What is the definition of 'retro' to you?

[Arklem]

Stuff these days take so long to come out anyway that it feels surreal to call the PS3 retro, but it's almost 20 years old by this point, i think it's retro enough now...

 

[jankusanagi jankusanagi]

No.
Not in my opinion. Anything with HDMI and Bluetooth controllers will never be "retro" in my eyes

Oh, when videogames are all holographic, with no cables and no controllers, you'll call this "retro", I'm sure

 

[Clippy]

Furthermore, given the current state of AAA gaming, I'm willing to call "retro" anything from 10 years ago and older, sliding scale. This close to calling the PS4 retro too.

That would make The Witcher 3 retro. Can't wait to see it in the repo.

 

[Miles Miles]

When most people think of retro games they think of the 3rd and 4th gen consoles, not the 7th gen consoles. I don't think the 20 years old is retro rule works anymore because gaming is now changing too slowly.

 

[Deleted member 560402]

is FFXIII trilogy considered to be retro now? I guess so. I mean we're on FFXVI now so yeah. lol

 

[nathman]

It's older than Halo Reach. Yes it is retro.

 

[UnDubious]

It's two console generations ago, games still came on physical disks that you could play without an internet connection. Yes it is retro.
Furthermore, given the current state of AAA gaming, I'm willing to call "retro" anything from 10 years ago and older, sliding scale. This close to calling the PS4 retro too.

PS4 games are literally still coming out, so this makes no sense. Normal commercial games, not fan projects or tiny indies.

 

[Deleted member 560402]

PS4 games are literally still coming out, so this makes no sense. Normal commercial games, not fan projects or tiny indies.

PS4 games are still coming out because not enough people bought PS5. :p

 

[Deleted member 259254]

no because I'm still living in 2008

 

[Don Patch]

It's only really retro when career ebay'ers feel the need to charge 150% more for it and label it "Retro gaming".
They're the real authorities...

 

[job32]

It will be retro when there is an emulator that you can play the games flawlessly on your phone

 

[MasterEn]

can ps3 and xbox 360 counted as retro consoles nowadays?

i'd say that a game system is retro when you can no longer purchase the games at standard retail stores, like walmart, target or gamestop or from the companies digital store fronts, like the e-shop for the wii-u and 3ds, vita and psp; and the only way to purchase or obtain copies of the game are from second hand stores or from the 7 seas as i have the internet being referred to on occasion in a few youtube videos that i've watched.
if the ps3 and 360 don't fit into the first category, then yes, they are retro.

 

[snes9x]

Probably. Feels weird as hell to say but yeah. PS3/Wii launched 19 years ago and the Xbox 360 turns 20 this year. And that gen is a hard break from the past in many ways: HD graphics, game budget inflation, emphasis in online gaming, huge open worlds, motion controls, digital storefronts, DLC. It feels like the HD gen set the stage for the following generations to come. So even when we get to 2033 it's still gonna be hard to accept the PS4 is retro when we're just living the shadow of HD. Like, changed is coming so incrementally that we're stuck in a long sense of "presentenss" with these newer consoles.

 

[Deleted member 58254]

No.
Not in my opinion. Anything with HDMI and Bluetooth controllers will never be "retro" in my eyes

That's honestly a good rule for what to consider retro

 

[Sumea]

That's honestly a good rule for what to consider retro

So, if I used a wired a USB wired Saturn controller on my PS3, it is now stopped being retro?
Is Xbox 360 retro, but PS3 is not retro because earliest Xbox 360 models do not have HDMI and none of them have Bluetooth controllers, specifically?
Does Wii stop being retro if you install a HDMI kit into it? How retro is Wii with just bluetooth controllers? Even though it is still from the same generation when it comes to time and support. Wii games were released up to 2015 still. Then again, SNES was very much considered retro in 200X when last official release was very fresh for that too, in 2002 Japan only.
This rule is very poor, and this rule will make it so PS3 is considered never retro. But Xbox 360 is already retro. Wii is like 50% Retro? What a sensible logical rule indeed. With this rule, one device is not retro, one, device is fully retro, and one device is maybe retro, and those are in that order PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii, even though they all share the same generation.

 

[Deleted member 58254]

So, if I used a wired a USB wired Saturn controller on my PS3, it is now stopped being retro?
Is Xbox 360 retro, but PS3 is not retro because earliest Xbox 360 models do not have HDMI and none of them have Bluetooth controllers, specifically?
Does Wii stop being retro if you install a HDMI kit into it? How retro is Wii with just bluetooth controllers? Even though it is still from the same generation when it comes to time and support. Wii games were released up to 2015 still. Then again, SNES was very much considered retro in 200X when last official release was very fresh for that too, in 2002 Japan only.
This rule is very poor, and this rule will make it so PS3 is considered never retro. But Xbox 360 is already retro. Wii is like 50% Retro? What a sensible logical rule indeed. With this rule, one device is not retro, one, device is fully retro, and one device is maybe retro, and those are in that order PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii, even though they all share the same generation.

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

 

[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".

 

[Deleted member 3099]

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.

 

[Deleted member 560402]

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.