GRcade

KKLEIN wrote:When the manufacturer stops making the machine.

I had started typing some complete pony involving dates and machines... but this is the truth.

TheTurnipKing wrote:

KKLEIN wrote:When the manufacturer stops making the machine.

I guess now would be a bad time to point out that TecToy still makes Master Systems in Brazil?

Those are actually Wii U's. Easy mistake to make.

Please, there's no way to confuse a Wii U with a Master System Evolution. One is a slick repackage of classic gaming, and the other is a Wii U.

TheTurnipKing wrote:I guess now would be a bad time to point out that TecToy still makes Master Systems in Brazil?

Well that's just a third party buying the license to remake an old console.

The way I see it, once the main manufacturer stops making their machine and people stop releasing proper games on it (and no "Oh, but there are people that still publish for the NES" doesn't count) it becomes defunct, and therefore a "Retro" system.

As EA Sports are releasing FIFA 14 on PS2, there's a case that the PS2 is therefore still relevant.

At least it had more replies than my Shank topic.

Shitpost sorry

It's easier to define videos games by eras.

1998 onwards with the dreamcast was the beginning of the current era, I mean what great leaps have been made since then? With the Dreamcast (or in pc gaming around 97/98) it got to the point where studios had pretty much gotten their heads around making 3D games and could really begin to make the games they wanted to make. Yeah sure the games are much bigger now (Shenmue is pretty tiny compared to modern sandboxes) but other than the wii and twin stick controllers becoming standard I don't think that much is a whole lot different.

The 3D0/PS1/Saturn/N64 is it's own era, with games there isn't really a point where one era ends and another begins, if anything they always cross because it's not often that game studios just completely drops support for previous machines when a new one comes out (unless the company is Nintendo or Sega). Anyway these consoles were the early 3D system, this era to me is a transition period, it's old but it isn't exactly "retro", sure a lot of stuff from this generation is hideously outdated but a lot of games from that time are still good today and are pretty much the basis for most modern games of their genres (see Tekken 3, Gran Turismo, Mario 64 etc, may not be the first games to nail their genres in 3D but they all had an impact).

You get the idea, the 16-bit era is pretty much the peak of the original 2D games movement.

KKLEIN wrote:As EA Sports are releasing FIFA 14 on PS2, there's a case that the PS2 is therefore still relevant.

Or EA are just money-grabbing cuntrags?

Buffalo wrote:At least it had more replies than my Shank topic.

Only because retro isn't gooseberry fool

I don't think PS2 is retro, definitely not Xbox.

Retro for me is about quality as well as time. Like, there were a lot of shitty games out during the retro 'era', but they aren't retro. Just shitty, and old/outdated.

Unless they were so shitty that now they're well known, like E.T.

I don't think the term retro has any implied quality level.

Like I said, it's my opinion. Retro for me has always meant the gems, or the unique.

I would define retro literally as anything that isn't current gen. Realistically though, I'd say anything you wouldn't expect to find in mainstream gaming stores.

Retro for me is anything before the Playstation, pretty much anything on a cartridge with Saturn and the less consoles being the exclusion. Playstation isn't retro in my opinion, give it a few more years and I'll extend it to anything not on a DVD or Gamecube disc.

Alpha eX wrote:Playstation isn't retro in my opinion

WRONG. How the strawberry float is Playstation NOT retro? What kind of crazy gooseberry fool is this? Is there a full moon or something?

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Alpha eX wrote:Playstation isn't retro in my opinion

WRONG. How the strawberry float is Playstation NOT retro? What kind of crazy gooseberry fool is this? Is there a full moon or something?

I'm having a hard time as accepting that generation (Playstation and N64) as retro, for me it always feels like anything before the 3D leap is retro.

Buffalo wrote:Huh? I'm just making a new thread as that one was veering a bit off topic, mate.

It was just a joke based on the fact that this thread was born out of the discussion in the other one. Anyway:

For me retro is anything in the previous generation of consoles. At the moment retro would include the Wii, Xbox and PS2. Once the X1 is released, the 360 will be retro and once the PS4 is released, the PS3 will be retro. The definition of retro itself (imitative of a style or fashion from the recent past) supports this idea and removes any need to use a fixed period of time to define retro.

It's quite simple really.

The art and gameplay mechanics define what is retro. Things that are, today, considered game design from a bygone era i.e. the advance from 2D sprites to 3D worlds and sound chips to full audio accompaniment. New games can be defined as being retro too purely by design.

Dark Dragon 64 wrote:

Buffalo wrote:Huh? I'm just making a new thread as that one was veering a bit off topic, mate.

It was just a joke based on the fact that this thread was born out of the discussion in the other one. Anyway:

For me retro is anything in the previous generation of consoles. At the moment retro would include the Wii, Xbox and PS2. Once the X1 is released, the 360 will be retro and once the PS4 is released, the PS3 will be retro. The definition of retro itself (imitative of a style or fashion from the recent past) supports this idea and removes any need to use a fixed period of time to define retro.

I think you need the gap of a generation before something is truly retro. It needs a period in the wildness depreciating in value before people get nostalgically fond of it and pick it up cheap to remind theirselves of what it was really like.