/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.6708392]

Explain to me how this isn't a retro console yet dreamcast is one despite sharing many iconics games together.

[Anonymous No.6708393]

Was it autism?

[Anonymous No.6708403]

This is off-topic. Discussion of /vr/s board rules go on >>>/qa/

[Anonymous No.6708407]

>>6708393
To make a collage and think that’s evidence that it’s only one person? Yeah probably.

[Anonymous No.6708418]

>>6708392
#3, 6, 15, 19, 25

[Anonymous No.6708431]

>>6708392
because its not retro, its games are too new and not retro

[Anonymous No.6708439]

>>6708392
ps2 is the only gen 6 that needs to never be allowed because allowing it would be too much of a shitfest.

[Anonymous No.6708440]

>>6708403
>just use a shit board that the mods never visit that is bant/pol/b/r9k/s4s tier

[Anonymous No.6708443]

>>6708431
The launch titles are far from too new. Several of them are Dreamcast ports. In fact the Dreamcast version of Unreal Tournament is a port of the PS2 version.

[Anonymous No.6708445]

>>6708439
Nice selfie

[Anonymous No.6708446]

>when you realize it's witching hour

REAL GENERATION SIX HOURS

[Anonymous No.6708449]

>>6708392
i agree its time to allow 6th gen on this board

[Anonymous No.6708450]

>>6708392
It is, just some people are faggots here.
If it makes you feel any better, r/retrogaming doesn't even consider the Dreamcast retro, so /vr/ is at least slightly more based.

[Anonymous No.6708451]

>>6708392
im 24 yers old and cant even talk about the games i grew up with on this bard because its run by autistic millennials

[Anonymous No.6708458]

>>6708451
Your childhood will never be retro. Seethe more zoomer. /s

[Anonymous No.6708476]

>>6708451
Growing up with something does not make it retro, retard.

[Anonymous No.6708478]

>>6708451
I'm 31 and a lot of these gen six games came out in the very early thousands, meaning that I was mid teens. The faggots here are too old to even use 4chan if they hate early thousand games for some silly reason yet are ironically okay with 3d games.

>>6708450
Dreamcast being allowed here is part of the problem. This was built to be a containment board yet it's a slow board, and that's just retarded. Dreamcast no one gives a shit about. But they feel sorry for the outcast so they give them their own faggy board. What's funny about that is the mods never protected shit like the /r9k/ from invaders. It's a traffic thing. The day that /vr/ gets overrun is the day that things change.

And it's coming.

[Anonymous No.6708483]

>>6708476
The main demographic of 4chan is far younger than him you realize. It's retro if you want to not please the literal 1 percent on this board whlie /v/ is for the majority teens.

[Anonymous No.6708489]

>>6708478
Most of the people that are really against 6th gen don't actually want 5th gen here either, but because the rules are currently in their favor, they let it slide.

[Anonymous No.6708501]

cringe and gbautistpilled

[Anonymous No.6708508]

>>6708392
NEVER EVER ZOOMIES

[Anonymous No.6708513]

>>6708392
1999<2000
simple math zoomie

[Anonymous No.6708519]

>>6708478
>And it's coming.
Maybe next year, right? :^)
Stay seething!

[Anonymous No.6708524]

>/vr/ has just 1 (one) rule
>OP is still too stupid to understand it

[Anonymous No.6708553]

>>6708451
That's nice but it has nothing to do with what games you grew up with or nostalgia, this is a board for the discussion of game consoles created before 1999. If you would like to discuss game consoles made after 99 then you are free to leave and use a different board/website that allows discussion of that console.

[Anonymous No.6708564]

>>6708524
This. It's literally one rule, GBAutist. One.

[Anonymous No.6708565]

>>6708553
Go on though, admit it, you did have a 5th gen console when growing up ;)

[Anonymous No.6708574]

>>6708553
What about a console made during 99?

[Anonymous No.6708575]

>>6708418
You could split ea h piece of this dialogue into multiple pics if you wanted to. That way, the point still gets across and no salty zoomer can claim that it was too long to read (unless they have worse attention skills than I thought)

[Anonymous No.6708579]

>>6708418
*each piece

[Anonymous No.6708580]

Reminder that 5th gen wasn’t allowed on /vr/ until anons cried
>but muh childhood! My consoles and games were from before 1999!
So the rules have changed before, and they did change to accommodate people’s childhood consoles despite initially not being considered retro

[Anonymous No.6708585]

>>6708483
Truth isn't democratic, masturbationbrain.

[Anonymous No.6708586]

>>6708553
But that's the thing, where do we go? /v/ is full of literal children and we're not allowed here. it's a cold world out there for a 6th gen fag.

[Anonymous No.6708589]

>>6708418
>Nothing about Dreamcast being made retro when the previous console gen came out
tick tock...

[Anonymous No.6708592]

>>6708524
>>6708564
>Sixth generation and later consoles are not considered retro.
Stop posting Dreamcast

[Anonymous No.6708597]

>>6708478
Dreamcast is fine. "No platforms from after '99 (excluding ports and remakes)" is a very easy-to-communicate and concise rule.

[Anonymous No.6708602]

>>6708589
This, the 1999 rule has been superseded by the rule that justifies the Dreamcast as retro with the release of 8th gen. DC wasn’t allowed previously even with 5th gen despite being released in 1999, so clearly the reason DC is allowed now has nothing to do with its year of release, the fact it also happened to be 1999 is a lucky coincidence that didn’t require the 1999 rule to be removed entirely.

[Anonymous No.6708604]

>>6708586
/vg/, /v2k/, gaydit, GameFAQS message boards, Twatter, etc

[Anonymous No.6708607]

>>6708597
>No platforms from after '99 (excluding ports and remakes)" is a very easy-to-communicate and concise rule
What about PC Games?

[Anonymous No.6708613]

>>6708602
>This, the 1999 rule has been superseded by the rule that justifies the Dreamcast as retro with the release of 8th gen
Dreamcast came out in 1998, which is before the year 2000. Seethe. The bottleneck/upper limkt has always been the year 2000, and that's not going to change.

[Anonymous No.6708615]

>>6708613
>Dreamcast came out in 1998,
only in Japan.

[Anonymous No.6708616]

>>6708607
Depnds on OS (Win 2000 being the last retro Win platform since it actually was released in 1999). Same thing with arcade boards. Check the back of each game box to see if it runs on a retro OS, bro.

[Anonymous No.6708617]

>>6708607
Technically speaking, a PC “platform” would likely be the generation of Windows the game runs on. So if it runs on Windows 9X it should be okay in theory, if it requires XP or newer then it won’t.

But try posting about a PC game that released in 2001 for Windows 9X, then you’ll see that /vr/ doesn’t like sticking to their own sticky when it doesn’t please them.

[Anonymous No.6708619]

>>6708575
>no salty zoomer can claim that it was too long to read
They might claim they didn't read it because they don't want to give me the satisfaction of knowing it makes them seethe, but they read each and every word of it.
>>6708580
>>6708589
#9, 33
>>6708586
/v/. There are active 6th gen fag threads right now. Or maybe there's a different PS2 forum somewhere on the internet, fuckface.
>/v/ is full of literal children
You'll fit right in.

[Anonymous No.6708620]

>>6708615
Not an argument, but granting you it anyway, it came out in 99 everywhere else, retard.

[Anonymous No.6708624]

>>6708620
>it came out in 99 everywhere else, retard
Not in india.
It came out there in 2000, so technically it's not retro.
>>6708619
>#9, 33
That didn't answer my question.

[Anonymous No.6708625]

>>6708617
>But try posting about a PC game that released in 2001 for Windows 9X, then you’ll see that /vr/ doesn’t like sticking to their own sticky when it doesn’t please them.
Refer to #18

[Anonymous No.6708627]

>>6708619
>but they read each and every word of it
Exactly my point, mon frère!

[Anonymous No.6708628]

>>6708624
>Answer my question.
Refer to #34.

[Anonymous No.6708629]

>>6708625
So is this game retro?

[Anonymous No.6708631]

>>6708628
>no u
nice answer

[Anonymous No.6708635]

>>6708629
#18

[Anonymous No.6708636]

>>6708624
>Not in india. It came out there in 2000, so technically it's not retro.
I know you distraction-shitposting, but my answer is that the first region it launched in is the rule of whether it's retro or not. So if it released in Japan first, the Japanese release date is used to determine whether it's retro or not for EVERY region.

[Anonymous No.6708638]

>>6708629
>released after 1999
No, but it's allowed here anyway. Just like Diablo 2, Gothic, Morrowind and Deus Ex.

[Anonymous No.6708640]

>>6708635
>You're not in charge of what gets deleted
Neither are you.
A thread someone made about Hitman reached bump limit without getting deleted, so therefore that must make it retro even though it came out in 2000.

[Anonymous No.6708641]

>>6708602
>>6708589
>Nothing about Dreamcast being made retro when the previous console gen came out
See #28

[Anonymous No.6708642]

>>6708629
Back of the box says it plays on Win 95, so yes.

[Anonymous No.6708643]

Was your console released after 1999?
If it was, then it's not retro and shall be discussed on /v/. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.6708645]

>>6708613
Doesn’t matter, the rules had to invent a reason for why the DC was suddenly retro and that reason is relating to the current generation of consoles.

DC was not retro even despite the 1999 rule but with the release of a new generation, that’s how it *became* retro. To say this rule now wouldn’t work for 6th gen with the 9th gen being released would be inconsistent. The year 1999 is just no longer the most important part of the rules if what that year is supposed to represent has been re-contextualised a couple of times
>4th gen platforms with games released up to 1999, I.e no modern home brew allowed
>5th gen platforms with no limits on how late the games released on those platforms can be, already the 1999 rule is a bit pointless nice post 2000 games can be discussed
>Dreamcast now allowed with release of 8th gen, majority of its library released 2000 or later, 1999 rule now obsolete
To keep the 1999 rule is gate keeping and comparable to “only 90s kids will remember” Facebook posts.

[Anonymous No.6708646]

>>6708638
>No, but it's allowed here anyway. Just like Diablo 2, Gothic, Morrowind and Deus Ex.
That's not how it works. It's only retro if it plays on a pre-2000 OS. The rule is consistent, not arbitary.

[Anonymous No.6708647]

>>6708640
>A thread someone made about Hitman reached bump limit without getting deleted, so therefore that must make it retro even though it came out in 2000.
Ok.
And GBA threads get deleted, so therefore that must mean it's not retro.
Not sure what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous No.6708650]

>>6708641
>DC is retro
because the 8th generation of consoles came out
>inb4 see-
No, don't pretend to speak for mods
>>6708647
>Not sure what you're trying to say.
The rules surrounding PC games being retro are too loose.

[Anonymous No.6708651]

Is this retro?

[Anonymous No.6708652]

>>6708641
I’m not reading your faggy imaginary discussion like that has any relevance to discussing the sticky as it currently is. Get the mod to add it to the sticky and I will consider your (probably piss poor “lol fuck you zoom zoom”) arguments.

[Anonymous No.6708653]

>>6708645
>To keep the 1999 rule is gate keeping and comparable to “only 90s kids will remember” Facebook posts.
#31
>To say this rule now wouldn’t work for 6th gen with the 9th gen being released would be inconsistent.
#17, 19

[Anonymous No.6708656]

>>6708651
Yes.

[Anonymous No.6708657]

>>6708646
>It's only retro if it plays on a pre-2000 OS
but games released way into the 2000s are still playable on a pre-2000 OS
>>6708656
Wrong, it came out in 2001

[Anonymous No.6708658]

>>6708645
>Doesn’t matter, the rules had to invent a reason for why the DC was suddenly retro and that reason is relating to the current generation of consoles.
But it does matter, because that's the rule and the truth.
>DC was not retro even despite the 1999 rule but with the release of a new generation, that’s how it *became* retro. To say this rule now wouldn’t work for 6th gen with the 9th gen being released would be inconsistent. The year 1999 is just no longer the most important part of the rules if what that year is supposed to represent has been re-contextualised a couple of times
That's apparently how it worked for the DC, okay, but again the upper limit was always the year 2000, hence why the rest of the 6th gen never became retro.
>To keep the 1999 rule is gate keeping and comparable to “only 90s kids will remember” Facebook posts
No, this is just you trying to cope.

[Anonymous No.6708660]

>implying anything released after gen 3 is retro
lulz

[Anonymous No.6708661]

>>6708645
>To keep the 1999 rule is gate keeping and comparable to “only 90s kids will remember” Facebook posts.
No.
I'm perfectly fine with the status quo because I think the 1999 hardware rule makes sense and prevent further consoles from becoming "retro".

>>6708650
Your mother is too loose.

[Anonymous No.6708662]

>>6708651
Yep, because it was released before 2000. Also, before you ask, WS (black and white) is retro but WSC is not, for the same reason (since there are WSC-exclusive games, I mean).

[Anonymous No.6708664]

>>6708657
>Wrong, it came out in 2001
1999, you dum dum.

[Anonymous No.6708665]

>>6708653
>It doesn't matter what you think or feel because you're not in charge
neither are you so you can't prove that the rules won't be changed again when the 9th generation of consoles come out

[Anonymous No.6708668]

>>6708652
>I’m not reading your faggy imaginary discussion
But you already read the whole thing. And it makes you seethe. Lol zoom zoom
>>6708650
>The rules surrounding PC games being retro are too loose.
Call 911, that sounds like an emergency.

[Anonymous No.6708670]

>>6708668
Is this 2001 game retro or is only the dreamcast port considered retro?
>>6708664
That's a color model in the pic, brainlet

[Anonymous No.6708671]

>>6708657
It came out in 1999. Are you stupid?

[Anonymous No.6708672]

>>6708670
>That's a color model in the pic, brainlet
I know, you silly. It came out in 1999.

[Anonymous No.6708673]

>>6708657
And? That means they're retro. Note: backports (ie, post-2000 platform games ported to a retro platform) are retro, but the original game they are ported from is not (eg, Cave Story Gen/DC is, Cave Story (WinXP original) isn't).

[Anonymous No.6708674]

>>6708665
#10

[Anonymous No.6708675]

>>6708671

[Anonymous No.6708676]

BASD jannies
MODS=GODS

[Anonymous No.6708680]

>>6708674
That's literally proven false by #11

[Anonymous No.6708679]

>>6708670
If it's a port, remake, or natively plays on a retro OS, yes, it's retro. Otherwise, no.

[Anonymous No.6708681]

>>6708658
Well, the 1999 has been recontextualised so many times, and the nonsensical reality that Crazy Taxi 2 can be discussed but not Gran Turismo 3, and the fact that it causes so many arguments over such shaking reasoning (mainly, 1999 benefits me and it’s already in the sticky so nuuurrr), I think it makes good sense to just do away with it anyway. The rule clearly doesn’t represent the original intention of /vr/ so it shouldn’t really be applicable now anyway.

Of course it won’t actually change because gate keeping boomers will have a total fucking meltdown if that happens and the mod probably would prefer a few grumbling meta posts about the rule not making sense over literally the board being awash with threads calling the mod a fag and to change the rules back

[Anonymous No.6708682]

>>6708673
>mfw Volgarr The Viking is retro

[Anonymous No.6708685]

>>6708679
>natively plays on a retro OS, yes
What do you define as "natively plays"?
Tony Hawk's Underground is compatible with Microsoft Windows 98/ME/2000, does that make it retro?

[Anonymous No.6708687]

>>6708681
>The rule clearly doesn’t represent the original intention of /vr/ so it shouldn’t really be applicable now anyway.
Your opinion about what the "original intention" was doesn't change the rule.
>Of course it won’t actually change because gate keeping boomers
Stay mad, zfag.

[Anonymous No.6708690]

>>6708670
>Is this 2001 game retro or is only the dreamcast port considered retro?
If you make a thread about it, does it get deleted?

[Anonymous No.6708691]

>>6708685
Taking the rules literally, then yes. It runs on a platform originally released in 1999 and the fact it can run on later OSes is of no relevance since so can PSX games run on non retro consoles like PS2 and PS3.

Any argument otherwise is a cope.

[Anonymous No.6708692]

>>6708681
>I think it makes good sense to just do away with it anyway
You're thinking wrong, anon.

>1999 has been recontextualised

>The rule clearly doesn’t represent the original intention of /vr/ so it shouldn’t really be applicable now anyway
I didn't work so well with GBA threads. Try it and find out ;)

[Anonymous No.6708694]

>>6708586
Just take over 8kun /v/, it's basically empty since the purge.

[Anonymous No.6708696]

>>6708690
Is that the only way to find out which PC games are actually retro?

[Anonymous No.6708697]

>>6708685
>Tony Hawk's Underground is compatible with Microsoft Windows 98/ME/2000, does that make it retro?
If you make a thread about it, does it get deleted?

[Anonymous No.6708698]

>>6708687
It’s not an opinion, it was quite clear that 5th gen was not allowed initially, the 1999 rule could have only been to prevent modern home brew from being discussed

[Anonymous No.6708701]

>>6708682
Might just be the backports of it that are retro, since I can't find what the original PC version can play on.

[Anonymous No.6708703]

>>6708696
Why no, you can actually think about it first.

[Anonymous No.6708706]

>>6708697
>>6708696

[Anonymous No.6708708]

>>6708694
Isn't 8kun monitored an FBI front or some shit (ever since 8chn went down)?

[Anonymous No.6708709]

>>6708646
I've been torn that Shadow Watch demo was barely released in 2000 instead of 1999, so I felt like I couldn't talk about it here. Apparently I could by this standard, although I doubt anyone else would want to. ;_;

[Anonymous No.6708712]

>>6708685
>What do you define as "natively plays"? Tony Hawk's Underground is compatible with Microsoft Windows 98/ME/2000, does that make it retro?
Yes, and this is an example of what I meant by "native playability."
>>6708690
>If you make a thread about it, does it get deleted?
That's sometimes due to bad moderating, but is generally true, true.

[Anonymous No.6708713]

>>6708696
For a retarded zoomie like you, probably

[Anonymous No.6708717]

>>6708698
For the third time, the upper limit has always been the year 2000, so you are stating your opinion only.

[Anonymous No.6708720]

>>6708392
I'm ok with letting in the Piss2 and Shitbox. But the Gaycube needs to stay out. So I'd rather have none of them.

[Anonymous No.6708723]

>>6708681
>The rule clearly doesn’t represent the original intention of /vr/ so it shouldn’t really be applicable now anyway.
The original intention of /vr/ was discussion of consoles up to 4th gen with the 99 rule functioning as a means of catching any late post 5th gen releases for 4th gen consoles. Unfortunately, dumbfucks took this as an excuse to push for 5th gen and the Dreamcast despite the fact that they had releases well into the 00s. The rule was fine as it was, adding 5th gen was a huge mistake brought on solely by the retarded community on this board that misunderstood the rules intention, now we have even bigger retards fighting for things like halo and xbox live to be considered retro thanks to the precedent set by 5th gen faggots. Split /vr/ into two boards, one for gens 1-4 and the other for 5-6 with 7th and above added when morons whine for its inclusion as well and that board goes to shit soon after.

[Anonymous No.6708724]

>>6708709
If you think a retro game might be confused as non-retro, be sure to qualify it in your post (eg, "plays on [retro platform]"), anon.

[Anonymous No.6708725]

Mods really let this one get up to 105 posts

[Anonymous No.6708726]

>>6708720
A perfect example of the first real console warrior generation, so, good that 6th gen will never be reteo.

[Anonymous No.6708727]

>>6708723
>make a new board
#30

[Anonymous No.6708729]

>>6708725
each board is allowed one meta thread, hiro said.

[Anonymous No.6708730]

>>6708726
Ya whatever ESL your Piss1 sucks too.

[Anonymous No.6708731]

>>6708729
#11

[Anonymous No.6708732]

>>6708723
>original intention
Shit we have a medium.

[Anonymous No.6708734]

>>6708717
Well people are saying “being pre-1999 is what makes something retro” well that’s not what the rule in its earlier incarnation said and not the reason the sticky gives for why Dreamcast is retro now. Since the rule couldn’t be “DC is now retro despite always being released in 1999, just because I felt like it, love the mod xxx”. No it says DC is now retro due to it being 2 generations behind the then current 8th gen.

If you don’t like the ambiguity, don’t get angry at me, demand the mod write a new rule that definitively says “fuck you zoomers retro is what we say it is, and not retro is what we say isn’t”

[Anonymous No.6708736]

[Anonymous No.6708739]

[Anonymous No.6708740]

>>6708723
the problem of using gens as a limitation is that retards will continue to shitpost disputing when the final retro gen actually started. That's why the "pre-2000 platforms" current rule, even though 5th gen posting is generally abysmal, true.

[Anonymous No.6708741]

>>6708727
#11

[Anonymous No.6708742]

[Anonymous No.6708745]

>>6708393
fpwp

[Anonymous No.6708746]

[Anonymous No.6708749]

[Anonymous No.6708751]

[Anonymous No.6708753]

>>6708734
The sticky says "and any other forms of video games on platforms launched in 1999 and earlier." "The way DC became retro" is a thus non-sequitur because again the upper limit was always the year 2000, so go fuck yourself, zoomer.

[Anonymous No.6708756]

[Anonymous No.6708757]

[Anonymous No.6708760]

[Anonymous No.6708761]

[Anonymous No.6708762]

[Anonymous No.6708768]

[Anonymous No.6708769]

Fuck you hot pockets for neglecting this board and letting gbautist reign free. Fuck Sony forever for what they did to Sega. You're never having sex OP. You have no friends. The mental illness that afflicts you will forever cripple your social life. Your parents will be happy when you kill yourself so they no longer need to support you. Nobody loves you. Everybody wants you to die. Kill yourself and unburden your family you worthless parasite.

[Anonymous No.6708771]

[Anonymous No.6708772]

[Anonymous No.6708773]

Well guys, looks like the non retro thread destroyer Chad has arrived. Sorry zoom zooms!

[Anonymous No.6708775]

[Anonymous No.6708776]

[Anonymous No.6708778]

test

[Anonymous No.6708780]

>>6708773
>the non retro thread destroyer
All the pics he's posting are retro though

[Anonymous No.6708781]

>>6708439
>>6708446
Is she Jewish?

>>6708709
>>6708724
(that way, the mods won't take ig down, since they probably don't know about which PC games are retro or not and will likely not bother looking into it for themselves)

[Anonymous No.6708785]

>>6708780
That's the point you dense fucking retard. I'm bringing this piece of shit thread posted by a blithering temper tantrum throwing piece of mentally defective shit on fucking topic.

[Anonymous No.6708787]

Everyone laughs at your mental disability OP. Haha remember what they used to say to you in school? Everyone thinks that about you now even. Even when you're in a supermarket checkout and you open your mouth to speak the cashier is judging you.

[Anonymous No.6708790]

[Anonymous No.6708792]

[Anonymous No.6708795]

[Anonymous No.6708797]

>>6708729
Talking about food on the weapons board wouldn't be meta.
Talking about non-retro games on the retro board isn't meta.

[Anonymous No.6708798]

[Anonymous No.6708801]

[Anonymous No.6708802]

[Anonymous No.6708803]

[Anonymous No.6708805]

[Anonymous No.6708806]

[Anonymous No.6708807]

[Anonymous No.6708808]

This thread pops up a lot lately and regardless of the side chosen, every poster in them is genuinely fucking retarded. Myself now included.

[Anonymous No.6708809]

[Anonymous No.6708810]

[Anonymous No.6708813]

[Anonymous No.6708814]

[Anonymous No.6708815]

[Anonymous No.6708816]

Hey hey it’s the spammer vigilante, clocking in for your 2:30 hour self imposed shift? Hope you treat the wife later after spending all this time on 4chan

[Anonymous No.6708817]

[Anonymous No.6708818]

[Anonymous No.6708819]

[Anonymous No.6708823]

>>6708808
Farthuffers/attention whores/self-described "centrists" get the metaphorical bullet, too.

[Anonymous No.6708825]

[Anonymous No.6708827]

[Anonymous No.6708828]

[Anonymous No.6708829]

>>6708823
What if they kill you first though?

[Anonymous No.6708831]

[Anonymous No.6708832]

Based retro destroyer.

[Anonymous No.6708835]

[Anonymous No.6708836]

[Anonymous No.6708837]

[Anonymous No.6708840]

[Anonymous No.6708841]

[Anonymous No.6708842]

[Anonymous No.6708843]

>>6708829
They're too fat, lazy, and arrogant to be able to do that, much less learn putting forth the effort to find out how to do that.

[Anonymous No.6708845]

[Anonymous No.6708846]

[Anonymous No.6708848]

[Anonymous No.6708849]

[Anonymous No.6708852]

[Anonymous No.6708853]

[Anonymous No.6708854]

[Anonymous No.6708858]

>>6708801
I always thought the idea of a game plugging into another game to expand its content was the coolest shit ever and was really sad that this never caught on. PC games got expansion packs yes, but it wasn't as cool.

[Anonymous No.6708859]

[Anonymous No.6708860]

[Anonymous No.6708861]

[Anonymous No.6708862]

[Anonymous No.6708863]

[Anonymous No.6708865]

[Anonymous No.6708867]

[Anonymous No.6708868]

[Anonymous No.6708870]

>>6708814
The Genesis definitely had superior top down action adventure games. When I finally got the opportunity to play Link to the Past I was pretty underwhelmed/disappointed.

[Anonymous No.6708871]

[Anonymous No.6708872]

[Anonymous No.6708873]

[Anonymous No.6708874]

>>6708785
>>6708742
>>6708749
>>6708756
>>6708760
>>6708768
Bro, please tell me you have Robopon Sun's English manual and box and/or a scan of them. I'll pay you $10 if you upload it.

[Anonymous No.6708875]