>>1507820 >PSP and DS They are retro, they're almost twenty years old if not twenty years already. Retro is a shifting bar, what you consider retro is different from what your parents consider retro and that's different to what the generation coming after you will consider retro. For me, retro is Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis, since I grew up with PSX and N64, but for someone who grew up with the 360 and the PS3, N64 is retro, Even Gamecube and PS2 would be. There's kids alive now who think the Wii U and 3DS are retro.

>>1507820 I find it funny how everyone considers the biggest shift in gaming to be 2D to 3D yet the line between retro and modern is the transition from 3D to HD. really makes no fucking sense.

>>1507820 I'm not sure if the Gamecube/PS2/Xbox era really constitutes as retro, but if anyone in good faith would consider the shift to the detrimental decrease in soul that is the generation of the Wii, Xbox 360 and PS3 to be "retro" rather than the beginning of modern vidya they're insane. I mean, I like the Xbox 360 and some aspects of the Wii but they are sure as hell not retro. DS on the other hand, maybe the first one but DSi and 3DS, no.

>>1507878 >I mean, I like the Xbox 360 and some aspects of the Wii but they are sure as hell not retro. Well think of it this way, maybe they are not retro now, but in 50 years they would definitely be, assuming a major paradigm shift in the way we play games were to appear, like every console before a theoretical neuralink would be considered retro. >>1507820 Personally I am not a fan of dividing stuff in retro and not retro, or classic - retro - modern. I think it's better to just group things by console generations, I am even fine with grouping 2 or 3 console generations in one category, like NES + SNES being the prime 2D era or something like that. In the past I think I tried putting console generations in the same boxes we have for history(pre-historic, antiquity, middle ages, modern, contemporary) but it's not good to force things like that, and well.... there is that meme. As for why do it by console generations, well it's a bit easier than doing it by GPU generations, and the fact that console technologies would stagnate for 4-5 years, means you would have huge jumps in technology with each generation(though this is less true nowadays).

"retro" is relative changes as time goes on. in 2200 the NES and PS5 would be considered the "same era"

>>1507913 To back this anon's idea a bit, the classical music era was roughly between 1750 and 1820 (according to kikepedia), that's 70 years, and it would be like putting the Magnavox Odyssey and the PlayStation 6 in the same category. Now, I doubt that will ever happen, but we don't know how games will change in 50 years, nor how those people will classify old games.

>Are the PSP and DS "retro"? They're at least 20 years old. >360/PS3/Wii? Will also be 20 years old, next year. Let's also not forget they all ran on PowerPC, which is not widely used anymore beyond Nintendo using it for the Wii U

>>1508024 >psp and ds 20 years old no the fuck they are no- >google it, 2004 >mfw

>>1507913 Man, I think about this all the time. You are the first person I have ever seen to say this. Today we see absolutely no difference in say, the years 1435 to 1465. That's same length of time as Asteroids to Minecraft, but we have no context to it and anything from that era would simply be referred to as mid 15th century art. Centuries from now, our concept of generations and eras will not exist to people who play games. Gaming historians might be aware of them, but not the average future gamer. Knowing "seventh generation" refers specifically to period between 2005 and 2013 will be obscure knowledge, what that means and the qualities associated with that period of gaming will be totally unknown to anyone who hasn't researched the topic. Games from the 2000s and games from the 2030s will all merge together, especially with how many games intentionally mimic styles from earlier eras, we have context to that but somebody from 2500 will look at SNES games and Steam pixelshit and see them having been cut from the same cloth. People centuries from now will probably classify games from this era according to their own perception of historical trends, not any categories we use. It's like how High Gothic was not a term used until over 500 years later, or how Gothic architecture in general wasn't even a concept in the Medieval.

I mean, if retro = old, then yeah. But I think there should be more nuance to the term than that; otherwise, you would just call them old

The year 2000 is the cut off point. Halo is not retro and neither is the DS. Fuck you.

>>1508150 >Today we see absolutely no difference in say, the years 1435 to 1465. Oh hey I am not the only one thinking about this. I think that it is a great tragedy that we will never know the difference between 1000 and 1010. The 2 decades and all the style and mannerisms is just gone. You say that knowledge of the 7th gen will be obscure knowledge but I think it might be even worse, We might just forget there ever was a 7th gen.

>>1507896 For pc it should be based off directX generations atleast untill Y2k and then before that probably win 9x and dos games depending on the era of intel processors.

>>1508441 I agree, but then you get oddities like OOT being retro but not Majora based solely on the year, could narrow it down to console releases which encompass their games to alleviate that

This thread is making my bones dusty >>1507820 I'd personally define it not strictly by time but by culture. A PS1 game was produced with different values and in different circumstances than a early PS3 game for example, and PS3 games were developed in different circumstances and values than your PS5 game released yesterday.

>>1507820 >When does "retro" end? Mid '90s. We went from 3D being the standard to 2D being the standard. Even 2D games were impacted by that, as they now often had to mimic 3D games. There has never been a bigger jump in the style of games. I don't care what babbys say, but N64 and PS1 (and Saturn) will never be retro. The difference between PS1 and PS2, PS2 and PS3, PS3 and PS4, it was all just gradual. The difference between Super Nintendo and N64? It was monumental. Mario 64 wasn't just Super Mario World with better graphics and a bigger world. It was a whole new type of gameplay that had basically never been seen before, and it immediately dominated the entire medium. That is the dividing line, and it always will be, unless somehow some other jump happens that is as big. The closest we've had since is the rise of online games, but even that hasn't changed the actual types of games as much, it's just made them multiplayer and shittier, but they're essentially still the same types of games. >>1507896 >paradigm shift This guy gets it. But there's never been anything close to as large as a paradigm shift as the leap from 2D to 3D. >>1507931 >>1508150 >music, history These analogies are interesting, but how about if we use analogies that are older than vidya, but still not ancient? How about movies? There is the Silent Era, the Golden Age, New Hollywood, the Blockbuster Era (not sure if there is a more accepted name for this), and the Streaming Era. Yes, at a certain point people will compress them all, but The Silent Era is The Silent Era, and I think all that will happen is that that era will become more and more obscure overall, but when people think about it, it will still be its own era. Likewise, I find it hard to imagine people in the future really lumping in Batman v Superman as the same era as The Maltese Falcon. Eventually those decades will seem small, but the stylistic difference is still enormous. Or since I mentioned Batman v Superman, how about we use the example of comics? There's the Golden Age, the Silver Age, and the Bronze Age. Now, slightly in the future, I think people are starting to think of the age after The Bronze Age as the Dark Age (describing style rather than content), and now for the last decade we've been on to some horrible new SJW age that I'm sure will eventually settle into its own name eventually (the Rainbow Age?). The styles are markedly different between the different ages, and while an absolute casual might not be able to tell the difference, anyone who cares can immediately tell what era a work is from just by glancing at it (unless it's a very well made retro throwback, or a holdover from an old creator who refuses to change). Vidya is more like movies, of course, in that tech is more of an issue, but even then, I think people overstate the impact of the tech sometimes. One of the biggest leaps, that is often forgotten, isn't even a hardware generation leap, but merely the release of Super Mario Bros. Pre-SMB Famicom/NES games had better graphics than Atari games, but the gameplay was largely the same. Then Super Mario Bros. came out and everything changed. I'd argue Pre-SMB is like the Silent Era of movies. Some later Silent movies still hold up pretty well, they can almost make you forget they're silent, but when you compare it to what came after, the difference is striking. NES and SNES games, meanwhile, are honestly not that different aside from graphics. Even then, there are some games that blur the line. Ninja Gaiden Trilogy is shitty partially because it looks so similar, arguably even worse, than the NES games, but it doesn't actually look so bad that it doesn't look like a SNES game. NES, Master System, Genesis, SNES, etc. are the same era, even if different generations. But compare even late Genesis/SNES games to your average Saturn/N64/PS1 game and it's a whole different world. Maybe Star Fox and Virtua Racer blur the line slightly, but they had to use special chips, and even then they're essentially the sole examples from their consoles that even come close to blurring that line. Yeah, Yoshi's Island looks good and everything, but nobody is mistaking that for an N64 game. By the same token, PS1 and PS2 aren't that different. Yeah, the graphics are better, the worlds are bigger, and there is marginal online functionality, but it's still largely the same type of gameplay. Same goes for Saturn and Dreamcast, and even N64 and Gamecube. N64 and Gamecube seem more different due to the storage media allowing Gamecube to have better music and FMVs, but there are major Gamecube games, like Animal Crossing, that are literally ports of N64 games, and nobody knew the difference until they learned from the internet way later. When you got a PS1 game that was a port of a Super Nintendo or Genesis game (and there were plenty of those), you knew it. Online becoming standard might be a bit of a paradigm shift, with 360/PS3/Wii, but I wouldn't say it's as big a shift as the two mentioned above. Still, I don't think there's been any major shifts since then, and as people are mentioning, this was 20 years ago. PS3 and PS5 games are pretty much the same thing, just quality has slowly declined over time. But GTA V is one of the best selling games two generations in a row. Or is it three? I mean there's nothing else to play on PS5 or Xbox whatever. It's all been the same shit for 20 years. I'd argue it's largely been the same shit for 30 years, just getting shittier and shittier over time. But the leap to 3D was a big change, and the leap from arcade style games to console directed games with Super Mario Bros. was a pretty big change before that. A bigger change than the adoption of online features, I'd argue. >tl;dr: Leap to 3D is the cutoff point. Donkey Kong Country 3 is a very advanced retro game, Super Mario 64 is a somewhat primitive modern game, even though DKC3 came out after.

Anything before DVDs.

>>1509218 >implying the difference between Crash Bandicoot 3 and Jak & Daxter is bigger than the difference between Yoshi's Island and Super Mario 64. Naw. DVD just allowed more storage. It was no more of a paradigm shift than the change from cart to CD. It was no more of a shift than the change from DVDs to Blu-rays. Or just different cart sizes in general.

>>1507820 Anything before 3D games became common is retro and anything after isn't.

>>1509253 So the SNES isn't retro?

>>1509439 >3D I don't see a single vertex or skeleton rig in those pictures anon

>>1509439 I don't think anyone not taking the piss would seriously consider Mode 7 to be 3D. >inb4 doom Now that's a debatable gray area that I'm sure even mentioning it will make this thread overshoot the /bag/ thread through arguing alone on that topic

>>1509445 Quake uses vertex animation, right?

>>1509103 N64 and PS1 could be argued to be retro but only if you want to include "transitional" or "experimental" 3D, which opens the door to discussions about when that in-between period starts and ends. If you just say no 3D as much as possible the distinction is easier.

>>1509103 >>1509489 This is equivalent to boomers saying AC/DC and Van Halen will never be "classic" rock since they weren't as revolutionary as Elvis or the Beatles.

>>1509494 Sounds like my time travel adventure with country music >be tiny kid >listen to twangy country music from old timers >move >grow up >"I like country music anon, here!" >oh ok I remember liking that I guess >listen >it's rock with a bit of a drawl

>>1507820 >When does "retro" end? It doesn't, retard. The term has been used since the 1970s and doesn't have a concrete definition. With regards to gaming, it generally refers to any console that is at least 20 years old.

>>1507820 PS3 and 360 are not retro consoles >Operating system like a modern console >Uses hdmi like a modern console >Online capabilities like a modern console (of course today with lack of support) DS is slightly improved gameboy. Wii and PSP somewhere between modern and retro console.

>>1507820 I knew this discussion would happen at some point. My DS didn't survive, it barely survived 5 years. My GameBoy though, it's doing perfectly fine and it's much better. My PC is basically retro at this point and somehow it still runs everything perfectly fine. I think retro just stays retro, it's not age dependent but rather technology dependent. Somehow the last 15 years were just stagnant in that regard.

>>1509494 "Classic" and "Retro" are not synonymous. There are many games I wouldn't consider "retro" but would consider "classic." There are also many games I wouldn't consider "classic" but do consider "retro." "Classic" implies not just age but also quality. I'd also argue the age connotation of "retro" is slightly different than the age connotation of "classic." Elvis and The Beatles were already basically different generations. So yeah, if you want to argue '50s rock is "retro" and later stuff isn't the same, I'd agree. >>1509647 >>Uses hdmi like a modern console You're not the first to say this, but I think it's incredibly silly to say that the type of cable used is what differentiates things. I know you probably mean to imply something about screen resolution, but I also think that's silly. Resolution keeps going up, but normalfags can't even tell the difference. You have to be some sort of nerd counting the pixels. It was impressive at the time, but in retrospect, not actually a big deal. HDMI wasn't enough to stop the Wii from selling. >>1509439 >>1509446 Also, Anon said "before 3D games became common." He didn't say "before 3D games existed," since "3D" games go back many decades. But nobody would say that anything after 3D Monster Maze can't be retro.

>>1509713 How "common" is "common" though? SNES had plenty of mode 7 games, Doom literally had a genre named after it. Not to mention excluding games like gen 1 Pokemon (after N64 and PS1) from retro would be retarded.

>>1510166 Doomclones largely popped up after Doom, right around the time the Saturn/PS1/N64 were coming out anyway. Also, Mode 7 isn't really 3D. When polygons came around, it blew everyone away. Nobody was like "yeah, but we already had 3D with F-Zero and Super Mario Kart." Mario Kart 64 blew them away, even though it still actually used sprites for things like characters. But just having polygons everywhere made a big difference. Also, Pokemon isn't retro. If anything, it's "retro" in that it's a bit of a throwback to a previous era. But it's not of that era. It was old school when it came out. But if you want to claim that handhelds, which were 2D for a lot longer than consoles, were retro for like ten years longer, I think that's a silly claim. Those

I consider the consoles "retro" based on the main criteria that games were released complete without having patches and updates, and console storefronts didn't exist yet. The PSP started to drift away a bit from that point but only far late into its lifespan. At the same time though, I remember there were broken PSP games like one Japanese port of a PS2 Atelier (can't recall which one though, but the game would essentially break upon a certain amount of hours spent in one session) and Zettai Zetsumei Toshi 3 (aka Disaster Report 3, it was impossible to achieve 100% completion with the UMD disk until a digital version came out patched years later). So the idea that the pre-digital era was better back then isn't necessarily true on all fronts. PSP and DS also came out around the time of the PS2/Gamecube era, which was a different kind of industry back then.

>>1510225 >So the idea that the pre-digital era was better back then isn't necessarily true on all fronts. But it's about how often it happened. It was pretty rare back then because developers were incentivized to give a shit, as opposed to releasing unfinished and broken games and just figuring they'll patch it later (if they get the budget for that), or just expecting fans to fix it themselves. >PSP and DS also came out around the time of the PS2/Gamecube era, which was a different kind of industry back then. They came out pretty close to the end of it, not that long before the 360. But yes, the 360 really pushed online harder than anything before. The Dreamcast's online features were a major selling point, but nobody would say it's the same as how online is used today. A precursor of things to come, perhaps, but not quite the same. If you want to get autistic about it, the Atari VCS had an add-on to get onto a rudimentary version of the internet, and the Sega Genesis/Mega Drive had download exclusive first-party games and everything. There's an actual Sonic game that was only released as a download for the Sega Mega Drive online service. It's one of the first Sonic games ever, from 1991. But still, that's not quite the same as how the 360 handled it, where if you weren't connected to the internet, you basically had a gimped system. It was expected that you'd have it, and if you didn't, you were missing the point. It was no longer an extra feature, it was a main feature.

>>1507820 360 and PS3 (and everything after) aren't retro, their games are essentially no different from modern games, they'll only become retro when the design conventions of games change substantially. Wii, DS and PSP are retro because their games adhered to different sorts of design principles than modern games. The 3DS (and maybe the Vita) will become retro due to most of its games not being aligned to modern conventions, but it's too young to be retro just yet.

>>1509103 >This guy gets it. But there's never been anything close to as large as a paradigm shift as the leap from 2D to 3D. The transition from 3D to HD was a MUCH bigger paradigm shift than 2D to 3D the 2D-3D shift was just a graphical leap and nothing more. the 3D-HD shift was a graphical, cultural AND stylistic change. the transition from color to brown and gray, the transition from "baby" games to "mature" games, the push for more "realism", audiences moving away from kids to dudebros, and just the gaming culture and vibe as a whole changing completely.

>>1510225 Final Doom (PC, 1996) also needed an update since MAP31 was impossible unless you started a local netgame to spawn the yellow key since it was accidentally flagged as a deathmatch-only entity.

Retro ended around the PS3/360 because games have not made any impressive leaps in quality or content since then and enshittification has crept in. The Switch was the last console I owned. It was a piece of garbage.

>>1511500 You're actually insane if you believe that lmao

All this talk about whether or not the N64 and PSX is retro has me thinking. What the fuck would a 6th generation (ps2, xbox. gcn) nolsaltgia bait game look like? I mean the psx retro bait has that polygon wobble and n64 have those blurry textures. I can't really think of any real defining visual features between the consoles of the 6th generation.

>>1512388 >What the fuck would a 6th generation nolsaltgia bait game look like? >>1470786

>>1509228 DVDs became commonplace during the early to mid 2000s, which is more or less the time where games stagnated.

>>1512388 Water, islands, slightly higher poly than N64, stylized menus and UI, non-midi or non-recognizably-midi soundtracks, cartoony visuals, slight bloom and/or cel-shaded, minimal voice acting, experimental features, a cool backpack or vehicle, and maybe a talking nonhuman companion (who may or may not be related to said backpack or vehicle). Brief adventure with lots to collect in a tight space.

>>1512388 idk, but 7th gen nostalgiabait will be brown and piss.

>>1512383 3D games still felt like 2D era games just with 3D graphics, and all the genres and styles of the 2D era was there. the HD era is when gaming went down a different route altogether

>>1512690 Now that you mention there were quite a few tropical/beach levels in that gen. >>1512820 Yeah that's pretty obvious. So 8th gen is tumblr bait or is that for 9th gen? >>1512826 Yea no. the 5th gen 3d games kinda had that vibe of emptyness or retards call it 'liminal space'. Which was due to the lack of experience and to reduce the amount of models in a loaded area. Also for many 2d series that went to 3d, gameplay depth was unintentionally sacrificed. The 6th gen is when 3d devlopement got it's shit together. 7th that honed experience got thrown out the window for open world shit, or chasing the dude bro audience which resulted in dumbing down gameplay.

>>1507820 Consoles designed around CRTs first and foremost are "retro". 7th gen is the cutoff.

>>1513053 Then what are handhelds?

>>1512341 Holy shit if thats the case then what the fuck was ID software smoking if they knew this map pack wasn't even properly tested.

>>1513344 Unironically LOTS of cocaine. I'm not sure if he straight up admitted it in his book but >In the 1960s and ’70s, Romero’s family was involved in the drug trade, and his father, who was addicted to “everything from cocaine to alcohol,” abused Romero, his mother, and his younger brother. Romero found refuge in early video games... >>1512890 >>1512388 >>1511500 >>1510166 >>1509713 (except this guy) >>1509445 >>1509253 >>1509489 Anyway all you >console <kiddies (Yeah, you dont remember that term do you?) arguing about transitional 3D graphics are wrong. I'm guessing most you aren't young enough to remember going to the arcade just to play 3D games, because they were "common" before Starfox in 1993 had full 3D graphics at home. And yes there were multiple 3DFX games. But then you have fully textured Cruisin USA in arcades and it wasnt even "good" looking back then. Oh wait, those of us with PCs were already playing Mechwarrior (1989) which looks like Star Fox does, with raster filled polygons, at home. But the arcades had games that looked like that in 1984, and on PC you had wireframes the same year (Elite). But then there were NASA computers running wireframe 3D in 1973. >Oh but transitional 3D ENDED around 5th or 6th gen consoles right? That's where youre wrong. Are Gameboy Advance games retro? They looked like SNES games (including rare crusty 3D) but came out when "most" game development was fully textured 3D. So were portable consoles still in their retro era for longer? <It gets worse We already established that "our" games weren't 3D until a certain time. You guys weren't playing readily available and common 3D games in the arcade. Well, what about phone games? There was a whole cottage industry of 2D java phone games for years before the iPhone. Then the iPhone exploded and 2D games were back on the fucking menu. Are these retro? Well kinda yes. Imagine wanting to play an old phone game from.when you were younger, you are going to have to do a lot of work to emulate it! Anyway mark my words, soon you will be arguing with someone who thinks that until the iPhone 4 or whatever made fully 3D games like grand theft auto vice city fully playable on phones, THAT was the retro era. Everything after the iPhone 5 is modern slop, they'll say. Anyway, if I had to pick one definition, retro is anything that isn't easy to get running on hardware sold today without an emulator. Yes that includes pre-remake Dead Rising on the Xbox 360 and the Nokia phone version of Pitfall. Anything else is a cope based on whatever age you were when your inner child died. >>1509253

>>1514153 >Anyway, if I had to pick one definition, retro is anything that isn't easy to get running on hardware sold today without an emulator. So is any EoLed video game retro?

>>1514342 Uhhhhh fuck >Concord >launched 9 months ago You know what a lot of people might not like it but yeah, I guess I'd allow anybody whose game isn't around any more in my retro gaming club if they liked it enough to go through extra effort to try and play it by cheating the online check or hosting their own server or whatever they have to do. Any /SKG/ could be retro regardless of actual age. Otherwise if it's based on anything in the game itself, well, thanks to gaming stagnation I think there are still games that are retro (EG old enough that adults remember playing it as kids and want to seek it out) and basically share all their fundamental defining features with new game releases from big studios. Phrasing it that way also excludes games that are 10, 15 years or older and don't feel retro because they are still on store shelves today and if a kid picked them up today they probably wouldn't know theyre old. That's your Skyrim, GTA V, and also MMO/live service games that never left EG FFXIV, Runescape 3, etc.

>>1508150 What you're missing and >>1509103 almost hits is that culture, as well as technology accelerates with time. The differences between 1660 and 1680 society is absolutely nothing compared to the shift between 2000 and 2020. That's why it makes more sense to categorize eras by historical "landmarks" than by set periods of time, things move so fast these days that doing so quickly becomes nonsensical as you both pointed out.

>>1507820 >When does "retro" end? Gameplay design has not been evolved in any way since 6th gen, has infact reached it peak at the end of that Golden Age of Gaming and when it had passed the state of the industry is degressing so hard modern faggots of a "devs" would scream <literal holocaust if demanded the fraction of the competency prowess of 6th gen games, infact I am baffled why they haven't outlawed yet the nostalgia for past times looking how severely it humiliates them by merely existing. Technologically wise as well most tech quirks shined in 7th with grafixx included and here as well, we are drastically devolving in technological competency barring few exceptions. So final /v/erdict is that retro ends at 5th gen because of it's games being way more highly experimental in their gameplay design while 3D emerged without smoke and mirrors approach for the first time in proper magnitude. 6th gen is the previous generation of our eternal 7th gen Dark Age meaning we cannot classify it as retro as of yet. I'd say when VR stops being a sad meme then 6th would deserve to be classified as retro.

>>1511500 >the 2D-3D shift was just a graphical leap and nothing more. This is just false and you know it. How can you even say something so obviously incorrect? 3D allowed whole new genres of gameplay. It was to such a degree that 2D games essentially disappeared for a long time because nobody even wanted them, because they immediately felt so dated. Do you understand that there were literally no 3D platformers before this transition? 2D racing games feel totally different than 3D racing games, as things like Mario Kart and F-Zero are still practically two dimensional, just you go forward instead of up and down. Even things like Doom and Wolfenstein are really just early forerunners of this shift, and only early by a couple of years. These examples only prove that it wasn't just about polygons, but about movement. It's about both, really. The graphics selling the illusion helped to make the movement easier to sell. As for the transition to HD, brown and gray was already becoming a thing for a long time by that point. That was just the point when it became overpowering. Plenty of games in the previous generation were already like that, and the colorful games were already dying. That's just part of the transition to "mature" games, which was already being sold as early as the Genesis, and just continued more each year. Everything you're saying is really one point that had been progressing since about 1990. >>1512826 >Super Mario 64 feels like Super Mario World with better graphics. >Crash Bandicoot feels like Sonic & Knuckles with better graphics. >Goldeneye feels like James Bond Jr. with better graphics. >Soul Calibur feels like Street Fighter with better graphics. Hell, even Mario Kart 64 feels significantly different than Super Mario Kart just due to the fact that the tracks aren't flat planes anymore and there is tons of verticality to it. Of course there were games that still played in two dimensions, but they were much fewer and further between. There's a reason New Super Mario Bros. was a big deal. 3D was such a huge shift that they stopped making 2D Mario games. They did rereleases, which were basically sold on nostalgia for an older era, and then, only when they ran out of old Marios to rerelease (including 64. The only one they didn't rerelease was Sunshine because it was still current)), they were able to sell a new one, again using nostalgia for an older era as a selling point. And of course the graphics were 2D, but this isn't about graphics, it's about movement. >>1513221 Handhelds are secondary accessories to the main consoles. They're like add-ons. So is arcade and PC. >>1514153 >I'm guessing most you aren't young enough to remember going to the arcade just to play 3D games, because they were "common" before Starfox in 1993 had full 3D graphics at home. Your use of "common" in quotes is appropriate, because they weren't really common. That's key. >were portable consoles still in their retro era for longer? No, "retro" is based on the standards of the time. Handhelds weren't the main standard. It's like saying FMVs were standard in the early '90s because the Sega CD existed. It existed, but it wasn't where main attention was focused. Handhelds were afterthoughts, arcades were experimental, and home computers were experimental and a bit more indie. >retro is anything that isn't easy to get running on hardware sold today without an emulator. >anything from the previous generation is "retro" Now you're so far from any definition anybody else in the world uses that it's just pointless. You're basically inventing your own language at this point. >>1515027 >culture, as well as technology accelerates with time. Not necessarily. Vidya tech was advancing very quickly for a couple decades, but in the last 20 years (I'll allow 15 if you want to argue), things have slowed to a crawl. Games from 15 years ago are almost exactly the same as now. Many of the big benchmark games for current hardware are just rereleases of games for hardware released 20 years ago.

>Are the PSP and DS "retro" I would say no, but then you look their release date and then realise im old

>>1515601 I'm not into PCs enough to get this joke. Wasn't OpenGL already old as shit by the time DDraw became DirectX? so it's a double whammy joke but uh...

>>1520938 OpenGL had a lot of versions and stuck around for a LONG time even after it was pretty much obsolete (replaced with Vulkan). Of course when I think of a retro graphics api I think of like, Voodoo Glide.

>>1520938 Win-G is the precursor to DirectX that was first made available for windows 3.1x while IrisGL was made by Silicon Graphics. Sanae is basically saying Civ II would be considered retro while Civ III would not as it uses DirectX 9. Thus, if it was made to run on windows 98 it's not considered 'retro'

>>1515027 > as well as technology accelerates with time tech completely stagnated after the Core 2. nowadays its just stupid toys and gimmicky shit like VR and AI to appeal to investors.

>>1534007 >Core 2 ...Duo?

"Retro" ends for cars in 2001. "Retro" for games ends in 2004. "Retro" for PC hardware ends in 2007. No I will not elaborate except to say that the jewish tribes were responsible and that 'The Matrix' declared the unleashing and unbinding of the secret long march through the institutions into open total policy control. You were lucky at the very end times you got a C2D and an 8800 GTS. Although I could not afford either of them. By raw throughput terms they advanced a stepping. That was it after that. 2007 marks nothing but set dressing after that. If you want to be like above anon and say Windows 98 is not retrograde, defunct, depricated, is as modern things function, then I don't know what to say to you. Microcosm came out in 1993 IIRC and completely filled the CD. "It's not retro because it's 3D (on a technicality)" is bunkum. You lie. Windows 98 came out before most graphics cards had arrived at the plateau of Texture & Lighting. "Big deal my games didn't need them" do you know what unaccelerated textured polygons are like? Do you think being a little underwhelmed or underappreciative of sub-30fps at 320x240 makes one into a HD-resolution "look at tha grafficks" worshipping whore? These were big strides and they mattered to people. Deus Ex was not a DOS game. The Radeon was not out before the year 2000. Before that you had the Rage 128 Pro with drivers that flaked or completely fell down and crashed. Blame ATI, but most cards, and most developments were like this. It had not matured. Things were still experimental.

>>1534763 >Do you think being a little underwhelmed or underappreciative of sub-30fps at 320x240 makes one into a HD-resolution "look at tha grafficks" worshipping whore? Yes. These things aren't nearly as noticeable as the regular jump from 2D to 3D. Textured polygons were the norm from the mid-'90s onward.

>>1534082 the Core 2 line in general. I'm talking about the whole generation. Core 2 marked the end of computing accelerating at an ultra fast speed. before that, a $2000 supercomputer from 1996 would've been completely obsolete in 1999. Nowadays you can get a 15 year old computer and it will still be very usable for anything that isn't resource-intensive like gayming or 3D modeling.

>>1535150 So we've reached a plateau by '98, every idea can mechanically be done on the Rage 128 Pro... Smooth scrolling across armies in a Total War game, Spore's creature creator, online multiplayer for Battlefront II... Provided we made the graphics simple enough, and the programming good enough, and the res low enough, we had peaked in terms of ideas? It can't be called "retro" (for it is as all modernity does) from that point? Do you know what it's like to play a flight sim like Crimson Skies on the Rage 128 Pro? Have you tried multiplayer? With a blimp and seven other people? Some ideas and mechanics remain unimplementable, still, until things progress past '98. The latter point that 2D > 3D is more astonishing than 3D > better 3D... Compare your Rage II doing Wipeout 1 at 15 fps or Turok: Dino Hunter, to the Rage 128 Pro doing NFS: Porsche Challenge (admittedly pretty fucking badly also). The difference in playability, not just graphics (I've deliberately chosen graphically good games from Win95). Or by console standards, the difference between Virtua Racer (choosing Hard Drivin' would be unfair) and Gran Turismo. That's so unimpressive compared to the Lotus III > Virtua Racer route, that it can't be called 'Retro'? That standard of purity is too high for me. I put the end od most things around 1999-2001. I'm very glad to own things at or from before this era. It represents a lost way of looking at things. If it represented fundamentally modern ways of doing things, I would not be interested.

>>1535967 All the changes you're talking about are incremental. 2d to 3d was a massive paradigm shift that allowed whole new genres of gameplay that simply would not be possible before, since new forms of movement were possible. The closest you can get to saying it's incremental is that the technology developed incrementally. While that's true, it became mainstream almost all at once. There were some early forerunners going back decades, but then in the mid '90s, suddenly everything changed and this became the mainstream. It's like saying a flood started not when the dam broke, but when the leak started. Virtual Racer is only retro compared to Gran Turismo is you limit the discussion to only 3D games. If you want to talk about "retro 3D racing games," then sure, Virtua Racer can count. But if you talk about racing games in general, then obviously Virtua Racer is much closer to Gran Turismo (both the original and the newest) than it is to something like Pole Position, Hang-On, or the myriad other racing games that used that 2D technology. And racing is one of the best examples against my argument, because those games were still trying to give the illusion of 3D. But the illusion didn't work nearly as well, the movement didn't even feel the same. Mode 7 and similar tricks helped advance things, but even then, the sheer movement differences between Super Mario Kart and Mario Kart 64 are a much bigger difference than between 64 and 8 DX. >1999-2001 Everyone knows vidya peaked in 1998, but yes, the decline after that was gradual, so I very much enjoy the next decade. But after 2007 things dropped off a cliff.

>>1535967 "Retro" to me can be broad as long as it defines a distinct aesthetic that can be traced to somewhere in the past. There's no true cut-off place imo, as there were still "retro" games being made somewhere for a long period of time throughout each generation. If I had to choose, I'd probably say 7th generation for consoles, and no true cut-off date for handhelds (yet), but probably the 3DS/Vita or the Switch since handheld games were often restricted by the hardware forcing aesthetics that you would often see from past consoles.

It's a moving target, it never ends. Everything becomes retro with enough time.

>>1536495 Meant to reply to the OP

>>1536341 personally gaming only got better and better until the Recession. the PS3/360 were robbed of being the golden period of gaming and just turned into COD and movie slop crap by the 2nd half of the gen. sadly gaming died a premature death and never had a true golden age like other media did. you could say one period of gaming was "better" than another period, but they just weren't ever "good" in the absolute sense.

>>1536542 I dissagree, the halo clones trend started in 2004. Granted there were quite a few good fps games that weren't halo/cod clones (like F.E.A.R. [2006]) but by 2008 a fps that wasn't a clone of those two was an exception not the norm.

>>1536341 I chose deliberately weak arguments actually. Which your immedately following sentence concedes in saying try as they might 2D can not do "pseudo 3D" anything like "actual 3D". I chose in fact to argue that Virtua Racer was Old English and Gran Turismo was Middle English. Including some regressions on the way there; GT's only 30 fps, has fewer players, no overhead follow cam but it's textured, and it's got accomodating AI which can't bully you as hard as VR, and more importantly the gameplay. The physics simulate wheel inertia and brake lock. In a way that's fun. Unrealistic, but still a marked change on the twitch-handling you just have to put up with in order to play Virtua Racer. And it's not stopped there. GT2 is orders of magnitude better than GT1 in terms of mechanics. These are big things to me. I seldom go back to 1 at all; even though it's better thematically because it's physics were what can only be described as "not finished". GT7 is... Modern English, but the slang part of it, the debased and gutteral part of it. GT2 is the peak and it may resemble modernity but then it's right on the limit of 2001. This is the point. In that same era GTA2 (which you'll argue is an outlier case for remaining 2D) morphed into GTA III. I prefer GTa2 but hey the era in which modernity was settled and nothing truly new or original ever came had that happen in the middle of it. There's not much more to say about it; you can play Quake II and MDK on your Matrox Millennium/Voodoo1 exception that came out, and I'll play Quake III Arena, MDK2, Max Payne, Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex and Counter-Strike 1.6 on my shitty "post-peak" Radeon from the might-as-well-pack-it-in-year 2000. While saying "pfft this is just like Duke 3D". >>1536495 Some day the Tesla Model S will be retro and a classic. Hopefully too transvestitism as well. As a social contagion. We're gonna look back on it and we're gonna go "what were we thinking?" This here being the definition of "Retro" that includes the term "retrograded". >>1536542 These consoles were starting to say "we don't know why we exist anymore" at the very start of their existence/release. Although the early Xbox Live aesthetic speaks of a moment in time personally or in "my" eyes.

>>1507820 Consoles like the NES and SNES are known as vintage. Retro is now PS2 and 360.

>>1539315 >360 If we're talking the first half of its lifetime where it had Blades & the Avatar update dashboards, sure. But if we're talking the second half where its dashboards looked more like Metro? The spirit was gone by then.

>>1539387 >those blades >those colors >those aesthetics Take me back.

>>1539422 You can even see the loss of that spirit when they rolled out the new startup intro for the console

>>1539387 >>1539470 Man, I really miss Y2k and Frutiger Aero aesthetics. I don't understand why companies really like to push Minimalism.

>>1539608 > I don't understand why companies really like to push Minimalism. https://archive.ph/BdlYp <Simplified Recognition: Companies are debranding to ensure logos remain recognizable on small mobile screens <Digital Adaptability: Flat, minimalist designs perform better across diverse digital platforms <Brand Maturity: Many companies debrand to signal evolution from startup to established business <Design Trend Cycle: Debranding follows fashion industry's move toward minimalism <Practical Functionality: Simplified logos serve as flexible portals for expanding product lines <Mobile-First Approach: Small screen sizes demand cleaner, less detailed visual elements <Design Detox: Brands are moving away from the excesses of digital design embellishments <Future Flexibility: Simpler logos create more options for customization and evolution https://archive.ph/DiFZN <Minimalist logos improve scalability and load times across digital platforms, directly supporting mobile-first UX and SEO performance. <42% of consumers trust brands with clean, modern logos more. <Simplified logos are more cost-effective to produce and adapt globally, reducing design complexity and expenses for brands with extensive cross-platform branding needs.

>>1539206 You just keep saying that things improved after Virtua Racing, but I never said it didn't. I just said Virtua Racing is much closer to Gran Turismo than it is to the contemporary releases in the OutRun series (which came out much closer temporally to VR than GT did). Yes, GT is a big improvement on GT, but the difference between them is way smaller than the difference between VR and every 2D racer, including OutRun 2019, which came out in the same year. And yes, I would argue Grand Theft Auto 1 and 2 were just holdovers of an earlier era. They were practically retro games (as in retro-styled, like a lot of modern games market themselves) even at the time. Because I never said that after the transition to 3D being the norm "modernity was settled and nothing truly new or original ever came," I just said that that transition, to 3D being the norm, was the biggest change in vidya history, and therefore if I need to put a single line between only two eras, that's where I'm going to put the line. There were early 3D games before, and there were late 2D games after, but what was the norm changed, and that's important. Of course modern games have differences from PS1 games, but the differences between modern games and the average PS1 game is less than the difference between the average PS1 game and the average Super Nintendo game.

>>1549221 speaking of "fashion," I have never seen modern fashion or beauty pageants come up as memes or regulary discussed topics on the internet unless I have to venture into female youtube for that, which I havent. I don't think I've seen words like 2010's fashion or 2020's fashion come up. It's like everything's been in stasis since the 2000s.

>>1507820 Retro literally just means before. It was always relative. Just like it's stupid to refer to a time period as "post-modern".

>>1550184 the 00s-20s are just the logical conclusion of the deterioration of Western culture since WWI. It didn't happen overnight.

>>1549221 I understand that making things minimal for the sake of simplicity and easier recognition of certain logos, but points like: >Digital Adaptability: Flat, minimalist designs perform better across diverse digital platforms >Digital Adaptability: Flat, minimalist designs perform better across diverse digital platforms >Brand Maturity: Many companies debrand to signal evolution from startup to established business sound incredibly retarded and make no sense.

>>1549221 The one and only reason minimalism is INTENTIONALY pushed is for demoralizaion. They hate you and want you dead and love to brag about it.