GRcade

This.

If that's retro, what's this?


(Other than the very best Halo, obviously)

I would say anything from two generations ago, or from a generation that is currently not backwards compatible is retro.

I'd say the original xbox, gamecube and PS2 at this point in time are retro, but there's no way in hell I'd count the Wii, 360 or PS3 as Retro.

But I definitely wouldn't count Halo Combat Evolved as a retro game, its utterly absurd as far as I'm concerned to call it retro.

StayDead wrote:I would say anything from two generations ago, or from a generation that is currently not backwards compatible is retro.

Not sure I'd figure backwards compatability into it. The reason being that most of the time the older console is still going to be in production, on sale in cost reduced form and handed down to younger siblings as people upgrade to a next gen system.

HSH28 wrote:But I definitely wouldn't count Halo Combat Evolved as a retro game, its utterly absurd as far as I'm concerned to call it retro.

It's retro enough that Microsoft felt compelled to remake it in Anniversary.

This thread was inspired by a comment in the PlayStation Plus 1 year thread, so my pic was a jokey reference to that. (although at the time I wasn't impressed by the Halo 2 quality graphics.)

Delusibeta wrote:While I will give Microsoft credit for not attaching strings to the deal and genuinely giving away free games, Halo 3 is on the borderline of being a retro game.

http://www.grcade.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=34227&start=20


It's easy to look at very old games and label them as retro. However what are the most recent games that can be described as retro? I would say the generation before last. Come the PS4 and XBO it would be wrong to label PS3 & 360 games as retro, but it be acceptable to call PS2 and Xbox1 games that.

If it's not sold on the shelves of a mainstream store anymore then it's retro.

TheTurnipKing wrote:

HSH28 wrote:But I definitely wouldn't count Halo Combat Evolved as a retro game, its utterly absurd as far as I'm concerned to call it retro.

It's retro enough that Microsoft felt compelled to remake it in Anniversary.

I don't think that having a remake has anything to do with if a game is retro.

For a game to be retro it has to have a significant outdated or no longer prevalent design to it I think. Just not being in HD or having graphics that look slightly dated doesn't count.

HSH28 wrote:

TheTurnipKing wrote:

HSH28 wrote:But I definitely wouldn't count Halo Combat Evolved as a retro game, its utterly absurd as far as I'm concerned to call it retro.

It's retro enough that Microsoft felt compelled to remake it in Anniversary.

I don't think that having a remake has anything to do with if a game is retro.

For a game to be retro it has to have a significant outdated or no longer prevalent design to it I think. Just not being in HD or having graphics that look slightly dated doesn't count.

Well then what is a retro game? I think qualifying it by rigorous conditions such outdated graphics or playability overcomplicates it. 1998 game Zelda Ocarina of Time HD N64 is a game has outdated graphics but gameplay that is superior to many modern games - but does that excuse if from being called a retro game? I don't think so, it's age means it can be rightfully called retro.

Venom wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

TheTurnipKing wrote:

HSH28 wrote:But I definitely wouldn't count Halo Combat Evolved as a retro game, its utterly absurd as far as I'm concerned to call it retro.

It's retro enough that Microsoft felt compelled to remake it in Anniversary.

I don't think that having a remake has anything to do with if a game is retro.

For a game to be retro it has to have a significant outdated or no longer prevalent design to it I think. Just not being in HD or having graphics that look slightly dated doesn't count.

Well then what is a retro game? I think qualifying it by rigorous conditions such outdated graphics or playability overcomplicates it. 1998 game Zelda Ocarina of Time HD N64 is a game has outdated graphics but gameplay that is superior to many modern games - but does that excuse if from being called a retro game? I don't think so, it's age means it can be rightfully called retro.

I'd say not. The design for Zelda games hasn't changed much since OOT, so its not retro.

Zelda, Zelda II and ALttP are all retro.

Doom is retro, Doom 3 is not retro.

Quake is retro, Quake 3 is on the cusp of being retro, Quake 4 is not retro.

Gran Turismo is not retro.

GoldenEye is retro. Timesplitters isn't retro.

You are right that rigorous conditions don't always work, but its not supposed to be rigorous, its just a guideline. If its 2D from the 70s, 80s or 90s its probably retro. If its beyond the very beginning of 3D games then it probably isn't retro.

It is worth noting however that OOT originated on a platform at least 2 generations distant AND its had a remake.

Lot of people lying to themselves to try not to feel old here.

TheTurnipKing wrote:It is worth noting however that OOT originated on a platform at least 2 generations distant AND its had a remake.

I'd just say that goes to show that neither of those are a good factor in determining if a game is retro.

ret·ro
/ˈretrō/
Adjective
Imitative of a style, fashion, or design from the recent past: "retro 60s fashions"

I would say that Zelda has somewhat of a retro style too it as it's nothing like any other game that really gets released these days.

Halo, is not retro as it plays out exactly the same as the majority of other futuristic FPS games made these days. Quake however is retro.

I realise I'm changing my opinion here, but I think this is a better stance based off of the actual definition of the word.

StayDead wrote:

ret·ro
/ˈretrō/
Adjective
Imitative of a style, fashion, or design from the recent past: "retro 60s fashions"

I would say that Zelda has somewhat of a retro style too it as it's nothing like any other game that really gets released these days.

Halo, is not retro as it plays out exactly the same as the majority of other futuristic FPS games made these days. Quake however is retro.

I realise I'm changing my opinion here, but I think this is a better stance based off of the actual definition of the word.

If you look at the latest Halo games... they're actually quite distinct from the earlier iterations of the franchise. FPS are slowly but surely turning into a COD flavoured mulch. Which is quite ironic since COD itself as I think of it quite obviously stole large chunks of it's gameplay from Halo in the first place.

Interesting fact: The final official Master System release (2 Mickey Mouse ports in Brazil) hit stores in December 1998, one month after the Dreamcast was launched.

Balloon Sod wrote:Interesting fact: The final official Master System release (2 Mickey Mouse ports in Brazil) hit stores in December 1998, one month after the Dreamcast was launched.

I thought the last Master System game was some kind of Smurf game?

http://segacollect.blogspot.co.uk/2008/08/les-schtroumpfs-les-schtroumpfs-autour.html

edit: Ah, apparently that was the last Master System game released in Europe (1996, though, so not too far off your Mickey game!).

That Smurf game caused me hours of trauma. When setting up Hyperspin for my arcade I had box art, videos and background for pretty much every game, just not Smurfs around the World Took an age to sort it out. For that reason alone it should have never been released.

I'd define it as anything before the N64/PS1, so things like the SNES, Megadrive ect. Might be more of a 'what did I start gaming on' or something relative to my age rather than progressively adding another generation of consoles to what I'd call retro. Also something to do with the style of the games with their graphics and music, hence why some modern games can have a 'retro-feel'. Nothing after the PS1/N64 will ever be retro for me, regardless of how old it gets.