What is the definition of 'retro' to you?

[Badseed Badseed]

This is retro...

 

[AngelsOrDemons]

So what does everyone consider the cut off for "retro" to be? Like age based so anything older than 15 years = retro, by game generation so like up through the 4th gen etc or by a specific system like retro ended with ps1 or 2. And then what about things like the GBA that looks like something from late 80s/early90s but came out in 2000s.

What truly is "retro" in your opinion and why?

 

[IyoTheHelpfulWolf]

I'd say 15-20 years is a good general guideline, as it follows the cycle of current>obsolete>revived.

The current era of gaming, typically marked by new console releases as most popular games are made for consoles first, draws attention away from the last era, as people look forward to the new thing and want to leave behind the hindrances and annoyances of the old paradigm.

But, after about 15-20 years, appreciation for the abandoned era becomes cool again, as people are able to appreciate it with hindsight they didn't have during or shortly after the trends of that era were current. The Xbox 360, for example, is over 20 years old and 2 console generations behind. Plenty of time for the people who grew up with it to become nostalgic and have the hindsight to distinguish it from eras afterward, and for younger gaming enthusiasts to gain an appreciation for it as this cool retro thing.

 

[jon2]

Concur, 15-20 years ago is retro gaming, cuz that's enough for a kid to grow into adulthood...

 

[Stingy Perry Stingy Perry]

Probably at least fifteen years ago. The era before patches, DLCs, micro transactions and gacha.

 

[Pearly]

Anything older than 10-15 years old when it comes to games can be considered retro, as the console cycles were so short and the jump in technology from the ps3 era and going back into the past from there is very apparent as the technology upgraded through the years, it's going to be difficult with determining games as retro from about 2015 though as the technology has reached a limit of returns on upgrading technology. Diminishing returns hit video games like a truck. We get faster load time now and most of the higher end graphics cards actually make games look a little worse these days. RE 9 looked worse on max setting with all the bells and whistles on an Nvidia RTX 5090 turned on compared to a vanilla ps5, the rain made everything look like it was covered in gel instead of just looking wet.

Basically, I think it's going to be odd to call anything retro in the typical since from after the release of the ps4 era. Escicllay since retro now seems to be shorthand for old games, like the ps2 era backwards with specific reference lately to 16bit and 32bit era games.

I think it's going to end up like movies, you can tell what decade a game if from in a few ways and that will be the metric for it, and like movies some games will become timeless in any case so it being retro doesn't really apply.

I don't like using the term retro myself as most things I've liked across my life have been high quality enough from release that they stand the test of time, if it's good, it's good, I don't care when it's from or even if I grew up with it.

 

[Deleted member 14682]

So what does everyone consider the cut off for "retro" to be? Like age based so anything older than 15 years = retro, by game generation so like up through the 4th gen etc or by a specific system like retro ended with ps1 or 2. And then what about things like the GBA that looks like something from late 80s/early90s but came out in 2000s.

What truly is "retro" in your opinion and why?

Kind of hard to quantify because even going off this standard

Probably at least fifteen years ago. The era before patches, DLCs, micro transactions and gacha.

You're talking about something that many studios, independent and otherwise are still trying to emulate/commit themselves to morally/business wise. Perhaps even more so than in the past when the technology wasn't always available to do such things and it now requires a direct commitment towards. Basically, it's a state of mind. Do you make something that is affordable, playable, enjoyable, and actually deserving of people's time? Or, are you a glorified con artist trying to pass off vaporware and half baked promises buried underneath DRM riveted market places and compromised reviewers in an effort to cheat people out of their money. Somewhere in between? Anyway, an actual demarcation for what people consider retro games shouldn't be at point of time before now but a date by which technologies established the markets and realities of their era. So between 1980-2009.

 

[Spiral1407]

I don't think it should be an age thing, since console generations have become longer since the 7th gen and the leaps in graphical fidelity have slowed significantly since the 8th gen. For me, you'd have to look at what was being released at the time compared to now and see whether its is outdated in any way. So for example, the early 7th gen would be retro, but the late 7th gen (so some time around 2010) is modern.

 

[SpcDaicon SpcDaicon]

I still use the 2D pixel art and polygonal 3D as the threshold for retro gaming, so around the transition from 4th to 5th console gen. We did have 3D games on the 4th gen but it was just a handfull of games way too late. I consider the 7th gen the start of the modern era of gaming.

I not really sure about the 5th and the 6th tho. They are way different from the 4th but lack a lot of features that the 7th gen onwards have.

The only thing we can be sure is: as long time flows, everything will become reto eventually

 

[Deleted member 14682]

So, you've an issue of technical specification, philosophy, and just simple statement of fact regarding chronological dating. Which, do you prefer?

What is the best way to determine if something is retro - StrawPoll

What is your opinion? Vote now: Technical classification by age, Philosphy of design inherent to a period of time, Technical range of specifications based upon a specific window of t

strawpoll.com

 

[What's His Face]

If the game doesn't revolve around the physical usage of carved stone & bone pieces, then it's not retro to me.

 

[GundamJehutyKai]

I go by rough console generations but with a caveat. Usually, I say 2 generations behind would be retro but if games are still being released for the platform, then it isn't retro.

So if the PS6 was released next month, the PS4 wouldn't be retro as we're still getting new releases for it (even if they are mostly played on PS5 now)

 

[PhrawzT]

20 years, nothing after the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube era.

 

[AngelsOrDemons]

I still use the 2D pixel art and polygonal 3D as the threshold for retro gaming, so around the transition from 4th to 5th console gen

But then what about the GBA or DS that is all 2d pixel art but past 4th / 5th gen?

And yeah I hadn't even thought about "modern" retro games. Like if its made in 2026 but uses GameBoy restrictions, is it "retro?" That one seems to fit more into "retro revival." Like if an old painting style is later revived.

I'd say 15-20 years is a good general guideline, as it follows the cycle of current>obsolete>revived.

This makes sense as well, and you could compare it to cars. A car becomes "antique" or "collectible" in a similar way.

So it seems overall its more based on nostalgia (i.e. what you personally grew up with) so like the SNES could be "modern" to someone who grew up with Atari etc.

Deep stuff....

 

[Sheepy765]

I wouldn’t say I have a definitive cut-off for retro games. But If i had to make one I’d say games from 10 or upwards years ago maybe…?

 

[YoshifreakZX]

The 6th generation for sure. Once gaming started to go digital, that's when the modern era for gaming started, and that began with the Xbox 360, PS3 and the Wii.

 

[AngelsOrDemons]

yeah the digital downloads, internet multiplayer and all that was definitely a major change. Downloading a game and playing random strangers from across the world is way diff than physically plugging in Mario Kart 64 and 4 controllers and playing with mates sitting next to you on the couch.

For sure makes shit talking more direct and effective

 

[Snipo]

For me the cut-off is definitely at the PS2, however I think a case could also be made for the ds, especially pre-dsi, it still has that retro feel. I know that the 7th gen is already over 20 Years old, however I can't really view it as retro, maybe it's starting to enter that era.

 

[Kovlak]

It's not a popular opinion, but retro for me, personally, is everything not current gen. I don't care about how many years to be retro discussion. Especially because consoles older than current gen are at least around 10 years old.

 

[JellyjamLu]

20 years, nothing after the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube era.

Yeah same, Dreamcast to PS2, that's the cut off for me.

 

[TruxtonTatsujin]

Nothing newer than 2001. You ask me in 50 years and my answer will be the same.

 

[petran79]

Ps3, wii, xb360 were peculiar in that they mixed digital with analogue. Eg they could run on crt tvs initially till they were replaced by digital TVs in late 2000s and they relied mostly on physical media, though they also featured an eshop.
I'd consider those consoles the limit to be considered retro.

 

[runwhiteboyrun]

With the way the world moves it feels like 10 years is retro. But it isn't that much different than now, so 15-20 years is probably closer. 360/Wii/PS3 gotta be retro by now.

 

[TheJoulesThief]

The problem with using 10-15 or 15-20 year cycles as "retro" is game development is now 5+ years for all games. Like do I put Bioshock: Infinite or Last of Us into the retro category? I think its hard when there's a rerelease on to modern consoles. Additionally, I think the concept of retro is somewhat tied together with "stuck on old consoles." That doesn't mean rereleases take a game off the "retro" designation per say, but when a game hasn't been released by at least an entire generation, it becomes retro in my mind.

 

[Jeff]

So apparently, GameStop, considers Wii U to be part of the Retro category. 360 and PS3 I may understand, since they were released in 2006, but Wii U and even 3DS haven't reached the big 20 yet. But, I think Gamestop is drunk. When I think of retro, I think of 70s, 80s and 90s. And In my opinion, the term retro began around 2003, as we see NES games, Arcade games, Sega games and Atari games getting ports in collections and through emulators to modern consoles. I'm not sure how all this works seeing that games from next gen consoles get rereleaes to newer consoles whether they got an HD upgrade or improving gameplay or adding new quality of life mechanics.

What do you think? Is Wii U considered to be part of the Retro category? Or is Gamestop just confusing everyone by doing their annoying 10% off of $10 trade-in values again?