>>79 I would feel inclined to find some kind of strong distinguishing factor, like the way hardware worked, or the way game engines had to be structured, something that can tie together true retro games. Pre-64-bit processing? That would cut off between SNES and N64 The era of Atari Jaguar, PS1, so on.

>>80 It's gonna take a while for the seventh gen to be called retro, I wouldn't call Metal Gear Solid V or Halo 4 retro games.

The XBOX 360 is as old now as the SNES was when the 360 first released. Let that sink in.

They may be more than 15 years old but I would still not consider them retro. Maybe I could give leeway to the Wii as it was nothing more than a overclocked Gamecube (right down to the graphics) that happened to have motion controllers but for the PS3 and Xbox 360 it's a little more complicated. >today's controller button layouts, for lack of a better word, haven't changed too much from that gen besides having a upload button. Gyro in controllers has been a thing since PS3's Sixaxis (and you would be right to say that the layout of PS3 controllers is about the same as the PS2 and PS1's Dualshock right down to how you hold them) >they had new hardware to seperate them from their predecessors (and you would again be right to say that early PS3s had PS2 hardware to play the games, but it didn't live long as future revisions of the console eventually gutted PS2 hardware) I don't know if homebrew means anything for retro but the Wii isn't good at running PSX games the way PS3 emulates them flawlessly and to some extent PS2 games.

The Wii and it's awkward novelty control scheme are starting to feel more retro each day. Also consider its glassmorphism approach to UI which not a single device still uses nowadays, having more in common with the first iterations of the iPhone than with modern devices.

>>79 Retro is not just a time period, it refers to the aesthetic of a time period as well as products of a time period that typically fulfill the aesthetic part. 5th Gen consoles and OS's (Windows 98, making Deus Ex retro for example), retained the same audience and a multitude of aesthetic/gameplay trends from the 4th Gen. If you compare 5th Gen and 6th Gen games however, you could easily make more distinctions other than "2D to 3D." Multiple changes to older genres (FPS and beat-em-ups being the biggest), the near-extinction of other genres (2D run 'n gun, 2D action platformers such as Shinobi or Kagane), the precursors to mainstream online multiplayer services, among others.

It hasn't been mentioned but the Xbox 360 went through some revisions of its dashboard which muddies the water of retro. The first revision I would consider retro because it not only did not last long but as far as I know no modern day application has a similar design to it. It is funny that the Wii and PS3 UI hasn't changed too much when they launched.

>>106 The first one is still my favorite, the very last felt just like a desperate attempt to make an aging product marketable by imitating the newer one (xboner)

Retro is a relativistic term referring to a period of design, rather than hard and fast rules of chronology. That being said around the time games really ever get past sixth generation of consoles orthodoxy of design, which is potentially arguable for the current generation of gaming. There's a bit of a weird issue where design kinda stayed exactly there for over 2 decades

>>106 I loved the blades. MS's need to constantly redesign shit ruined that though.

I would say not until about 2025 that 7th gen would be "retro", mainly on account of it being an unusually long generation. >>105 >>113 >hurr durr muh retro feeling Fuck off with that cuckchan faggotry. This is the mentality of MY CHILDHOOD IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOUR CHILDHOOD

>>131 This nigger gets it. I don't care about your feelings, time is the only true measurement tool when it comes to what is retro and what isn't.

>>88 Liar.

>>79 It's more about the feel of the game and the techniques used than the date of release. For me, if it's 2D, it's retro. Anything rendered in 3D? That's the new stuff that they just came out with a year or two ago.

I would say up to the 5th gen. Games from the PS2 and onwards look and play much more akin to modern vidya without the jewry, with most of the hardware limitations on gameplay gone out of the way. You could show them to kids or someone who doesn't even play videogames and they'd think they look pretty cool, and get into them somewhat easily. But PS1, SNES, Genesis, Game Boy Color and maybe even some Dreamcast games? If i showed them to most people more used to modern vidya, they'd probably think they aged horribly and that they look and play like barebones tech demos of latter 2000's vidya. I'd have a hard time selling them to anyone who didn't grow up with those consoles or who isn't very patient without a "it was good for it's time" mindset. The only exception would probably be the Nintendo DS, at least compared with the PSP. I also dunno where to draw the line with PC games.

>>165 Well that settles that then.

>>79 >>132 The Dreamcast should be retro in terms of the time and date it got released, for sure. All other 6th gen consoles and up, no dice.