/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.7795889]

Is resident evil considered retro yet? What's considered retro? Where is the line drawn?

[Anonymous No.7795893]

>>7795889
6th Gen and Back in Considered Retro on /vr/

[Anonymous No.7795904]

The OG trio is certainly retro.

[Anonymous No.7795905]

>>7795893
That is a lot more recent than i was expecting desu

[Anonymous No.7795906]

>>7795889
RE 1-3 was always allowed on /vr/

[Anonymous No.7795910]

>>7795889
Op here, on a pic related note, which REmaster was your favorite? I personally choose the gamecube

[Anonymous No.7795912]

>>7795905
definitely seems like some kind of mistake

[Anonymous No.7795916]

>>7795910
I just played through the REmake. Its good. Better then the recent remakes they released.

[Anonymous No.7795921]

>>7795905
In the past 6th gen wasnt discussed but since its been like legitimately over 20 years since the 6th gen started.
It kinda makes sense to include 6th gen. It technically started in 1999

[Anonymous No.7795923]

>>7795904
>calling clock tower a resi also-ran
That annoys me well more than it should.

[Anonymous No.7795925]

>>7795916
>Better then
>then
>not better than
>then
>then
>then

[Anonymous No.7795926]

>>7795910
RE3 for me. Though the Gamecube REmake is pretty good. Better then the recent ones they released.

[Anonymous No.7795928]

>>7795926
I don't think RE3 was a "REmake" It was just enchanced graphics.
Only the first RE got "REmake" status.

[Anonymous No.7795929]

>>7795926
REmake will always be the perfect one but 2 REmake comes really close.

[Anonymous No.7795932]

>>7795928
You're correct but the other guy asked about remasters not remakes. Those are very different concepts.

[Anonymous No.7795940]

>>7795928
Actually you're not correct because both 2 and 3 had direct remakes while everything up to and including CV had the lightgun remake treatment with the Chronicles games. I know you knew this but I like to set the record straight.

[Anonymous No.7795950]

>>7795932
Thats like saying Legacy of Kain on the dreamcast is a Remaster when its just bumped up shitty ps1 graphics. But i misread the comment.
i thought it said RE3 was my favorite Remake

[Anonymous No.7795960]

>>7795950
>Thats like saying Legacy of Kain on the dreamcast is a Remaster when its just bumped up shitty ps1 graphics
Yes, that's what a remaster is. It's taking the original material and doing it up a bit. Just because a remaster was a shit job does not preclude it from being a remaster. Remakes are different beasts entirely and it confounds me that people mix the two things up.

[Anonymous No.7795974]

>>7795960
I guess if you consider a port a "remaster".

[Anonymous No.7795980]

>>7795889
There's no line, it's as arbitrary as the 4channel managers™ want whether the fags here like it or not.

[Anonymous No.7796040]

>>7795889
Anything allowed on Gamecenter CX is retro. Gamecenter CX recently allowed PS2, Xbox and Gamecube games, so those are all allowed

[Anonymous No.7796047]

>>7795889
If it's not 16-bits or under, then it's not real retro.

[Anonymous No.7796080]

>>7796047
32x

[Anonymous No.7796098]

>>7795889
Thanks to the anon in the previous thread for posting the link to those Classic REBirth mods. They work really well, about as good as you'd hope for a GoG release.

[Anonymous No.7796167]

>>7795905
>>7795921
6th gen is the birth of everything about modern gaming, the only thing classifying it retro is it's age which is enormously dumb in my opinion

[Anonymous No.7796536]

>>7795921
>>7796167
I think you both make good points, although i think it makes more sense for retro to be a mechanics and gamestyle marker rather than an age marker

[Anonymous No.7796541]

>>7796047
Idk i think games like sm64 should be considered retro. What makes you say? What did retro mean to you?

[Anonymous No.7796645]

>>7796541
Just ignore him. He just wants attention for saying fifth gen isn’t retro. He doesn’t actually want to discuss the fourth gen and below.

[Anonymous No.7796681]

Anyone got the ISO for the Japanese and US (UK?) PowerVR PC versions? I've got an actual PowerVR card and I'd like to give them a shot sometime. I think the Japanese version is stuck at 640x480 and the western version is 800x600. Haven't found a lot of concrete info.

[Anonymous No.7796972]

>>7796536
This is more or less my opinion. Gen 6 is the transition into modern gaming, but at the start of the generation there's still plenty of games that have the N64/PS1 era mechanical clunkiness & an aesthetic more reminiscent of 90's arcade games than late Gen 6 titles. Heck, you don't really get anything resembling a modern third person shooter until RE4 comes out.

[Anonymous No.7797029]

>>7796972
Modern gaming is mobile Gacha games. You have a lot of games which are still derivative of PS3 and XBX360 but how many games are there that are actually made in the style of the average gen 6 games

[Anonymous No.7797082]

>>7795904
There is something interesting about this article

>RE3 is cripser thanks in part to using higher resolution

RE3 doesn't use higher resolution. On PSX it's the same resolution as RE2. So why would they say this? Well, they probably got the info from the devs/publisher.

I think what it means is that the devs worked on a higher source resolution before converting stuff for PSX. Implying that they would have worked on the backgrounds at 640*480 before converting them at 320*240 for the game, whereas previous games would have directly worked on the backgrounds at 320*240.

People tend to claim/think that 640*480 backgrounds for RE2 don't exist in the PC ports because the source files were trashed as soon as the game was released. This is hard to swallow considering the number of ports the game had (although there is evidence showing that some of the ports, and even RE3's RPD, were done using an earlier version of RE2 at first...)

I think high-res RE2 backgrounds don't exist simply because, only for RE3, they never existed. And this article would support that theory.

Or I'm reading too much into and the journo is just making shit up.

[Anonymous No.7797094]

>>7797082
>Or I'm reading too much into and the journo is just making shit up.

Although, they're also using a picture from the RPD to claim that the backgrounds are more hi-res (which is precisely the only place in the game where it's not), this tends to make me think that instead of making shit up they are indeed repeating what the devs told them, they don't really know and just picked the wrong picture for the explanation

[Anonymous No.7797113]

>>7797094
>>7797082

They are probably referring to RE3 backgrounds looking sharper and more detailed. Or they're mangling something that the devs told them.

[Anonymous No.7797142]

>>7797113
>Or they're mangling something that the devs told them.

I think that's it and this is precisely why I hate articles where instead of establishing a proper interviews they editorialize the shit out of it and it's basically hear-says. Interviews can't be trusted, but this shit even less so we can't known for sure.

Still, usually (and I say usually), journos don't make shit up, they just repeat something they were told and that sometimes they don't understand properly.
Before presenting the game to a show or to the press, they make bullet points to tell to the journos (either as such or redacted), and technical stuff like resolution is exactly the kind of stuff people loved back then because it's taken as "fact: this game looks better".

[Anonymous No.7797152]

>>7796536
I think that only makes sense if you see gaming as a binary of 'retro' and 'modern'. 8 and 16 bit games weren't designed like ones for the 2600 and its contemporaries. 3D consoles have several distinct eras too, unless you're refusing to look past the basic mechanical framework of first and third person cameras in a 3D environment. Half-Life 2, a technical milestone heading into the PS360 era, plays absolutely nothing like the games in the same genre that would go on to define that era.
I agree that games of the contemporary era don't currently belong on /vr/ but I don't agree that we're locked into considering the same systems 'retro' as AVGN videos did in 2004.

[Anonymous No.7797160]

>>7795889
>yet
Things don't just become retro here, anon. Resident Evil has always been retro here, however.

[Anonymous No.7797164]

>>7795921
>over 20 years since
When has that ever been the standard for "retro"?

[Anonymous No.7797171]

>>7795889
you should be banned for not reading the sticky, tbqh.

[Anonymous No.7797369]

>>7797164
Always. Retro comes from retrograde, meaning something adhering to the standards if the past rather than modern standards.

Anything from 2 generations ago should safely be considered retro. PS2 games are archaic compared to PS4 games. PS3 games are archaic to PS5 games because they were mostly complete games as opposed to today's season pass nightmares.

[Anonymous No.7797374]

>>7795889
>disc consoles
>retro
Nothing that is read off a disc with a laser can be considered retro

cartridge and pixels is where the line is drawn

[Anonymous No.7797624]

>>7797369
What mechanics and gameplay styles are changing? Sure graphics look better and everything sounds better but that is only a small metric of what determines retro

[Anonymous No.7797663]

>>7795893
Dreamcast/Gamecube/PS2/XBOX is "retro"? Fucking kids. Get off my lawn.

[Anonymous No.7797747]

>>7797663
exact. i played this cool new game smt nocturne and shit felt incredibly modern. this aint no wizardry ripoff that was smt on snes. get this zoomer shit out of my /vr/

[Anonymous No.7797921]

Majority consensus on /vr/ was that retro stopped at 5th gen

Then a random mod barged in to say that 6th gen is allowed to appease an autist that spammed the board for a whole summer

Anyone who criticized the rule change was banned

And 90% of the regulars who used to post cool shit got driven away

Thanks mods!

[Anonymous No.7798093]

Here is the most based walkthrough of RE2 you'll ever see in your life

https://imgur.com/a/adFEqj8

[Anonymous No.7798285]

>>7795904
>>7797082
>>7797113
Here is another article that claims the background are higher res. They must have been told that by the publisher. I think my theory isn't so farfetched.

[Anonymous No.7798417]

>>7795889
Everything up to and including the Nintendo DS is retro

[Anonymous No.7798707]

>>7797082
>People tend to claim/think that 640*480 backgrounds for RE2 don't exist in the PC ports because the source files were trashed as soon as the game was released. This is hard to swallow considering the number of ports the game had
I don't buy that they deleted everything immediately either, considering they still had the background files for RE1 a year later to re-render new camera angles for the Director's Cut.

[Anonymous No.7798767]

>>7798707
The thing is, there are several pieces of evidence that lead to believe that both the N64 version of RE2 and RE3 (for the RPD) used a beta version of RE2 as a base at first. That's kinda odd, but it really that doesn't really prove anything.
I really believe that the devs of RE3 worked on the backgrounds at 640*480 (which is what they meant when they told the press bg were higher res) before scaling them to down 320*240 for PSX, and then the PC port just used the 480p versions; which took zero work since they already existed.

Meanwhile RE2 would have directly worked at 240p; and even if the source files for the 3D rooms were available, it would be out of scope for a port to take the time to remake the backgrounds, I mean who knows if the coordinates for the camera angles would even be saved in the source files...

[Anonymous No.7799281]

>>7795889
That's a stupid thing to ask.

[Anonymous No.7799429]

>>7797374
you're actually an idiot

[Anonymous No.7799702]

>>7795889
>Is resident evil considered retro yet?
By most standards, and by this page's standard, yes. For me, nothing released from 2000s and after can be considered retro, but I think that's just part of getting older. Some people might even consider the 3D generation (PS1/N64 onwards) too modern to be considered retro

[Anonymous No.7800747]

If there is any RE fan here with mad googling / waybackmachine skills and who's already done some research, I'm looking for the following things regarding RE3:

>intro/ending pictures that were scrapped

source : https://survivhor.biohazardfrance.net/RE3/BETA/index.html

Their source being "a Japanese site"

on the first image it looks like Rebecca is in the back. Apparently a magazine at the time before the game's release had claimed that Rebecca would die in RE3.

[Anonymous No.7800750]

>>7795905
It used to be the year 2000 as a cut off tile a bunch of GBA and camecube babies cries to Mods to be let into the club house.

[Anonymous No.7800754]

>>7800747
and I'm also looking for the source of the following things from the same site's other page

>screenshots of the 3D renders
>the interview where Mikami claims RE3 should have been called 1.9

Again, they have no source, except saying "he said that some time after the game's release", and this claim has been used everywhere online, and everyone sources "the other site" with nooone sourcing the real source

Also, I didn't try asking whoever wrote this site but it's probably no use asking since this stuff has been like this for more than 20 years, and they just maintain the site without updating it

[Anonymous No.7800757]

>>7795905
I always thought that updating the retro line should go backward. Like, the board should become MORE retro with time, not less.
Basically, by now 1995 should be the cutoff.

[Anonymous No.7800778]

>>7800747
Found one of them. This is apparently the source image. "Released by Capcom" is all I know. Presumably it was planned for the intro fo RE3.

[Anonymous No.7800785]

>>7800778
Here they are

https://v-jolt.tumblr.com/post/96636562422/resident-evil-3-beta-prologue

Too bad they just had to add a watermark; and of course no source either. Why was everyone in the RE community such shitheads? I understand that wikipedia and giving source wasn't the norm at the time but goddamn. it's literally impossible to find sources and/or unmodified images anywhere.

[Anonymous No.7800801]

>>7795904
>>7798285
Where can i get those scans?

[Anonymous No.7800808]

>>7800785
>>7800778
>>7800747
After a bit more research I was only able to find ONE of the pictures with the original res and unmodified (before you ask, yes, the pics are on the resident evil wikia but they're in lower res, the original ones should be 640*480). Hopefully anon has better internet skills than me ?

>>7800801
https://www.retromags.com/
www.archive.org
https://www.abandonware-magazines.org/ for french stuff

[Anonymous No.7800817]

I had gamecube and ps1 emulators running with RE2 side by side and tried looking at backgrounds. While on gamecube they looked a bit different, all pixelized shit was still pixelized and I couldn't find any new detail in 5 or 6 backgrounds i compared. What's up with that? Every youtuber comparing those claims that it's so much better and yet...

[Anonymous No.7800831]

>>7800817
I haven't verified this so take it with a grain of salt, but I'm pretty sure the backgrounds in the GC version *are* higher res, however it looks like they were upscaled from the original ones. It's possible that the upscaling done is internal too, meaning that the background files are actually the same old 240p ones but a piece of code upscales them (N64 version does that for its background with the RAM pack)

The pixelated stuff might be masks. Masks are parts of the background that can obscure 3D models (3D models can go "behind" them), and are rendered seperately, and those are usually left as is. See for instance the windows versions of RE3, they did use higher res source 480p backgrounds, but the masks still use the 240p versions.

[Anonymous No.7800875]

>>7800831
Well I couldn't get the Sourcenext port running on my linux machine so I didn't compare that. But at least on consoles there's not much difference between ports except slightly different tint (which makes Dreamcast port look way worse in my opinion).

[Anonymous No.7800879]

>>7800875
>slightly different tint

Yeah I have no idea wtf they did with the backgrounds in the Dreamcast versions but they're horrible. All the colours are fucked. Between that and the atrocious loading times (worse than on PS1) the DC versions are actually pretty bad if you ask me.

[Anonymous No.7800914]

>>7800879
noooooo but avalanche reviews said the dreamcast port was the best!!! and somehow he never mentions the pink tint it has. Very weird. I think I heard on digital foundry that the tint is caused by dreamcast converting rgb values in a fucky way or something.

[Anonymous No.7801038]

>Resident Evil
more like Resident FARTS lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJYvCHm3Ov4

[Anonymous No.7801074]

[Anonymous No.7801079]

>>7801074
If you were to take down Nemesis in that hallway, would he still chase you through the rooms?

[Anonymous No.7801086]

>>7801079
if you take him down for good, that is to say twice, no he won't. I used to do it all the time in that hallway until I found the exploit in the office room

[Anonymous No.7801225]

>>7801086
>until I found the exploit in the office room
Explain

[Anonymous No.7801245]

>>7801225
I did it very badly in this video, once you get the hang of it it's a rather fullproof exploit, but you get the idea

[Anonymous No.7801287]

>>7801086
>>7801245
Well then another question. If you take down Nemesis in front of the police station, does he come through that window still? If so, do you get the second handgun parts for dropping him twice if you already got them in front of the police station?

[Anonymous No.7801290]

>>7801287
it's two seperate encounters. If you don't take him down in the entrance of the police station you'll be missing one of his drops for the rest of the playthrough. It's actually the hardest fight against him since so little supplies are available at that point.

[Anonymous No.7801297]

>>7801245
foolproof you fool

[Anonymous No.7801305]

>>7801297
I used to (fool)proof read myself but /vr/ isn't really worth doing that anymore

[Anonymous No.7801318]

>>7801074
whoa

[Anonymous No.7801339]

[Anonymous No.7801379]

>>7798093
handdrawn map, very soul

[Anonymous No.7801557]

>>7801379
It's probably one of the devs sketches of the level, seeing as they could not do them in real time

[Anonymous No.7801593]

>>7801557
I doubt that very much, because there are details on there which aren't in early versions of the room that we know of

[Anonymous No.7801662]

>>7801339
This game could have been so good. It looks fantastic but then gameplay kinda sucks, the hit detection isn't great and the constant infinite enemy respawns are a huge pain. Then, the game expects you to read literally hundreds of pages of files.

Then in the last section the game just drops the cake and gives up, and gives you guns with unlimited ammo. Also how the fuck where you supposed to know to go over that one wall?!

[Anonymous No.7801935]

>>7800801
Here is the NextGen one

https://archive.org/details/NextGeneration56Aug1999/page/n29/mode/2up

[Anonymous No.7802007]

>>7800817
The only thing that would be better would be the compression used on the backgrounds, making artifacts less noticeable.

[Anonymous No.7802436]

>>7798093
> Et vous n'avez pas acheté de ticket
Top kek

[Anonymous No.7803680]

>>7795904
CV all way true RE3

[Anonymous No.7804194]

[Anonymous No.7804197]

[Anonymous No.7804201]

[Anonymous No.7804205]

[Anonymous No.7804208]