At what point is a game a "Retro Game" ?

[Mason P.]

I read an article in a Gamepro and started to think about it. What or when do I deem a game to be "retro"? I guess for my personal taste, I put it at all consoles pre-Saturn (before mid 94). Of course games for those consoles came out later, but the system is what I go by.

What do you determine Retro?

[Draven]

I more consider modern games as being "Retro". Weird, I suppose, but by a comparison standard. It's like playing a new 2d side-scrolling shooter (like a new Contra) as opposed to an over-the-shoulder or 1st person shooter that one normally expects in today's gaming. "That game is so retro".

[Sonicwolf]

This forum determines retro as everything before Playstation 2. Unfortunately that is only a temporary definition as time keeps passing. Its hard to define when one has to move the a recent game or system into the retro category. Personally, I think 10 years is a pretty good amount.

[Kaboomer]

Ah, good questions. And one we will be doing an editorial on in the April podcast at http://www.RetroGamingRoundup.com.

[sebastiankirchoff]

I personally think a system has to be 12 or 13 years to be retro.

[FxMercenary]

Whether the console is in production anymore is how some define Retro.

I define it by a 10 year gap. 1999 is retro now.

[Pantechnicon]

DP standards notwithstanding, if I had to put a number on it I'd say 20 years, but I'd rather not put a number on it.

"Retro" is a constantly shifting line, and one which I think is largely subjective relative to an individual's age. The seventh-grader gifted with the shiny new hotness of an Xbox back in 2001 is in college now, and his Xbox is collecting dust in the attic. He's younger than an NES, and has virtually no conception of the Atari 2600. Are we right to make fun of him when he talks about missing his "old school" Xbox?

I've made this point before, but if you really want to know what "retro" is, don't worry about it in terms of numbers of years. Finish school, get married, get yourself a mortgage and a couple of kids. Get a job you may not necessarily like, but require in order to sustain said family and mortgage. Get to a point in your life where playing whatever system you grew up with (that is, when you can squeeze in the time) makes you feel happy, makes you feel carefree, despite the vapid condescension of people half your age wondering why you waste your time with "that old sh!t, dude". Then, regardless of your age, you will understand what "retro" really is.

[eskobar]

For me, retro gaming is anything before the NES and SMS ... Even if NES games look quite dated today, the game experience feels the same, unlike the Atari or Intellivision games that have really basic gameplay/graphics that you don't see anymore.

[Kyle15]

DP standards notwithstanding, if I had to put a number on it I'd say 20 years, but I'd rather not put a number on it.

"Retro" is a constantly shifting line, and one which I think is largely subjective relative to an individual's age. The seventh-grader gifted with the shiny new hotness of an Xbox back in 2001 is in college now, and his Xbox is collecting dust in the attic. He's younger than an NES, and has virtually no conception of the Atari 2600. Are we right to make fun of him when he talks about missing his "old school" Xbox?

I've made this point before, but if you really want to know what "retro" is, don't worry about it in terms of numbers of years. Finish school, get married, get yourself a mortgage and a couple of kids. Get a job you may not necessarily like, but require in order to sustain said family and mortgage. Get to a point in your life where playing whatever system you grew up with (that is, when you can squeeze in the time) makes you feel happy, makes you feel carefree, despite the vapid condescension of people half your age wondering why you waste your time with "that old sh!t, dude". Then, regardless of your age, you will understand what "retro" really is.

This.
Well said! ;)

[boogiecat]

Yeah 20 years is considered retro but those around 10-15 year old games/consoles should already be considered also in that category..

[Game Freak]

Id say "retro" is 16 bit in back, but thats just my opinion. To be honest, i grew up with the SNES, and was born in 93...I'm not one of those lucky ones that had an n64 back in the day, and i dont have a 360 or regular xbox either...I prefer older systems, cause they in general seem better, more original, and more difficult. Nowadays pretty much every 3d game i have ever played is wicked easy..

[NayusDante]

I've personally identified "retro" as a more technical term, referring to the older cartridge-based games. Once CDs came out, storage concerns went out the window and the "art" of fitting your game onto two chips went as well.

[Nebagram]

IMHO, 10 years or 2 after the official death of the system, whichever comes later. Sticking an arbitrary figure onto it is all well and good for some, but the PS2 is ten years old next year and still a vital enough platform to see new releases aplenty. Meanwhile people were calling the Dreamcast retro almost as early as 2005, when it was barely six years old. And I'm pretty sure the SNES hit retro status for most before 2000 (could be wrong there though).

[gum_drops]

A retro game is one that can no longer be traded in or bought used at Gamestop retail locations. Yep, its all up to Gamestop.

[Nico87]

I'd say 4th generation and older, and probably 5th aswell.

[7th lutz]

I have 2 different views on this.

1.) A game itself can be considered retro after 15 years after it was release.

2.) The system has to be dead for 10 to 15 years to be considered retro unless, the system has 12 year lifespan at least. If a game system died after 12 years at least like the Atari 2600 and the Neo Geo did, it only needs after 2 or 5 years to be considered retro.

I gave a system like the 2600 2 to 5 years to be considered retro after it's death for a reason. I bought an Atari 2600 Jr. in early 1988. The system was already 11 years old. That means the system is really showing it's age and is releasing games that the system is not designed for like Rampage and Double Dragon.

I said 15 after it's death for a game console for a reason. It for systems that really short lived like a 32x or a virtual boy for an example. It is for systems that live less than 3 years.

[NayusDante]

If you say that systems like Dreamcast, N64, PSX, Saturn, etc are NOT considered retro yet, then what do you consider it proper to call them? Transitional maybe?



Karl: "Hey Steve! Wanna go to the retro gaming swap-meet?"
Steve: "Nah, man! Transitional gaming's the cool thing now!"
Karl: "Awesome, maybe we'll do some Modern later."

Honestly, I think that we need to better define our terminology. There's clearly something that's not retro, but nowhere near current either.

[Gameguy]

I feel there's a difference between "vintage" and "retro". To me, retro means something new that's made in the same style as something older. Just like New Super Mario Bros for the DS is retro.

For vintage, currently anything 16-bit or older. Other stuff it really depends on what it is. Sega stuff I consider vintage because they don't make hardware anymore, I don't consider PS1, N64, or Gameboy Color games to be vintage yet(I just feel they're old). It's like the difference between something collectible that's 20 years old, and something that's just old junk from 30 years ago.

[otaku]

I think for a game to be retro it needs to be two generations old so right now the previous generation is still not retro.

[k8track]

I actually already answered this same question in this thread: What defines "CLASSIC"? (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107777)

[Haoie]

It's retro when we start talking about it.

Ho ho.

[Atarileaf]

Personally, I have a hard time even calling the PS1/N64 era as vintage or "retro" but I think N64 gets a little bit of a nod because its a cart based system, if that makes any sense.

[NayusDante]

You know, with the increasing storage capacity of flash-cards, and the fragile nature of optical storage, the next logical evolution for gaming is to go back to cartridges. The DS got it right, and its already been speculated that the next generation of consoles will forego disk drives. As an alternative to online downloads, SD cards are the next logical form of physical distribution. That's going to kill the cartridge == retro argument.

[Ed Oscuro]

You know, with the increasing storage capacity of flash-cards, and the fragile nature of optical storage, the next logical evolution for gaming is to go back to cartridges.
That's not really logical at all. It's all about reducing costs, so digital distribution wins.

The question for me is whether governments will force a showdown on censorship on online-distributed games, as in the past online purchases have been the way people have circumvented local laws banning the showcasing of certain games at local stores.

Back on topic, Dreamcast and earlier ;) Although I think the DC belongs in the same generation as the PS2 and Xbox, so really I'd put it back at earlier than DC.

[Mason P.]

If you say that systems like Dreamcast, N64, PSX, Saturn, etc are NOT considered retro yet, then what do you consider it proper to call them? Transitional maybe?

I consider them just to be old. Not retro. I also understand that as time changes the line will move. When the generation after the current one happens( ps3,Wii, 360), i personally will move the line to include the Playstation, Saturn, and the N64.

There is no set rules on what makes Retro "Retro". Its just you personal opinion.

[megasdkirby]

For me, retro is anything dating back pre 16-bit era.

NES, SMS, 2600...anything made in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Music: Cream is Classic. The Black Keys are Retro.
Cars: 1955 Thunderbird is Classic. 2005 Thunderbird is Retro.
Games: Contra NES is Classic. Contra 4 DS is Retro.
Consoles: NES and 2600 is Classic. NEX and Flashback2 is Retro.
Special case: While I would consider the GBA itself and much of it's library Classic at this point, examples such as: Castlevania NES is Classic. Castlevania NES Series GBA is Retro. exist in my own little paradigm.

If this is still unclear to you, my sincere apologies... For you, are truly lost by my reckoning. :p

[megasdkirby]

Interesting view, Icarus!

So you are basically saying that games released for a console originally are classics, but any ports of the same game is Retro. I see what you mean...if it's not the original, it's not the classic!

[Gentlegamer]

DP standards notwithstanding, if I had to put a number on it I'd say 20 years, but I'd rather not put a number on it.

"Retro" is a constantly shifting line, and one which I think is largely subjective relative to an individual's age. The seventh-grader gifted with the shiny new hotness of an Xbox back in 2001 is in college now, and his Xbox is collecting dust in the attic. He's younger than an NES, and has virtually no conception of the Atari 2600. Are we right to make fun of him when he talks about missing his "old school" Xbox?

I've made this point before, but if you really want to know what "retro" is, don't worry about it in terms of numbers of years. Finish school, get married, get yourself a mortgage and a couple of kids. Get a job you may not necessarily like, but require in order to sustain said family and mortgage. Get to a point in your life where playing whatever system you grew up with (that is, when you can squeeze in the time) makes you feel happy, makes you feel carefree, despite the vapid condescension of people half your age wondering why you waste your time with "that old sh!t, dude". Then, regardless of your age, you will understand what "retro" really is.Agreed. The same generally goes for pop music, too.

Edit: Icarus is also right on the difference between "classic" and "retro." Most people say "retro" when they mean "classic."

[crom]

For me, retro gaming is anything before the NES and SMS ... Even if NES games look quite dated today, the game experience feels the same, unlike the Atari or Intellivision games that have really basic gameplay/graphics that you don't see anymore.

Im going to have to agree with this... and then add to it...

retro = pre Nes (atari/coleco)
classic = nes/snes/genesis era (lets be real, this was the time when games boomed)
renesance = saturn, ps1, n64 (the era of 3d begins)
modern = everything else

[NayusDante]

I wouldn't use the term "renaissance" for that era, since it was just a transitional step. The true renaissance was the NES/SMS era, which led into the SNES/Genesis era. The renaissance I described is widely recognized for reviving the gaming industry after the crash.

Coincidentally, this is where we have games involving four turtles named after renaissance artists...

[crom]

I wouldn't use the term "renaissance" for that era, since it was just a transitional step. The true renaissance was the NES/SMS era, which led into the SNES/Genesis era. The renaissance I described is widely recognized for reviving the gaming industry after the crash.

Coincidentally, this is where we have games involving four turtles named after renaissance artists...

when your right your right and you sir are right... spot on spot on

[Mason P.]

I don't like the term "renaissance" when talking about games. I gont mind golden age" and "Retro" , and "Classic"; but "Renaissance" just sounds wierd.

[IceDrake]

Anything older than the SNES I'd consider Retro. Some N64 games like Super Mario 64 I might consider retro.

[HYB]

I don't really care, for me games are games no matter when they came out. I usually draw the line at DC though, so basically everything pre PS2. The retro feeling gets bigger as we get back to NES and before, but I grew up with the PS/64/DC era, so these do hold a bit of a retro feeling for me. I guess it's about the memories and stuff attached to consoles as well, but the definition does change as time goes on.