What is retro?

Want to air your opinions on the latest issue of Retro Gamer? Step inside...

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
kiniki
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:50 am
Location: Bristol

Post by kiniki » Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:54 am

So... to join in this debate...

Some people consider a dead console to be classed as Retro..

If thats the case, how long until the Gamecube is considered "retro enough" to be featured in the magazine?

I'm pretty sure they've stopped releasing games for it in europe? Does the fact that the Wii is backwards compatible mean that it delays the GC's 'retroness'?

User avatar
MikeHaggar
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 6:02 pm
Location: Norway
Contact:

Post by MikeHaggar » Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:59 am

Xbox is more retro than GC ;)

It only got 1 upcoming game in the US compared to the GC's 2...

User avatar
merman
Posts: 6557
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:14 pm
Location: Skegness, UK
Contact:

Post by merman » Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:28 am

kiniki wrote:So... to join in this debate...

Some people consider a dead console to be classed as Retro..

If thats the case, how long until the Gamecube is considered "retro enough" to be featured in the magazine?

I'm pretty sure they've stopped releasing games for it in europe? Does the fact that the Wii is backwards compatible mean that it delays the GC's 'retroness'?
Yes, to some extent.

I personally consider everything pre-2000 to be "retro" right now. But that doesn't mean next year I'll consider the PS2 to be retro... the commercial availability of games is just one of the factors.
merman1974 on Steam, Xbox Live, Twitter and YouTube

User avatar
kiniki
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:50 am
Location: Bristol

Post by kiniki » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:49 am

I know its some way off before you guys would probably cover it..

but it would be a really interesting piece...

I'll look forward to the future issue way way off when I get to see it!

User avatar
will2097
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:24 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire
Contact:

Post by will2097 » Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:12 pm

Errr - isn't it like the style of the game rather than when it was made?

God of War was kind of retro, Far Cry Instincts wasn't. See? Or a good old fashioned 2D Fighting game could be made in a reto style tomorrow.

NorthWay
Posts: 1640
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Grimstad, Norway

Post by NorthWay » Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:01 pm

Celebaglar wrote:For me - and this is just a personal view - Quake is a modern game that happens to be old, just as there are "retro" games which happen to be new. "Retro" has more to do with concepts than age, and it refers to concepts which are no longer prevalent or in vogue. I don't think Quake would qualify under that definition.
Very much along what I feel myself.

Quake might be "old", but it has a few facts that makes it totally un-retro for me:
It needed a beefy PC that was still years from being commonplace, thus making it more recent than its release date should say.
It was made for a HW and SW platform that is still kicking and crying on most computers today. You just install it and play.
The graphics might be simpler, but its expression is pretty much identical to your average modern game.

Personal taste:
It is an FPS. That is a marker that places most (all?) of them on the un-retro side for me.

Even more personal taste:
It is an FPS and made in an environment/age where 3D is the default and not the exception. Anything not 3D on the PC platform had to be justified not to be laughed out of the market. (Yes, management games such as Civilization were still accepted in 2D.)
When the "it must be in 3D" mentality kicked in is where I draw the line. Nothing wrong with 3D games, but the industry got tunnelvision and went like lemmings one after another down the same (pretty often) boring path. (I mean, who in their right mind tries to remake Defender in 3D??? That is a game _made_ for the 2D spatial awareness it gives you. I thought the radar in Elite was pretty fancy for trying to give you a position on your enemies, and even then you don't see much of what is around you.)
Interestingly enough, online distribution seems to have opened up a window for 2D again.

And no, I don't hate modern games, some of them I love to bits, but I wouldn't dream of calling them retro in any way.

Side point: Is "retro" and "classic" two different things? (Because somehow I'll agree that Quake is a classic.)

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 27023
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Post by Antiriad2097 » Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:04 pm

NorthWay wrote:Quake might be "old", but it has a few facts that makes it totally un-retro for me:
It needed a beefy PC that was still years from being commonplace, thus making it more recent than its release date should say.
I completed Quake on my ancient laptop. A whopping 380Mhz CPU, 32Mb RAM, 4Mb of which was shared for the graphics memory, with no hardware 3D acceleration and a weedy sound chip. Played fine, just as it does on similarly low powered handhelds like PSP. Far from beefy kit, even a PS1 can run it.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
MikeHaggar
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 6:02 pm
Location: Norway
Contact:

Post by MikeHaggar » Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:06 pm

I played Quake on my Saturn.

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:08 pm

Personally I would call Quake 'retro' more than 'classic'
It's aged pretty badly - Quake II on the other hand is still a good game
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

Ryuranger
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:03 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Ryuranger » Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:56 am

Retro For me would be when the Console the Games are on is no longer in Production and Most Big name Developers have stopped caring about it and moves on to other Consoles.
Image

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 27023
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Post by Antiriad2097 » Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:01 am

Ryuranger wrote:Retro For me would be when ... Most Big name Developers have stopped caring about it and moves on to other Consoles.
That would have been about a week after launch for the GameCube ;)
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

nwosteve
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:15 pm
Location: lowestoft suffolk

Post by nwosteve » Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:09 am

If it doesn't have new games commercially released for it, it's officially retro.
"You're all going to die." MK3 promo posters

User avatar
markopoloman
Posts: 11657
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset

Post by markopoloman » Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:29 am

That would mean PC games would NEVER be retro!

Quake is retro!

Monty--
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:32 pm

Post by Monty-- » Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:39 pm

I still consider retro games to be Eighties games and beyond. I vividly remember buying a 'retro compilation' on the Playstation in 1996 which had Bubble Bobble and Rainbow Islands on one disc. It stated on the casing that they were retro games. When was Rainbow Island released? 1989? Only seven years previously yet I classed it as retro.
I mean, people are now comparing the N64 as retro! But, thinking about it, if you were playing Super Mario when you were 14, and pick it up again now that you're 24, would you class that as retro? For them, I'd say yes. For me, no way. Still feels slightly recent and current gen.
I think it's an age thing.

User avatar
Celebaglar
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 8:34 am
Location: The Fish Mines of Gloom
Contact:

Post by Celebaglar » Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:23 pm

NorthWay wrote:The graphics might be simpler, but its expression is pretty much identical to your average modern game.
That's pretty much it for me. It might be old, and it might use primitive technology compared to today, but it concept and gameplay it's exactly like dozens of modern games released every year on every modern platform.

OTOH, others will swear blind that it's actually "retro", because they simply use a different definition of the term. That's neither good nor bad, just a diverse view.

At the end of the day it's an editorial choice. I might not agree with it, but it's not my view that counts here.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests