 5th gen and Dreamcast.

[Anonymous No.5967941]

>>5967865
Well then literally no videogame system is retro. Nice one retard.

[Anonymous No.5967943]

>>5967939
*25

[Anonymous No.5967946]

>>5967901 you do realise the opposite side of the coin are the boomers that refuse to let anything BUT their childhood consoles be discussed. No matter how many years pass.

[Anonymous No.5967947]

>>5967943
i'd be fine with that

[Anonymous No.5967948]

>>5967808
>4th and 5th console war shitposting is already bad enough,
Then ban 4th and 5th gen. We can always have more reddit MUH SOUL SOULLESS shitposting and zoomers asking entry level questions instead.

[Anonymous No.5967950]

>>5967943
Dreamcast is not 25 yet is allowed

[Anonymous No.5967951]

>>5967943
Then re-ban 5th gen and Dreamcast.

Only 4th gen and under allowed.

[Anonymous No.5967954]

I got an idea, why not 1999 + dreamcast

[Anonymous No.5967959]

>>5967954
That's exactly what we have now.

[Anonymous No.5967960]

>>5967939
The SNES wasn't even 20 years old when this board was created. And yet a 20 year old system now isn't allowed here.

Think about that.

[Anonymous No.5967961]

>>5967950
is-ought distinction too advanced for your brain?

[Anonymous No.5967962]

>Be me
>Using modded xbox to play retro games
>Zoomers get their wish, xbox is now retro
>Using my retro console to play retro games
>Running ItcantBeNes on PS1 emulator on xbox running Nes game.
>Running a retro game on a retro console emulator on a retro xbox.

[Anonymous No.5967963]

I say in 2021 we should bump the cutoff year to 2001, thus allowing PS2, Xbox, Cube, and GBA on /vr/.

[Anonymous No.5967968]

>sonic adventure 2 from 2001 is retro
>but not the gamecube port from a couple months later
>also Deus Ex, released a year before SA2, is not retro either

I just want the rules to be consistent. Just have it be straight-up based on year of game release, regardless of PC or console or "generation"

[Anonymous No.5967969]

>>5967961
>reading comprehension
You said it should be 25. However, the faggy mods have already set past precedence that <25 is ok. I'm telling you you're a retard.

[Anonymous No.5967973]

>>5967960
>The SNES wasn't even 20 years old when this board was created.
>1990 - SNES
>2013 - /vr/ created
Not that I disagree about 6th gen being retro, but come on anon.

[Anonymous No.5967974]

>>5967845
dreamcast only lasted 2 years and shared ps1/n64 ports, hence the pity inclusion to /vr/.

ps2/xbox/gc will never be retro because they don't have retro games.
halo 2 retro? kingdom hearts 2 retro? pro evolution soccer 2014 retro?
suck a dick.

[Anonymous No.5967976]

>>5967932
>/v doesn't discuss what I want to discuss even though it is within their rules, so I must force /vr to allow it even though it is explicitly against their rules
Why? Why not try to force /v to rule change to ban discussion of modern games to allow for more discussion of 6th gen?

[Anonymous No.5967978]

>>5967959
score

[Anonymous No.5967981]

>>5967974
>Half-Life and Unreal Tournament aren't retro

[Anonymous No.5967982]

>>5967976
Because the majority of people here don't want it that's why. The majority of people also don't post in retard threads like this one.

[Anonymous No.5967984]

>>5967968
SA2 cube port is retro since the original game was made for a retro system (dreamcast).

Deus Ex is retro because it was made for Win98, a retro OS platform.

[Anonymous No.5967985]

>>5967925
>implying /vr/'s rule sticky will ever be updated
We can't even get the Windows games situation clarified

[Anonymous No.5967987]

the issue is that Gen 6 in particular is stuck in an awkward place where it's not allowed on /vr/ but also can't gain any traction on /v/, where it's mostly just the most recent releases being discussed. The solutions are either to expand /vr/ to include Gen 6, or to create "/v2k/" as an additional vidya board for gens 6 and 7.
Either would be fine by me. /v2k/ seems like it would ruffle the fewest feathers, but I don't know why gookmoot hasn't pulled the trigger on that one. People have been suggesting it for years.

[Anonymous No.5967990]

>>5967790
I dread the day that Meleefags are allowed to post here.

[Anonymous No.5967993]

>>5967969
another clinical psychologist
we sure have a lot of them

[Anonymous No.5967994]

I want max payne threads /vr/os

[Anonymous No.5967995]

>>5967960
It makes perfect sense. There is nothing illogical or strange about it. Simple minds are easily fascinated by such things, that's why we have astrology and tarot card reading.

[Anonymous No.5967998]

>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.
We're on the advent of 9th gen coming out in the next couple years. After 9th gen is out, then can we bump up to 6th gen being retro? Though I think GBA should already be retro as it's pretty close to an SNES hardware wise and has a lot of NES and SNES games on it.
>>5967987
I wouldn't like a /v2k/ because that just unnecessarily splits up traffic and it wouldn't get as much activity as it could just being allowed on an already established board. Dead boards suck.

[Anonymous No.5968002]

>>5967987
>create "/v2k/"
ANOTHER vidya board!
we apparently DON'T have enough!

[Anonymous No.5968003]

>>5967987
Gen6fags could easily just create a gen6 general on /vg/ and post there, but no, they'd rather come to our board and ruin it instead.

[Anonymous No.5968004]

>>5967998
>I wouldn't like a /v2k/ because that just unnecessarily splits up traffic and it wouldn't get as much activity as it could just being allowed on an already established board. Dead boards suck.
I agree with that, and personally I'd prefer /vr/ just be expanded since it's a slow board anyway and a couple extra games being discussed isn't going to completely ruin everything. But I also know that there are people here very passionate about Gen 6 never ever being allowed, so I'd be willing to compromise and have a separate board.

[Anonymous No.5968007]

>>5967998
>9th gen
lol

[Anonymous No.5968008]

>>5968003
You know damn well that /vg/ is a containment zone for autists and tripfags. It's not actually meant for broad discussion like that. Just for people to circlejerk with other namefags and post their modded skyrim screenshots and shit.

[Anonymous No.5968009]

>>5967990
What, you mean you don't want
>WoW Vanilla General
>Melee General
>redundant "the CRT I use for Melee is broken, wat do; what CRT is good for Melee" threads outside of the ignored main CRT thread
>custom Gamecube controller show off general
>"Why can't we discuss Wii and 360 and PS3 on here yet?? They're older than I am!"
>Halo general
>Retro CoD general
>Melee tourney discussion/watch along threads

[Anonymous No.5968010]

This board is already ruined because of /v/'s boomer/zoomer bullshit leaking here. Allowing 6th gen will just create more /v/ parasites to infect this board.

[Anonymous No.5968012]

>>5967806
exactly. this board is slow and even then most of the threads are /v/ tier. and faggots get around the board rule anyhow with psp threads. emulation on your psp or wii U isnt retro just like discussing a game from 2001 isnt retro to these gatekeeping spergs.

[Anonymous No.5968013]

>>5968003
One guy actually tried and it got deleted by jannies, probably because it wasn't mobileshit.

[Anonymous No.5968016]

>>5968009
The issues you're preemptively complaining about were already solved years ago by the creation of /vg/ serving to put general threads away in their own place rather than flooding the board. The fact that general threads are still a problem (even now on /vr/ as it is) just speaks to the fact that mods don't do their job.

[Anonymous No.5968018]

>>>5967790
>Dreamcast is retro because it is a 90s console. The others aren't and unironically will never be because they were released post-90s. That's the permanent standard of /vr/, and it's what keeps newfags from ruining the board. Deal with it, or fuck off forever, faggot.

>>>5967817
>>I mean!
>Argument ignored, onions guzzler.

[Anonymous No.5968021]

>>5968016
Even if they aren't generals, they'll just end up flooding the catalog with numerous similar threads of those type.

[Anonymous No.5968023]

>Can't discuss 6 gen on /v/ because no one is interested in those threads and they die within minutes
>Can't discuss 6 gen on /vg/ because fagola jannies deleting threads
>Can't discuss 6 gen on /vr/ because balding gatekeepers deem it not trve rvtro enough

[Anonymous No.5968030]

>>5968023
Damn those gatekeeping librarians for not letting people walking around naked in the library! Sure I can go naked at home, but either nobody else is home to see my naked splendor, or my roommate is home and yells at me to put some clothes on.

[Anonymous No.5968032]

>>5967790
>Dreamcast is retro because it is a 90s console. The others aren't and unironically will never be because they were released post-90s. That's the permanent standard of /vr/, and it's what keeps newfags from ruining the board. Deal with it, or fuck off forever, faggot.

>>5967817
>I mean!
Argument ignored, onions guzzler.

[Anonymous No.5968034]

go and look at the threads on /vr/ and the threads on /v/ and compare.

the sense of superiority here is unwarranted.

vr waifus?
>when the game doesnt let you x (with random reaction pic)
emulation on devices made like last year or something
8+ doom threads, all autistic as fuck
CRT threads a constant. what goes on in there?
and the rest are low quality low effort threads about random UNINTERESTING SHIT

[Anonymous No.5968036]

>>5967790
Dreamcast is retro because it is a 90s console. The others aren't and unironically will never be because they were released post-90s. That's the permanent standard of /vr/, and it's what keeps newfags from ruining the board. Deal with it, or fuck off forever, faggot.

>>5967817
>I mean!
Argument ignored, onions guzzler.

[Anonymous No.5968038]

>>5968036
Third times the charm, anon.

[Anonymous No.5968040]

>>5968030
you really think someone coming on to here and starting a defender (2002) thread is going to shake this board to its core and implode the whole site?