is ps3 retro?

[Sumea]

I was not aware Xbox 360 didn't start with hdmi

Or that it's controllers, none of them, are bluetooth. Wireless yes, but not bluetooth. On this technicality Wii is less retro than a launch xbox 360.

Also, Xbox 360 was HD from the launch, just it was Component video only, which was not an universal standard around the globe making it's HD transition thing harder for rest of the world before the HDMI models came out. Just pointing out, the rule is somewhat poor.
And if we go "well, wireless controllers instead of bluetooth" we need to start looking at what was offered and discount even atari 2600 from fully retro zone because types of wireless controllers with more than less same tech xbox 360 used have been around for long while.

This is why I advocate more for time and vibes as a judge on the retro. I also already agree why PS3 and Xbox 360 to extent do not pass the vibe test, as others say their similarity to current gen is almost uncanny. Given that in 2000's, that less-than 20 years was NES->SNES->N64-GameCube, no wonder it did not take that long back then to see SNES as "old and quaint".

 

[RanmyakuIchi's icon RanmyakuIchi RanmyakuIchi]

I mentally tend to consider game made before I was a teen to be retro, so it's a bit odd when I think of the PS3 being retro now. It is though, it most certainly is.

 

[Fray Guillermo]

Anything with HDMI and Bluetooth controllers will never be "retro" in my eyes

Never thought about it like this but it makes total sense

 

[Tonberry]

To me it's got nothing to do with years, and more to do with technological leaps.

I used to say that Retro is everything before HDMI became the norm, and that there hasn't been an advancement like it since, but someone also pointed out that they consider something Retro when you can play the games just by inserting a disc, without regards to things like firmware or internet connections, and I kind of like that angle aswell, though it generally pertains to the same generation of hardware.

If a new resolution/video format were to replace HD (4K doesn't count because it's still just a form HD) resolutions, or if we reach a point where the vast majority of new systems of a given generation would be digital-only, then I'd probably change my stance. Something to that effect.

 

[Xeno]

no because I'm still living in 2008

This is the way to go.

 

[Sumea]

Never thought about it like this but it makes total sense

Again, if you think like this and it makes total sense, then Xbox 360 is retro, PS3 is not retro, and Wii is 50% retro. It actually does not make sense.
Like, if I go out and find a launch xbox 360 I have a 100% retro console but if I find most common xbox 360 models out there I have a 50% retro console because it has HDMI but it does not have bluetooth controllers. Funny enough, this also applies to half of xbox one's lifespan, because it also did not and still doesn't have bluetooth controllers, so it has only HDMI making xbox one more retro than PS3.
I mean, we could have used "Wireless controllers" but wireless controllers were already officially or inofficially available accessories from GameCube and down in generations.
I will keep pointing out the most absurd edge cases where this specific line makes no sense what so ever.

 

[Segadude113]

I was not aware Xbox 360 didn't start with hdmi

The OG XBOX had the ability to play DVDs but wouldn't let you until you purchased a separate remote controller that used a wireless sensor you plugged into the 1st controller port.

 

[Sumea]

To me it's got nothing to do with years, and more to do with technological leaps.

I used to say that Retro is everything before HDMI became the norm, and that there hasn't been an advancement like it since, but someone also pointed out that they consider something Retro when you can play the games just by inserting a disc, without regards to things like firmware or internet connections, and I kind of like that angle aswell, though it generally pertains to the same generation of hardware.

If a new resolution/video format were to replace HD (4K doesn't count because it's still just a form HD) resolutions, or if we reach a point where the vast majority of new systems of a given generation would be digital-only, then I'd probably change my stance. Something to that effect.

This also, for first half is just the vibes that I can agree and different people can have different vibe, as well as almost a stop in technological progress compared to what 80's to 2000's was like.

The thing about video resolutions does not make sense. "2160p does not count because it is just a form of HD." Well what else are we going to have? You do know under the hood 4K 60 and other upgrades to these "just a form of HD" actually need now HDMI 2.1 cables that have additional pins. We just have made a standard that has stuck and will likely stick a long time. If we applied this logic to composite video, then nothing would be considered retro from 50's to 2010 when HDMI connected TV's were finally common. Never mind that for many first years of PS3 and Xbox 360, most people still used same Composite output from their console with their SD Analog tube TV's. PS3 age was the transition to HD age, not a slam dunk adaptation of it. PS4 is the first console to not have the option of older standard and HDMI, 720p and compatible screen is a must while Xbox 360 and PS3 can be still plugged to old TV's from composite to RGB or even component if that half way there is OK for you. RGB scart also in europe and Xbox 360 even has a VGA Output option cable. Very dreamcast of that device. This all also before we remember or learn for the first time that Tube TV's also had two resolutions with video games, depending on your locale but for simplification sake NTSC 240"p" lines or 480i lines, some had 480p even, or sidegrade like Dreamcast VGA compatibility or whatever else went on with PC's and high resolutions of late game VGA monitors. From NES to end of PS1 240 was most common resolution, and for one generation 480i was the most common resolution, and then we got 720p or even occasionally 1080p rendered thing or two. Though so did xbox and PS2. So, is PS2 not retro because few things on it are in HD? is Xbox not retro because it also did HD? They did not do it through HDMI but they definitely had it with asterixes. This in mind, the leap from commonality of 720p to commonality of resolututions between 1080p and 2160p because it in console or even PC terms is almost never actually 2160p, we have leaped way harder in image definition than we did for first 30 years of gaming, and all that on cable that would have in the end 50+ years of use. The likelihood that HDMI will too if they keep upgrading just the signaling between devices and not the cable itself substatially, will make this rule, also, silly, since we will be using "just" a form of HD for foreseeable decades to come, and for that denying notion of retro from any tech that old.

What we consider is arbitrary but some people have very weird arbitrary look on things that I am now a dedicated villain of poking holes at here.

 

[Tonberry]

This also, for first half is just the vibes that I can agree and different people can have different vibe, as well as almost a stop in technological progress compared to what 80's to 2000's was like.

The thing about video resolutions does not make sense. "2160p does not count because it is just a form of HD." Well what else are we going to have? You do know under the hood 4K 60 and other upgrades to these "just a form of HD" actually need now HDMI 2.1 cables that have additional pins. We just have made a standard that has stuck and will likely stick a long time. If we applied this logic to composite video, then nothing would be considered retro from 50's to 2010 when HDMI connected TV's were finally common. Never mind that for many first years of PS3 and Xbox 360, most people still used same Composite output from their console with their SD Analog tube TV's. PS3 age was the transition to HD age, not a slam dunk adaptation of it. PS4 is the first console to not have the option of older standard and HDMI, 720p and compatible screen is a must while Xbox 360 and PS3 can be still plugged to old TV's from composite to RGB or even component if that half way there is OK for you. RGB scart also in europe and Xbox 360 even has a VGA Output option cable. Very dreamcast of that device. This all also before we remember or learn for the first time that Tube TV's also had two resolutions with video games, depending on your locale but for simplification sake NTSC 240"p" lines or 480i lines, some had 480p even, or sidegrade like Dreamcast VGA compatibility or whatever else went on with PC's and high resolutions of late game VGA monitors. From NES to end of PS1 240 was most common resolution, and for one generation 480i was the most common resolution, and then we got 720p or even occasionally 1080p rendered thing or two. Though so did xbox and PS2. So, is PS2 not retro because few things on it are in HD? is Xbox not retro because it also did HD? They did not do it through HDMI but they definitely had it with asterixes. This in mind, the leap from commonality of 720p to commonality of resolututions between 1080p and 2160p because it in console or even PC terms is almost never actually 2160p, we have leaped way harder in image definition than we did for first 30 years of gaming, and all that on cable that would have in the end 50+ years of use. The likelihood that HDMI will too if they keep upgrading just the signaling between devices and not the cable itself substatially, will make this rule, also, silly, since we will be using "just" a form of HD for foreseeable decades to come, and for that denying notion of retro from any tech that old.

What we consider is arbitrary but some people have very weird arbitrary look on things that I am now a dedicated villain of poking holes at here.

Of course it's arbitrary. That's like the entire point of the "what is retro to you" discussion.
It was also just a hypothethical scenario in which I might change my already arbitrary stance. I don't put much stock in it or whatever.

 

[Sumea]

Of course it's arbitrary. That's like the entire point of the "what is retro to you" discussion.
It was also just a hypothethical scenario in which I might change my already arbitrary stance. I don't put much stock in it or whatever.

Well, yeah, but I like it with some logic to it.
I dunno does that decade or so make a huge difference also between boomer gamers and zoomer gamers. Like I said, we definitely thought of NES and SNES as retro machines in 2000's, but they were not that old at that point, but then again, so weren't I.
Like, in another universe if VR gaming would have actually become the leading norm in gaming, in that case normal screen gaming would look quaint in comparison. But to me, time, should definitely have a sway in it. Arbitrarily extending something's status as modern without solid logic rubs off bit weird to me, like "4K is just a form of HD" when it is a quantum leap from the 720p generation compared to the 240p to 720p jump.

My point should have been stated "There is an element of arbitrary to this that should still have solid foundation on some material logic, Time, progress, technology leaps, lack of them"
The most common one that I have not alone stated few times, is that from PS3 onward, gaming has been... Very samey, progress feels almost nonexistent, heck, PS5 age almost felt like going backwards in technological standards. More hardware for less visual quality. People even dig out images of PS3 generation games, usually the PC versions showing how sharp and thus better looking everything was in comparison to now. The worrying trend how stuff has not just really moved forward in same way stuff used to move for past 15 years.

 

[Tonberry]

Like I said, we definitely thought of NES and SNES as retro machines in 2000's, but they were not that old at that point, but then again, so weren't I.

The most common one that I have not alone stated few times, is that from PS3 onward, gaming has been... Very samey, progress feels almost nonexistent, heck, PS5 age almost felt like going backwards in technological standards. More hardware for less visual quality.

This is true.
I'm kind of of the opinion that gaming from the PS3/360 era seems to have plateaued technologically compared to the advancements made in the early 90s. Kind of like diminishing returns in retro-ness, in a way.

 

[NachoChi]

I believe that next year both PS3 and 360 will be considered retro. If I can buy it a beer, then they're of age. Can't really go by the fact that "if I can emulate it then it's retro" since Shad is making really good progress. I wouldn't put that label on the PS4.

 

[nathman]

This also, for first half is just the vibes that I can agree and different people can have different vibe, as well as almost a stop in technological progress compared to what 80's to 2000's was like.

The thing about video resolutions does not make sense. "2160p does not count because it is just a form of HD." Well what else are we going to have? You do know under the hood 4K 60 and other upgrades to these "just a form of HD" actually need now HDMI 2.1 cables that have additional pins. We just have made a standard that has stuck and will likely stick a long time. If we applied this logic to composite video, then nothing would be considered retro from 50's to 2010 when HDMI connected TV's were finally common. Never mind that for many first years of PS3 and Xbox 360, most people still used same Composite output from their console with their SD Analog tube TV's. PS3 age was the transition to HD age, not a slam dunk adaptation of it. PS4 is the first console to not have the option of older standard and HDMI, 720p and compatible screen is a must while Xbox 360 and PS3 can be still plugged to old TV's from composite to RGB or even component if that half way there is OK for you. RGB scart also in europe and Xbox 360 even has a VGA Output option cable. Very dreamcast of that device. This all also before we remember or learn for the first time that Tube TV's also had two resolutions with video games, depending on your locale but for simplification sake NTSC 240"p" lines or 480i lines, some had 480p even, or sidegrade like Dreamcast VGA compatibility or whatever else went on with PC's and high resolutions of late game VGA monitors. From NES to end of PS1 240 was most common resolution, and for one generation 480i was the most common resolution, and then we got 720p or even occasionally 1080p rendered thing or two. Though so did xbox and PS2. So, is PS2 not retro because few things on it are in HD? is Xbox not retro because it also did HD? They did not do it through HDMI but they definitely had it with asterixes. This in mind, the leap from commonality of 720p to commonality of resolututions between 1080p and 2160p because it in console or even PC terms is almost never actually 2160p, we have leaped way harder in image definition than we did for first 30 years of gaming, and all that on cable that would have in the end 50+ years of use. The likelihood that HDMI will too if they keep upgrading just the signaling between devices and not the cable itself substatially, will make this rule, also, silly, since we will be using "just" a form of HD for foreseeable decades to come, and for that denying notion of retro from any tech that old.

What we consider is arbitrary but some people have very weird arbitrary look on things that I am now a dedicated villain of poking holes at here.

It does ask a good question about law of diminishing returns when it comes to advancements in tech. From 1990 to 2000, there was a massive jump in computation & that's reflected in the games between the 2 periods; if you compared, say, Super Mario Kart on the SNES & Gran Turismo 3 on the PS2, there is a massive jump in pretty much every aspect of the game. But 2000 to 2010? There are still big advancements, but it's not as massive as the decade before. 2010 to 2020 is even less & 2020 to 2030 looks like it'll be next to nothing.

But I do agree with you for that reason. Things can be ahead of their time and still be retro. The PS2 supported HD (albeit, 1080i) but it is undeniably a retro console nowadays. Instead, I like to determine if something is retro based on it being older than Halo Reach. I think that's a good marker.

 

[Sumea]

I believe that next year both PS3 and 360 will be considered retro. If I can buy it a beer, then they're of age. Can't really go by the fact that "if I can emulate it then it's retro" since Shad is making really good progress. I wouldn't put that label on the PS4.

Yeah. System having emulators even during their generation is as old of a concept as a PS1. Or GBA. Or DS. Or Wii. Or N64. Or Switch. Or...

 

[bigstinkie]

i think the netzors is the key to the pudding
yes the dreamcast could engage in cheeseburger related activities as could the playstation 2 and so on
but the playstation 3 generation is when the new normal was normalised (downloading games off the net, games receiving day one updates to function properly, downloadable content and so on)
so for me the final straw that shucks the camels back is the ps2/xbox/gamecube

 

[Sumea]

i think the netzors is the key to the pudding
yes the dreamcast could engage in cheeseburger related activities as could the playstation 2 and so on
but the playstation 3 generation is when the new normal was normalised (downloading games off the net, games receiving day one updates to function properly, downloadable content and so on)
so for me the final straw that shucks the camels back is the ps2/xbox/gamecube

Some of those I agree. PS2 actually had at least digital game distribution in Japan only with square's own system that was used mainly for Final Fantasy XI. Stuff like dirge of cerberus could be purchased and downloaded digitally. Rest what you say is correct but I think Day 1 patches are far more common thing from PS4 era. Patches and a lot of them at times, even console live service gaming especially in some genres like FPS and fighting games, but most of the time game launched and worked out of the disc. Day 1 DLC and on disc DLC started happening with PS3's later years but outright no game on disc, nothing or game not fully playable in some manner without a patch on the launch day I cannot remember one instance of on PS3, I would give that honorary medal to PS4 and it's compatriots. Of course, also, game downloading and patch downloading was a major A pain hole on PS4 compared to Xbox 360 and later machines. Wii at least could live happy life in happy past for that generation that is fine, though Wii U also enjoyed it's share of not really doing stuff like the others.

Another gradual evolution on PS360 generation was games moving from disc to the hard drive. Xbox 360 definitely did it best, where only few select games require an install, GTA V is only one I can name, if not only one full stop, but for PS3 it started with optional installs, throw in whatever MGS4 enforced, to almost every disc being almost fully installed onto the hard drive. Being able to play any PS3 game entirely from the disc without any mandatory install is weird. PS4 at least and it's compatriots do mandatory installs on system level and hidden, where the game can be usually launched right away but it is installing itself during that time, or making you even wait for a long while before it is playable, 2 disc PS4 games especially.

 

[Xdqwerty Xdqwerty]

Not yet, not yet

 

[Tonberry]

Not yet, not yet

...Is this a Tintin reference?

 

[Xdqwerty Xdqwerty]

...Is this a Tintin reference?

Wait, it is?

 

[bigstinkie]

Some of those I agree. PS2 actually had at least digital game distribution in Japan only with square's own system that was used mainly for Final Fantasy XI. Stuff like dirge of cerberus could be purchased and downloaded digitally. Rest what you say is correct but I think Day 1 patches are far more common thing from PS4 era. Patches and a lot of them at times, even console live service gaming especially in some genres like FPS and fighting games, but most of the time game launched and worked out of the disc. Day 1 DLC and on disc DLC started happening with PS3's later years but outright no game on disc, nothing or game not fully playable in some manner without a patch on the launch day I cannot remember one instance of on PS3, I would give that honorary medal to PS4 and it's compatriots. Of course, also, game downloading and patch downloading was a major A pain hole on PS4 compared to Xbox 360 and later machines. Wii at least could live happy life in happy past for that generation that is fine, though Wii U also enjoyed it's share of not really doing stuff like the others.

Another gradual evolution on PS360 generation was games moving from disc to the hard drive. Xbox 360 definitely did it best, where only few select games require an install, GTA V is only one I can name, if not only one full stop, but for PS3 it started with optional installs, throw in whatever MGS4 enforced, to almost every disc being almost fully installed onto the hard drive. Being able to play any PS3 game entirely from the disc without any mandatory install is weird. PS4 at least and it's compatriots do mandatory installs on system level and hidden, where the game can be usually launched right away but it is installing itself during that time, or making you even wait for a long while before it is playable, 2 disc PS4 games especially.

yes that is why i mentioned the natural lives of cheeseburgers and additionally the phrase normalised
i do not think a lot of those internet stuffs were normalised until that playstation 3 generation even if as early as the dreamcast console games were receiving the lettuce and tomatos

 

[Tonberry]

Wait, it is?

Everytime I read "Not yet, not yet" I'm reminded of the trailer for the Tintin movie, because it ends on that quote lol.

 

[Sumea]

Everytime I read "Not yet, not yet" I'm reminded of the trailer for the Tintin movie, because it ends on that quote lol.

 

[Tonberry]

View attachment 79450

(Nobody saw me swap my first pic out with a marginally funnier one)

 

[Kamako]

I met a 17 year old fella the other day who overheard a friend and I discussing the PS2 library and interjected to say "Ha! PS2? I've never even seen one of those before"

 

[Tonberry]

I met a 17 year old fella the other day who overheard a friend and I discussing the PS2 library and interjected to say "Ha! PS2? I've never even seen one of those before"