/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.6089464]

So with 2 new consoles arriving next Christmas, will /vr/ declare the 6th gen retro? Can't believe we're getting to that point already.

[Anonymous No.6089465]

>>6089464
No. We will need to wait until PS6 for it to become retro. So come back in ten years and ask again.

[Anonymous No.6089467]

>>6089464
No.

[Anonymous No.6089472]

>>6089464
DS and PSP will be retro

[Anonymous No.6089481]

>>6089464
Add yourself to the group of people asking for a /v2k/ board so you can stop asking about 6th or 7th gen here.

[Anonymous No.6089482]

>>6089465
>>6089467
Okay, the wording of the sticky suggested 2 gens of separation need to exist for "retro" instead of 3.
thnx

[Anonymous No.6089485]

>>6089464
>>6089465
>Literally everyone and every gamestore considers gba and gamecube retro
>/vr/ doesnt

Never change

[Anonymous No.6089486]

>>6089482
Allowing 6th gen would bring in a flood of zoomers who have nostalgia for the xbox/ps2 days (aka /v/ residents) and tank board quality.

I support making a /v2k/ though

[Anonymous No.6089489]

>>6089464
>>6089482
The reason why Dreamcast was added was because Dreamcast was released in 1998. It had nothing to do with the new generation of consoles (even if the mod stupidly wrote that, which leads to confusion).
The only way for PS2, GC and Xbox to be included on /vr/ is if somehow you can travel back to the past and convince Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft to release their systems before the year 2000. Good luck!

[Anonymous No.6089507]

>>6089486
I dread the day the 10th gen comes out

[Anonymous No.6089513]

>>6089489
Why is the year 2000 so important? Shouldn't what's retro change as time advances?

[Anonymous No.6089517]

>>6089513
Why should it?
Also, the word "Retro" doesn't really have a set, official meaning. There's sources claiming something has to be at least 50 years old to be retro, while others claim retro is only stuff that imitates something old.
In /vr/'s case, the limit had to be drawn somewhere, and it was the year 2000.
Wanting to change the rules every X years is just silly, and it will just make people who want their own childhood to be included to start demanding for it to be allowed, so if we allow 6th gen, immediately 7th gen beggers would appear. And before you think it, gen 8 too, ("I was a kid when PS4 came out! you're all autistic if you don't consider PS4 retro!!")

[Anonymous No.6089518]

>>6089464
God, how I love zoomer tears.

[Anonymous No.6089531]

>>6089517
Because styles become "retro" inherently as time (and technology/society) advances. That's why the GBA and GameCube are retro even if /vr/ chooses to deny the fact purely for practical reasons, they look and feel retro because they share the same old-fashioned features that have been phased out of modern gaming. It isn't about redefining the rules every year, just acknowledging that each year that passes makes everything else a year older.

[Anonymous No.6089550]

>>6089531
It's autists that refuse to believe anybody else's childhood or definition of retro is real.
Kinda pathetic really.

[Anonymous No.6089562]

>>6089531
You don't understand: /vr/ is not a period that's going forward as time passes, it's a fucking window; no console released after 2000, end of the line.

[Anonymous No.6089567]

>>6089531
>Because styles become "retro"
Read the post you were replying to again. There is no official meaning of the word "retro".

[Sage No.6089568]

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

[Anonymous No.6089569]

>>6089464

[Anonymous No.6089571]

>>6089562
If it is a window, it certainly isn't a snapshot. How long has /vr/ already existed, and how much longer will it exist from here? Focusing on the year 2000 as "the end" stifles discussion.
>>6089550
Reality is, the world will move on without us, we'll just be the ones left behind using a completely arbitrary definition of "retro" to protect our safe-space from change.