[ 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: 42 KB, 1000x1000, PlayStation-3-250GB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6316058 No.6316058[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

When does a system become retro?

More time has passed between now and the launch of the PS3 than between the launch of the PS3 and the release of the PS1. The PS3 store sold PS1 games as classic games, capitalizing on their retro status.

Yet I'd struggle to call the PS3 retro. I wouldn't even consider the GameCube or PS2 retro yet.

>> No.6316059

>>6316058
When it becomes released in 1999 or before
lick my rectum

>> No.6316061

>>6316058
Systems become retro when they're two generations old. PS2/GameCube/Xbox and Wii are retro, PS3/360 will be retro soon.

>> No.6316063

>more time has passed since X compared to Z
This logic is never valid because the rules aren't about amount of time passed, it's about a specific point in time. Systems released before the year 2000.
If you can time-travel and convince Sony, Nintendo and Xbox to release their 6th gen systems in 1999 or earlier, then they can be discussed on /vr/.
Simple as.
Also, just go to warosu's /vr/ archives and search for v2k. You will find lots of threads discussing this and the consensus always ends up being the same: /vr/ is fine as it is, doesn't need more shitposting than it already has, and the creation of /v2k/ is the most sensible solution.

>> No.6316065

>>6316061
I was about to say, fully prepared to be called a dumbass, I actually feel the Wii is retro. It's low tech, even for the time, games certainly help with that.

>> No.6316072

>>6316063
But 1999 is a bit arbitrary. I would consider Gameboy Color games, which released post-1999, as retro.

Plus, it's a bit weird to act like early PS2 or GCN or late Dreamcast games aren't retro, which were released 2000-2003, 20 or almost 20 years ago.

>> No.6316076

The very second you start feeling childhood nostalgia associated with them but that's hardly a way to run a board.

>> No.6316080

>>6316063
>If you can time-travel and convince Sony, Nintendo and Xbox to release their 6th gen systems in 1999 or earlier, then they can be discussed on /vr/

Here we see an autist fully admiting they'd be fine with discussing 6th gen consoles if only they were released in the correct year. This is further evidenced by autists have no problem discussing Dreamcast and even GBA on this board. This autism is why /vr/ sucks as hard as it does.

>> No.6316086

>>6316072
Released after 1999, for a system released in 1999 or before, is fine though.
Why does this cutoff date have so many hindrances in people being able to process it?

>> No.6316089

>>6316072
>But 1999 is a bit arbitrary.
Sure. Rules are arbitrary always. Nothing wrong with that.
>I would consider Gameboy Color games, which released post-1999, as retro.
And you'd be right, GBC was released before 2000.
Anyway, there are some grey areas, such as PC games that run on Windows 98, but were released much later, etc. There's always loopholes, but overall the rules are pretty clear I think.
Dreamcast games also are allowed, because the system itself is from 1998. No matter if new games keep coming out for it. We can also discuss new homebrew for any other retro system.
>>6316080
The autism is insisting on changing the rules over and over.
The internet is giant, /vr/ is not the only place to discuss video games, yet you act as if you're being held hostage. Want to discuss 6th gen? Literally thousands of other places to do that.

>> No.6316091

>>6316086
Because plenty of retro games and system have been released since then. 1999 sort of made sense when /vr/ started, but that was a long time ago, it's time to bring that date up.

>> No.6316093

>>6316089
Oh I'm not being held hostage, I'm just here for my yearly drop in to see if /vr/ has changed yet or if it's still just doom generals, SMW vs SMB3, and Metroidvania dicksucking.

>> No.6316094

>>6316063
>This logic is never valid because the rules aren't about amount of time passed, it's about a specific point in time. Systems released before the year 2000.

> 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.
Issuance companies cars have a rule were models were from 15 to 20 years old are considered classic
This generation will become retro in around about 2025

>> No.6316097

>>6316091
>>6316086
> BA START Anonymous ## Mod Mod Icon 02/08/14(Sat)14:53:38 No.1392415 Sticky Closed [Reply]▶

>> No.6316098

Jannies clean it up

>> No.6316101

>>6316091
Here's the thing, allowing 6th gen would:
1. Generate probably the biggest shitposting war since /vr/ started, from both sides, pro-6th gen and anti-6th gen (and all the trolls who would just jump in for the lols). It'd be never-ending and possibly make /vr/ unbrowsable for a long, long time.
2. open the gates for more gen-begging. You think 6th gen is retro because you were 12 when PS2 came out? Well, kids who were 12 when PS3 came out also want their shit here. Hell, people who were 12 when PS4 came out also probably consider it retro at this point and will probably start begging for at least early 8th gen stuff to be added here, since "X amount of time has passed!".
It'd just be a big mess.
/vr/ is for video games from a specific point in time. Arguing about what "retro" means (20 years, 30 years, 50 years) is useless because there's not any official definition for the word anyway.
It's not that I don't understand where you're coming from (that /v/ is shit and is hard to discuss video games), but /vr/ shouldn't be responsible for that.

>> No.6316104

>>6316094
The dreamcast addition doesn't really mention anything about a certain passage of time, though.
And DC was still released before the year 2000. It was more of a measure to make the pre-2000 criteria count, more than anything else.
Plus, DC was Sega's last console, and died prematurely in 2001, was barely part of the actual 6th gen. We can let it slide.

>> No.6316105

>>6316076
Zoomers are starting to feel nostalgia for things like five nights at freddy's so it's a god thing we dont go by that rule.

>> No.6316108

>>6316101
The rule should be consoles that are 2, maybe 3 generations old. Plenty of PS2/GC/Xbox titles have more in common with 4th and 5th gen games than they will with 9th generation games.

>> No.6316114

>>6316101
Well maybe they should better yet clearly defined rule instead of an abritey defined cutoff date

>Zoomers are starting to feel nostalgia for things like five nights at freddy's so it's a god thing we don't go by that rule.

They going by 20 year rule you would have to wait until 2034 until threads on that game are illegal.

>> No.6316120

>>6316108
Yeah but read point 1 again.
Also, again, there's no official definition of retro. You say it should be "2, maybe 3 generations", but the same way you give "retro" your own definition, other people might do the same. The same way you're questioning the current rules, there might be other people questioning the hypothetical changed rules. "Why just 2 generations? 5 years is enough to be retro!".
Again, no official definition, so anyone can make their own rules in their head.
But again, read my point 1: the shitposting. it'd be terrible. Not worth it to open the pandora box.

>> No.6316121
File: 131 KB, 1200x829, nintendo-gameboy-advance-purple.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6316121

Bros, I..

>> No.6316125

>>6316120
According to the Marryland DMV.
http://www.mva.maryland.gov/about-mva/info/27300/27300-28T.htm#historic
>To be registered as a historic vehicle (class L), your vehicle must be a passenger vehicle, motorcycle or truck (with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less): be 20 calendar years old

>> No.6316130
File: 59 KB, 1200x675, 3615291-xbox-series-x-main.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6316130

>>6316058
This is retro, change my view

>> No.6316134

>>6316125
I could also show you some communities of collectors of various different things that consider retro/vintage/historic to be AT LEAST 50 years or older, so if we're going by those rules, we couldn't even discuss anything here other than maybe Space Wars, lol.
Again, point number 1: The shitposting. It's not worth it.

>> No.6316138

>>6316065
>cope asshole

>> No.6316139

>>6316120
The shitposting would die down soon enough and it would come with a plethroa of new things to discuss that would fit right in with the culture of the board.

>> No.6316143

>>6316094
That would be a valid point if we were discussing the value or trade of these games and not a meaningless board on a website. The existence of /vr/ doesn't serve to define what a "retro game" is.

>> No.6316145

>>6316139
That is a thing called teething problems
plus that are users here that still don't consider the 5th generation retro.