So, what do you consider to be "retro" or "old school" gaming?

[Manga4life]

So, there is always the ever-long debate about when systems can be considered "retro" and what counts as being "old school" within the gaming community so I figured I'd start a thread to see what the members of this community recognize as retro. With that said, when do you guys think "retro" gaming ended or what generation of systems would you say was the last to be considered classic gaming systems? For me, I'd say the golden age of gaming ended with the PS1/N64 because that's when current day gaming went from being fun and accessible to being flashy and over the top with realism. The Playstation and N64 produced some classic games that people still remember fondly and play to this day, it seems like the PS2, XboX, and GC came along and took the fun out of gaming and decided to "jump the shark" so to speak with how games were produced and marketed.

It seems like video game ad's are no longer what they used to be whether it be in print or on television and it seems like people aren't going to look back and remember the past 10 years of gaming as a fantastic era when compared to the previous generations. But yeah, for me I'd say classic gaming ended with the PS1/N64 and even though some of today's games are fun and easy to get into it just seems like as a whole gaming will never have that "feeling" that it once had back in the day.

[NayusDante]

According to forum rules and accepted practice, the "Modern Gaming" forum is for PS2 onward, so everything Dreamcast and earlier counts as classic.

That's the DP definition, and there have been many arguments over it. DC is technically in the PS2/GCN/XBox generation, so I'd push it over to Modern, but meh.

My PERSONAL definition of "Classic" would probably end with SNES, and maybe include the Jaguar. Aside from performance increases, not a lot has changed from PSX and Saturn, where we got multimedia and high storage capacity at-launch (not in add-ons). Once you get to the social/mainstream features introduced with the Xbox 360, I'd say that we're in Post-Modern gaming, but that's just me.

[Collector_Gaming]

how about this as a rule of thumb
pre 2000 = Classic
2000+ = Modern :P

[treismac]

Here is a rather simplistic rule of thumb I like to use:

Cartridges = retro
Disc = modern*

*I have never heard of handheld gaming. Scrambled letters and numbers like PSP and 3DS are meaningless to me. ;)

[Richter Belmount]

playstation 3 and blu ray discs

[Rickstilwell1]

According to forum rules and accepted practice, the "Modern Gaming" forum is for PS2 onward, so everything Dreamcast and earlier counts as classic.

You mean everything Neo Geo Pocket Color and earlier counts as classic. NGPC came out after the Dreamcast in 1999.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I tend to think the distinction is best exemplified by a games gameplay type and/or visual style rather than a hardware/platform cutoff.

[exit]

Here is a rather simplistic rule of thumb I like to use:

Cartridges = retro
Disc = modern*

*I have never heard of handheld gaming. Scrambled letters and numbers like PSP and 3DS are meaningless to me. ;)

You see that would work if it weren't for Sega CD, Turbo Grafix CD, 3D0, Sega Saturn and so on. A lot of the CD based consoles are mostly CD drive add-ons, but to the few that did fall under disc based, things aren't so black and white.

I would say at this point, anything anything before the PS2 era would be considered retro, but that will surely change soon once the PS2 is finally obsolete for a few years.

[Leo_A]

My personal line of thought is classic gaming is everything other than the current generation of systems and the generation before that. So GBA became a classic system this year and the GameCube will enter classic status next year, for instance. And manufacturing has to have ended, which is why I wouldn't of considered PSOne as classic, even with the release of the PS3, until very recently (Thanks to many reprintings of games).

[Sanriostar]

I'm probably the Get off my Lawn type:

I still consider Pre-crash to be considered "retro"; a mental relic from the RGVC days.
There's now systems considered old and classic by others that weren't even out when I started collecting.
Get me my Geritol and Whiskey tumbler, and fill it to the top, won't 'cha? LOL

[Sabz5150]

Uses Li-Ion batteries and runs for twenty hours: Modern.
Uses AA batteries and runs for 50 minutes: Old School.

[substantial_snake]

Two generations back = classics

I go by this general rule because once you stop seeing major retailers stop selling a product it tends to fall away from the general gaming conciseness. Their are always special exceptions like the dreamcast and the various failed early to mid-90's consoles simply because their time at the forefront was so short. Also console relevance time frames tend to fall within 10-12 years and thats about enough time for many gamers to grow up and look back on what they played when they were kids as classic.

This was how my friends and I defined classic consoles even when we were growing up and I always thought it was kinda a universal thing when they seemed to go by the same rules here.

32-bit gen (16-bit still relevant) = 8-bit classic
PS2, GC, XBOX gen (32-bit still relevant) = 16-bit classic

And so on and so forth.

[jonebone]

Anything not in the current generation is classic to me. Yes, even Xbox and PS2. I consider "modern" to be the current systems.

[swlovinist]

Anything not in the current generation is classic to me. Yes, even Xbox and PS2. I consider "modern" to be the current systems.

I agree with this. Anything that is hitting that "decade mark" and is last gen would place it in a "classic category".

While I have been a classic gamer and grew up with the NES, that does not mean that the classic game systems should only be the ones I grew up with. As time moves on, so will the the games that people grew up with.

[treismac]

You see that would work if it weren't for Sega CD, Turbo Grafix CD, 3D0, Sega Saturn and so on. A lot of the CD based consoles are mostly CD drive add-ons, but to the few that did fall under disc based, things aren't so black and white.

I would say at this point, anything anything before the PS2 era would be considered retro, but that will surely change soon once the PS2 is finally obsolete for a few years.

You're right. I am universalizing my experience as a gamer. Other than the Turbo Duo that I regrettably* returned quickly after being dissatisfied with it, I never owned any retro gaming CD players- they weren't part of my gaming reality. I did own a Saturn, but I forget entirely about its existence until someone mentions it or I think of its splendid Saturn Bomberman, so there you go.

* I damn well hope that I used the money from the return on something kick ass, 'cause I'd love to have the Turbo Duo now. :(

[Yago]

I dunno. I guess you can refer to like the Atari 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision, Oddyssey and Vectrex as historical gaming? :) These systems I consider Retro or classic gaming. Nor will I ever consider anything else as classic gaming for the reason these are the systems that started it all. They were there in the beginning. Nothing else deserves to be listed in the same class as these systems in that time period. Just my opinion that don't mean jack anyway lol.

[kupomogli]

Retro/old school and classic to me are totally different in my opinion.

I'd consider retro games at most 8bit or prior. Classic would be anything, as of right now, 64bit or prior.

To me, retro isn't ever going to define anything beyond 8bit. It's where I started my gaming experience so it, to me, was when gaming first started. If I was older and started gaming earlier with my main console was the 2600 or something else, then I'd probably say that it would be retro and anything beyond wouldn't be.

Classic doesn't define a beginning for me though. It's anything that could be considered archaic to todays standards.

[Shulamana]

Retro/old school and classic to me are totally different in my opinion.

I'd consider retro games at most 8bit or prior. Classic would be anything, as of right now, 64bit or prior.

To me, retro isn't ever going to define anything beyond 8bit. It's where I started my gaming experience so it, to me, was when gaming first started. If I was older and started gaming earlier with my main console was the 2600 or something else, then I'd probably say that it would be retro and anything beyond wouldn't be.

Classic doesn't define a beginning for me though. It's anything that could be considered archaic to todays standards.

I'd agree, 8-bit era feels like the Bronze Age of gaming to me, while the Iron Age would be the Genesis/MD up through the introduction of the PS2. Calling everything more than 10 years old "retro" is like saying that something that happened 65,000,000 years ago and something that happened 200 years ago were both "ancient history". Classifying things as either one or the other just seems too simple to get the stuff credit.

[jammajup]

I think i have seen this asked before on DP somewhere,retro or classic to me is any computer or console from the begining (which in my case is late 70`s - early 80`s like the Atari 2600) upto and including the Sega Dreamcast.Anything after that like Ps2,GC,Xbox is not,i hear people say that a machine is retro after 10 years but i am not sure about that.
I think it depends how old you are too.

[BlastProcessing402]

If the default controller for the system at launch only had a d-pad, it's retro. (NES, SNES, Genesis, etc)

If it had a stick or a disc or paddles or something else pre-d-pad, it's vintage. (Atari, Intellivision, Pong, etc)

If it had a d-pad and a single analog stick, or the default controller had a d-pad but a later controller added a stick or two, it's semi-retro. (N64, PSX, Saturn, Dreamcast)

If there's a d-pad and two analog sticks or motion controls, it's modern. (Xbox, PS2, GC, Wii, 360, PS3)

[Manga4life]

So, after surveying the responses to my original post it would appear that a good chunk of people consider anything after the PS1/N64 era to be "modern", or in short it seems that it's a general 2 generations back kind of thing. VERY interesting responses though, lot's to think about on my end, but I think that anything PS1/N64 or below could be considered "classic gaming" while anything NES and below could be considered "retro gaming".

Still, awesome feedback by the members here on this subject, hence why I created it to begin with. You all rock! :rocker:

[Sunnyvale]

I tend to think the distinction is best exemplified by a games gameplay type and/or visual style rather than a hardware/platform cutoff.

This. Hardware differences and style differences have shown this to be true.

[Aussie2B]

Still, awesome feedback by the members here on this subject, hence why I created it to begin with. You all rock! :rocker:

Heh, you're lucky it hasn't turned into a heated argument. There are a lot of gamers that get up in arms if anyone tries to apply "classic" to anything other than pre-crash games.

As for myself, I think it's silly to call anything but the current systems "modern". If a system is completely dead, no way is it modern in my eyes. I prefer to think of things more as retro/classic gaming rather than defining what is or isn't a retro/classic game. I'd feel a little weird calling something on PS2 or whatever "retro", but if I tell someone that I'm a retro gamer, I'd expect them to take that as meaning that I tend to play older games, which can range from the oldest of games to the previous generation.

[retroman]

i would say Dreamcast is pushing it, but anything before that

[goatdan]

If you're asking for "retro gaming", that's tougher. For me though, Classic Gaming got a great definition in 2001 that I use to this day. And, it's what we use as the official definition for the Midwest Gaming Classic... I need to tell a short story though.

We were having a lot of trouble trying to figure out where to cut off the 2002 show. We wanted to do a "classic" gaming show. There was the feeling that classic should be anything 2D or earlier only. Then, there was the feeling that it should include newer systems like the Saturn and PS1. Another school of thought was making it 8-bit and earlier.

I decided to ask my cousin, who was about eight at the time, what he thought was a classic game. After a few moments of thought, he very earnestly said, "Sonic Adventure for the Dreamcast." I had to ask, why that game -- it wasn't that old? His response was that it was an older game (to an 8 year old, a 2 year old game is quite a long time...) and that he always had great memories of coming to my house and playing it.

I realized *that* was the key. A game is classic when the person playing it has great memories of playing it that makes it classic. It doesn't matter if the game just came out, if you have fun playing it in a way that it will be truly memorable, then that is a classic game.

I still use that definition to this day. Classic is in the eye of the beholder, and instead of trying to pick out exactly what is and isn't a classic, let's celebrate what everyone thinks is a classic, even if it appears to be modern to us :)

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

We're six years and another generation on.

I would now consider the 7th /128-bit/PS2 generation classic. That means the PS2, Xbox, and GameCube. The Dreamcast has long been considered classic.

This generation, the 9th, started around 2013.

Sony has the PS4, Microsoft the Xbox One, and Nintendo the Wii U and Switch.
(The Switch has been out for almost a year and no PS5 / Xbox whatever's-next has been announced yet. I think it's safe to say that they're not coming till 2019 or later. I would guess 2020 or 2021)

The previous (8th) generation is dead.
PS3 was discontinued October 2016, Xbox 360 April 2016, and Wii is an interesting case.

Wikipedia says the Wii Mini is still in production, but I haven't seen Wii-anything on sale at GameStop, Wally World, etc, and (https://www.statista.com/statistics/349078/nintendo-wii-and-wii-u-console-sales/) says that no Wiis were sold after March 2016. No games have come out for the Wii in America since November 2015, with the exception of two Just Dance installments.

Still, I wouldn't call it classic yet. Classic, to me, is generally when a system is two generations out of date, or has had no new games for five years.

The last USA PS2 game was FIFA 14, on September 24, 2013. But in its case, this is a system that peaked in the 2001-2006 era, and its last good year for games was 2009. It got a dwindling trickle of shovelware, cheap licensed games and watered down sports updates from 2010-2013. I would say it was right around 2014 or so that the PS2 went classic. At that point, the current 9th gen systems were out, the 8th gen systems were on the decline, and the PS2 hadn't got any A titles in five years.

For the original Xbox, it had Madden NFL 09 on August 12, 2008. August 12, 2013 seems about right for the time it went classic.

The GameCube's last game was (surprise, surprise) Madden NFL 08 on August 14, 2007, which gives us a date of August 14, 2012.

[jb143]

Classic, to me, is generally when a system is two generations out of date, or has had no new games for five years.


But the term "classic" doesn't have as much to do with age as it does with quality.


Classic: judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind.

So Super Mario Bros 3 would be considered a classic game. Super Pitfall, not so much.

Though the original question was about systems being considered "retro" or "old school". I personally have a hard time putting anything post 16-bit in that category, though clearly I wouldn't consider PS2 or GameCube "modern" systems.

[AceAerosmith]

"Old School" and "Retro" are games that you looked back on nostalgically, play when you're older, and realize they really weren't that good.

[Edmond Dantes]

"Old School" and "Retro" are games that you looked back on nostalgically, play when you're older, and realize they really weren't that good.

Unless they're games you never played but somehow wound up with a copy of.

I also often run into games which I for some reason hated as a kid, but then I play them as an adult and suddenly I can't live without them. Master of Monsters for the Sega Genesis being one example.

That's something I rarely ever hear people talk about--the reversing of a negative opinion into a positive one when you get older and/or your tastes change (and/or you get more skilled/competent at the game or genre in question, or just become more mature and open-minded--I used to not be able to stand the idea of text adventures but now I wonder how I lived without them). I always instead hear about the past like its invariably doomed to be suckage, which like most cynical thoughts, is wrong two-thirds of the time.

....

To answer the topic question, I basically consider the PS2/Gamecube/original X-Box generation to be "retro" now, with the PSP being I'm-not-quite-sure. For me the real distinction these days has come down to the difference in culture and (for lack of a better term) B.S. surrounding gaming. Simply put: if its a game where I can just put the disc in and play it with little or no fuss (except maybe installing the game in the case of a PC game, MAYBE entering a code) then its old-school enough for me. If I have to worry about DRM, or if the game is digital-only, or there's all sorts of hoops I have to jump through and each and every single game purchase becomes an effing research project, then its veering into modern territory.

That's not a great definition, but I'm not exactly a great thinker either.

[gbpxl]

general accepted definintion of vintage is 20 years or older

same goes for collector vehicle plates

[jb143]

The interesting thing about vehicles is that there is a legal definition of what constitutes "classic". Due to emissions and safety issues, which varies from state to state.

Classic Rock was defined by radio DJs and follows a mostly specific set of guidelines of release years and style.

Video gamers and collectors, on the other hand, are left to create their own individual arbitrary definitions.

Though I would say, that outside of these types of discussions, any time I hear the terms "classic", "retro", or "old school" applied to games they are referring to games with "pixel-art" graphics.

[Gameguy]

The cutoff for me these days is standard definition vs high definition.

[Cornelius]

I think I'd lean more towards jb143's statement about 'pixel-art' graphics. I'm sure there are examples that don't fit with that, but there are some games that I don't think I'll ever be able to call retro or old-school, no matter how old they are. Grand Theft Auto III comes to mind.

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

This isn't an ironclad definition of "old school", just an idea that can help delineate the term.

Another point toward the PS2-led generation being "retro" is that the kids that played those games new (during that generation) are now full grown adults. Kids meaning elementary school age, say 6-11, and adults starting at about 18-25 depending on the person, but on average 21 and up, most of which would be living independently, have jobs, or be nearing that point. Of course, a teen that played PS3, 360, etc could easily be an adult now.

Let's look at the last generation (PS3, 360, Wii). From the launch of the 360 to the launch of the Xbox One (last of the current gen to be launched except the Switch) was November 22, 2005 - November 22, 2013. Those who were 6-11 during this time period were born November 23, 1993 - November 22, 2007, with the "core" being born 1997-2004. Nearly half of those people still aren't old enough to buy M rated games, and only the oldest few years would be mostly adults. By this definition, this generation will become "old school" on November 22, 2021, when a majority of the kids who played the games new are now adults.

PS2-led generation was September 9, 1999 - November 19, 2006, Dreamcast launch to Wii launch. The kids during this time period were born September 10, 1987 - November 19, 2000, the "core" being 1991-1997. All of this age group can now buy M rated games. Most of the kids who were playing on PS2's, GameCubes, and Xboxes are in their 20s now, and the kids who played Dreamcast when it was in production are almost invariably adults now. Those that have fond memories of games like Jak and Daxter, Gran Turismo 3, SSBM etc as elementary school age kids are now adults for the most part. Young adults but adults nonetheless.

What about the 32 bit generation? Few would argue that it's "old school". It's May 11, 1995 - November 18, 2001, Saturn launch to GameCube launch (not counting the 3DO, 32X, etc). The kids during this time period were born May 12, 1983 - November 18, 1995, almost all adults.

Of course, people born after these date ranges experienced these systems as well, whether they were under 6 or experienced them after the next generation had came out. A kid playing Xbox 360 today will still remember it as part of their childhood. There are plenty of people born after '95 that played 32 bit games as a kid, after '00 who played PS2-gen games as a kid, etc. And each console is different. The kids who played Dreamcast are probably older on average than the ones who played PS2.

I'm 25 now and when I was 6-11, I played Playstation 1 and Playstation 2 the most; I also had a Genesis, N64, and GameCube. There was a period of about 7 months when all the PS2-generation consoles had launched but I still only had a PS1.