What point do you consider a console retro [Archive]

lurpak

04-26-2005, 09:44 AM

on another thread (about age) I relaised why so many of you consider the likes of dreamcasts, PS ones, even GBAs as retro consoles, me being 36 consider the likes of Master systems and NES only just qualifying as retro and all the others as just systems out of date.

to me retro consoles are the likes of Atari VCS, my beloved Videopac, Coleco Vision, vectrex..

I suppose retro (to me) is my teenage years, what is your icon of youth and does that reflect what you consider retro ?

Immutable

04-26-2005, 10:30 AM

The only thing that comes to mind as retro would be all those FC clones, like the Polystation III. :)

Cryomancer

04-26-2005, 10:38 AM

Woodgrain.

edit: honestly though, I generally don't think "retro or not retro", I think more like "fun or not fun", or "have owned/played this before or not". Honestly I couldn't care less about when something came out as long as i could have a good time with it.

syd

04-26-2005, 11:00 AM

For me retro would be NES since it's the first real system I had. I had an Atari 2600 but that died when I was 4 or 5 so I didn't get to use that thing too much! :(

Pantechnicon

04-26-2005, 11:16 AM

I'm perfectly happy with putting a number on "retro" by declaring a minimum console age of 20 years. NES and SMS have therefore just joined the club. Everything from 1985 on up is still awaiting eligibility (Atari 7800 is on appeal...)

I suppose retro (to me) is my teenage years, what is your icon of youth and does that reflect what you consider retro ?

The only problem with this thinking is that it can only be substantially understood by old fogies like us over thirty-types. I got out of high school in 1988. And when I started looking for another Atari 2600 in 1991 or so nobody, myself included, thought of the system as being "retro", instead it was regarded by others as "old crap".

No offense is intended to the 18-year-olds here (I really do love you guys...), but just because the Dreamcast came out when you were 12 and you call that "retro" does not make it thus. Go forth into the world; Hit the books in college when you'd rather be playing Halo, get a grinding job, marry a sweetie, have some kids, worry about paying your bills on time. Wait for one year to blindly merge in to the next one until the passage of time starts to feel a little foggy. And then you'll start to understand what "retro" really means.

Kejoriv

04-26-2005, 11:30 AM

I consider a system retro anything snes and earlier. Why? Those games were new when I was a little youngen. And now as a 23 year old, I LOVE playing the all the games, that I couldnt afford with my paper route or the games that friggen Santa Claus never bought for me. LOL

SkiDragon

04-26-2005, 04:46 PM

I dont want to even call an SNES retro, and thats the first system I owned. The NES is marginally retro, and its hard to say that anything older than the NES itsnt retro.

wufners

04-26-2005, 05:23 PM

Oddly enough, I would consider the Genesis retro but not the SNES or the Turbografx (tho maybe I would if I had ever played it.)

*shrugs*

Go figure.

I guess the definitition of retro is in part an age question but also a matter of when the console no longer became relevant within the mainstream gaming comunity.

Naturally, exceptions abound--2D is certainly becoming more and more retro, but I'd wager that the Playstation will feel retro long before the Neo Geo will.

rick weis

04-26-2005, 05:24 PM

IMO anything prior to the NES! NES and above are not retro...

Rick

jajaja

04-26-2005, 05:26 PM

I think from the NES and below. SNES isnt quite retro for me. I need oldskool chipmusic to get the retro feeling :)

WanganRunner

04-26-2005, 05:43 PM

For me, every console fits into one of two categories:

Retro

Current

By that measure, it's pretty simple to tell what goes where. Age has nothing to do with it. If it's not currently being supported, it's a retro console.

I haven't quite put Dreamcast there yet, because (a la Trizeal) games are still coming out for the thing that aren't techically homebrew. Thus, the GBA definitely doesn't qualify either.

The PS1 qualifies, as does the N64, Saturn, etc...

Cmosfm

04-26-2005, 05:47 PM

For me, every console fits into one of two categories:

Retro

Current

The PS1 qualifies, as does the N64, Saturn, etc...

no, no, no, and no. Those are not Retro, not in one bit whatsoever. So when they finally drop the N-Gage, it's going to be Retro as well?

I know that's your opinion, but I just disagree with your opinion. ;)

Retro, in my opinion, is anything 20 years old or older. SNES - nope, Genesis - nope, none of those are retro. NES, Atari, Coleco, all retro.

NESaholic

04-26-2005, 05:50 PM

Well i think when it's 20 years or more till the console came out you can call it retro.

WanganRunner

04-26-2005, 06:25 PM

I know that's your opinion, but I just disagree with your opinion. ;)

I disagree with your Barry Manilow avatar.

Firstly, the definition of "retro" in application to videogames is pretty damned subjective. Next time just give your opinion, and leave mine the hell out of it.

Insomuch as I'm concerned, "retro" means anything that is NOT "current" technology. This leaves the problem of defining what is "current", and I detailed my approach above.

But the bottom line is, I can answer this question however the hell I want, it's just not a black or white issue.

I can answer True/False

I can answer in the form of a question:
"What is anything that's not current technology"

I can answer with immaterial bullshit:
"Purple Brontosaurus cheeseburger my Zeppelin!"

Next time just say "Retro is anything that is 20 years or more old". I see no need for you and Mr. Manilow to try and "no" my post out of existence.

Ikari Warrior

04-26-2005, 06:34 PM

For me, every console fits into one of two categories:

Retro

Current

The PS1 qualifies, as does the N64, Saturn, etc...

This is how I am too. If it's dead and games are getting harder to find in regular stores, I consider it retro.
Launch PS2 games are starting to feel retro to me, as I've been going back and picking up some obscure gems I missed the first time around.

It's not like we're talking cars here, where they go up in value after they reach some predetermined age.

Jibbajaba

04-26-2005, 09:27 PM

I would say that in my opinion a console is retro or classic or whatever when it is 2 generations old. So a PSX or a saturn or an N64 or a gameboy color would not qualify. SNES, Genny, TG-16, original game boy would all qualify as classic. But this is just all off the top of my head.

Chris

RangerG

04-27-2005, 12:05 AM

Easy: DP red book = retro; DP blue book = not retro :)

Dr. Morbis

04-27-2005, 12:09 AM

alexkidd2000

04-27-2005, 12:38 AM

Old School - 10 years old
Retro - 20 years old

Crush Crawfish

04-27-2005, 12:43 AM

I consider a console retro once there is a generation of systems between it and the current generation. So right now, SNES is retro but N64 is not. The original Playstation will be retro the day the PS3 is released.

/2 cents

That's exactly the way I feel. However, It's gonna feel extremely odd to refer to N64, PS1 and DC as "retro." I feel like I was still buying new releases for those just yesterday! :/

bargora

04-27-2005, 01:01 AM

Main Entry: ret�ro
Pronunciation: 're-(")trO
Function: adjective
Etymology: French r�tro, short for r�trospectif retrospective
: relating to, reviving, or being the styles and especially the fashions of the past : fashionably nostalgic or old-fashioned <a retro look>
I think that it's interesting that this dictionary definition incorporates the notion of fashionability into the meaning of "retro". Perhaps there's a certain aura of chic that attaches to older things, separate from simple nostalgia.

For that reason, I would suggest that a game system needs to first pass through a stage of being perceived as "last-gen", filled with "jaggies", and just all-around "old" and/or "lame" before it can emerge from its status as a pariah and be seen as "retro-cool". Thus, for the "mainstream" gamer, I think that a retro system is a system that one may remember from the distant past, but would hardly consider playing seriously.

For the collector, on the other hand, I think that a "retro" system is one that is old enough that its place in the evolution of the form is settled; enough time has passed that its impact on video games in general can be clearly seen. And since serious collectors tend to be older, their memories stretch back much further than the ten years that some of you are proposing. Hence some of the reactions of "heretic!"

Those of you calling the Dreamcast "retro" today will understand the outrage five years from now when today's 14-year-olds start calling the X-box "retro".

OK, I'm done talking through my hat.

retroman

04-27-2005, 01:08 AM

i would say every other Generation of consoles....so that makes the 16bit era retro...and when the next Gens come out, it will make the sega saturn and ps one retro...

Fuyukaze

04-27-2005, 01:23 AM

I consider "retro" to only include systems that are generaly no longer fun to play on and are only usefull as tools to showcase the roots of home console systems. I realize many colectors and game fans would disagree with me this (and in some cases rightly so) but while I would love to own an Atari 2600 again, or even a Oddessy 2, the truth is I cant bring myself to play such systems anymore. The games were fun for their time, but in hindsight, I cant help but wonder if it was only because they were all that were available to me. Systems such as the NES, Master System, SNES, and such realy dont look like retro to me. The games graphics may be crude and primitive to todays standereds, but they were sometimes massive in size compared to what came before. Things like Crystalis and such could have never existed on many of the older systems. I would say anything retro, would have to be 5200 and older. Though in all honesty, most of those old systems I would realy like to see (and play) atleast once in my life.

Cmosfm

04-27-2005, 10:25 AM

briguy578

04-27-2005, 10:50 AM

There seems to be two different camps emerging here, the "20 year old systems" camp and the "two generations old" camp.

I'm going to have to go with the "two generations old" group. Genesis / Gamegear / SNES / Turbografix-16 / Gameboy Color are therefore all retro systems.

PS One, N64 and Saturn will all become retro when the PS3 and Super Gamecube come out.

Like I said, though, there seem to be diverging opinions here, so take your pick as to which definition suits you best.

8-Bit Master

04-27-2005, 11:38 AM

I'm going to agree with Dr. Morbis and say when a system has another generation between itself and the current one, it is retro. Some systems however blur the line, such as the Jaguar, 3DO, Cd-i, etc.....

I don't really consider them retro quite yet, mostly SNES and older stuff.

imanerd0011

04-27-2005, 02:18 PM

I personally consider NES/SMS retro, and everything before it. I think when a system has been out of production for 10 years it is definatley retro. SNES/Genesis still got a few more years to go.

Zombiezilla

04-27-2005, 02:40 PM

The only two systems I own are Intellivision and NES. So...I guess I am pretty much NOT modern???

I think anything before the NES though, as that was what revitalized the market, and there was a dead period before that. The pheonix rising...so to speak...is what the NES was.

I do have some MAME stuff though...

Mythik

04-27-2005, 02:49 PM

nes and before -- retro (although I havent ever really played anything from before nes :embarrassed:

shoes23

04-30-2005, 01:00 AM

When Hot Topic makes a shirt of it and tells me its cool! LOL

legov8

04-30-2005, 09:40 AM

For me it's this: If it's not a current system, it's retro.

bargora

04-30-2005, 11:22 PM

And so this topic demonstrates that there are two types of people: Those who can divide things into only two categories, and those who can split them up into three or more.

tylerwillis

05-01-2005, 12:17 AM

Retro is 8 bit generation and before. Old school is anything that isn't being currently produced.

Rikimaru

05-01-2005, 03:08 AM

You crazy kids and your videogames!

FlufflePuff

05-01-2005, 05:13 PM

I classify systems that are two console generations removed from the current one retro. The catch is that the system can't have any current systems that are backwards compatible with it. So, if they PS3 is backwards compatible with the PS1, then it won't be retro. If it isn't, then the PS4s emergence will make the PS1 retro. On the flip side, the Gamecube's release made the SNES retro.

crazyjackcsa

05-01-2005, 05:25 PM

Retro is just a word, like "punk" for instance, but as a general term, but me in the two generations old. Where does "old school " and "cult" lie?

ozyr

05-01-2005, 05:50 PM

Found on the net...

-----
Retro is a contemporary term used to describe things from a bygone era. It is often used in a positive sense, referring to quirky or attractive products that are no longer available. For example, "Retro fashion" or "Retro Chic" may consist of outdated styles, such as tie-dyed shirts from the 1970s, or poodle skirts from the 1950s. A love of retro objects (things from the past) is called retrophilia.

Retro, both in popular and in legitimized culture, can be seen as an uncritical exaltation of the past, used as a weapon against contemporary cultural forms. Retro is uncritical because it sees itself as a return to a lost authenticity, to basic values which somehow have been corrupted by later evolutions.

A critical attitude towards both the legitimate and the non-legitimate would then be what is called camp. Camp is an ironical attitude, an explicit re-introduction of non-dominant forms. It claims legitimacy, but instead of aiming at timelessness, it wants to live only a short life. It does not want to present basic values, but precisely to confront culture with its waste, to show how any norm is historical.

An example of Retro computing is the IBM 1130 computing system from 1966 which still has a following of interested users, albeit mostly via a simulator rather than the real thing.
----

Now, going by this, I would have to agree with the folks here who have put up the 20 year old rule. Anything newer than that just wouldn't fit into the meaning of Retro. It may be old, but if it isn't 20 years old, it just hasn't aged enough! :D

That's my 2.5 bits...[/quote]

fultonbot

03-06-2016, 03:20 PM

I know this topic is waaaay old but I thought I'd weigh-in because I was mulling this over this morning.
In my mind, it takes 20 years for a console to be retro. I have no basis for saying this other than, in my head, nostalgia takes about 20 years to bubble-up.
Specifically, this morning I was thinking to buying a PS1 20 years ago and realizing that it's now a retro platform.

WCP

03-06-2016, 07:26 PM

In my mind, it takes 20 years for a console to be retro.

20 years seems like a good benchmark. Only thing is, I can remember back in 2003, when I first got the retro game bug, and started playing the Super Nintendo and Genesis again. I thought those systems were "retro" even though the Super Nintendo was only 13 years old by then. Maybe it was because even though it was only a mere 13 years, it had been several generations, and generations with dramatic technological shifts. Comparing a Super Nintendo game to the most advanced Xbox game in 2003, was a gigantic difference in technology.

The Dreamcast is currently 17 years old, yet it doesn't feel as retro to me right now, as the SNES did back in 2003.

I think maybe the technological leaps between whatever generation you're considering and the current modern day generation, is a huge factor.

Tanooki

03-06-2016, 08:55 PM

Good point I think it is the tech and outward appearance of the game to the screen more than just a year as a year is just a number.

N64/PS1 are 3D, but so is the Dreamcast, but a well made DC game looks damn near in quality to some early PS2 era stuff, and still looks fine enough not to feel retro outwardly but the N64/PS1 they look downright retro as all get out, much like the old polygonal blocky arcade stuff of the 80s like I Robot or something. Gameboy looks and feels retro, but in some ways Gameboy Advance while it is, doesn't, given that the new wave of tech out there seems to lean towards GBA level output quality in colors and graphics on tablets and phones. It's a blurry mess really.

retro junkie

03-06-2016, 10:30 PM

When you talk about age, like for example 20 years, to me, you are referring to...... antiques. When I think of retro, it is anything not currently having games produced. I have to hunt for games, which is part of the fun. Anything not mainstream, it's yesterday. It is not about age. It is in finding fun in something that everyone is wondering, why are you playing that? Your response is, it was fun then and it is still fun now. It is not what the "in crowd" is playing, because they traded that thing off a long time ago. The company that built it cannot make money off of it any more, because everything is used. You are concerned so you purchase more than one console, so if it dies, you push it aside, pull the second one out, and continue playing. You have to rebuild the controller. :mad: To me, previous video gaming generations are falling under the heading of "retro."

celerystalker

03-06-2016, 10:59 PM

It's such a difficult thing to define because it's so subjective. The longer you live, you perceive time differently. You change less on a personal level developmentally, which causes time to have fewer clear signposts along the way. If you're in your 30s or 40s now, 2002 probably feels like it was just yesterday. If you're 21, it was forever ago. I generally go by a rule of 2 generations back or ten years roughly, but it's not exactly a great definition.

Berserker

03-07-2016, 12:24 AM

When artifacts imposed by technological limitations of the time emerge as aesthetically identifiable elements.

fultonbot

03-07-2016, 08:15 AM

anything not currently having games produced. I have to hunt for games, which is part of the fun. Anything not mainstream, it's yesterday. It is not about age. It is in finding fun in something that everyone is wondering, why are you playing that?

Yeah, that's a good summary. The "20 year" thing is something my own head fabricates.
So to you, "retro" is more of a "state of being". Like back in the late 80's there were no shops around me that sold Atari ST games, so I have to drive hours to buy anything, It was fun to go on those adventures. In some ways, that was "retro" even though the system was still being built. Atari really died in 1984, and this was only three years later, yet my love for the Atari brand was more about nostalgia than technology. I will have to think about that, but I understand the point of view.

Tanooki

03-07-2016, 12:18 PM

The Atari love is real, people still dig it, flashbacks up to 6.0 are proof of that as they sell quite well to keep supporting the revisions. The only one I ever had was the 2.0 that could have been modded to take a 2600 cart if the parts and skills were there. Back then I couldn't do it, now probably I could, but I'm so OCD about things being ugly I know i could never nicely cut a hole in the top to slot the game into it. :)

WelcomeToTheNextLevel

07-08-2019, 07:41 PM

I would tend to agree with the "two generations" rule, well two generations from whatever generation is most popular at the moment. For instance, the Xbox One / PS4 / Wii U came out around 2013 but it took until 2014-2015 for them to become more popular than the generation before.

Of course, there's considerable console-console variation, for instance the Dreamcast and PS2 are both two generations ago right now but the Dreamcast has been retro for quite some time due to its early demise while PS2 just became retro recently.