Forums

Topic: How long ago is "Retro"

Posts 21 to 31 of 31

Matt_Barber

Eel wrote:

@Matt_Barber I propose changing it from just any handheld to “a low to mid range tablet or phone”

Yeah, plus handheld devices themselves are generally a lot easier to emulate.

I recently picked up a Retroid Pocket 2+ and it can manage almost the entire PSP and DS libraries plus a decent chunk of the 3DS one. The Switch is still well out of its league, but that's not bad for a $99 handheld.

Matt_Barber

HeavyMetalWario64DS

For me Retro is at least N64/PS1/Saturn and older, although I'm starting to think of PS2/GC/Xbox as Retro more now. There's a big jump in the 3D graphics quality between those generations and some of the game mechanics are more modern in the 6th gen such as Arcade Racers no longer being about just beating every track once. FPSs are closer to what we have now in 6th gen as well with Dual Analog being the standard.

As for PS3/360/Wii/Wii U, I consider them old, but not Retro, and for PS4/XOne/Switch I think of them as the older current consoles since they're still getting games. I know Wii U is part of the PS4/XOne gen, and Switch is part of the PS5/XSeries gen, but from a technical standpoint they feel like the gen before it, and the Wii U is discontinued so it's not getting games like the other 2 consoles are.

Edited on by HeavyMetalWario64DS

HeavyMetalWario64DS

skywake

@Matt_Barber @Eel
I think putting "emulation" in there makes it pretty tricky and arbitrary. Especially given the ability to emulate something and the ability to emulate it well are entirely different things. I think the better measure would be a console is "retro" when you can buy a low-to-mid range portable device that can run the same games at an equivalent or better level of quality

I think we can agree that the PSP/DS could run games from the PS/N64 era at that level or better. But not the PS2/XBox/GC era. That the 3DS/Vita could push either up against or slightly beyond the GC but not certainly not 360. And modern smartphones, standalone VR headsets and the Switch can go past 360/PS3 but not past PS4/XBOne. And likely a next-Switch will probably rub against PS4 just barely while the Steam Deck very slightly overshoots it. So right now? I'd firmly say that 360/PS3 are firmly into "retro" territory while PS4/XBOne are still not. Just.

Of course saying this is the measure is slightly complicated by the existence of the Wii and Wii U. So I might amend the metric to argue that a console is "retro" when every console of its generation passes the above threshold. Which means that Wii U won't be "retro" until the quality of the PS4 Pro and XBox Series X can be replicated on a phone/tablet like device/portable. And the Wii became retro as soon as Nintendo released the Switch and there was a portable device on the shelves that could keep up with the 360/PS3

And using that adjusted metric, the Steam Deck isn't an issue either. It doesn't outclass the XBox Series X which means it doesn't change the "retro" classification of anything from that generation. Although now I've just created a new argument about what consoles belong in which generation (is Switch PS4 or PS5 era? is Wii U with the 360 or XBOne?)

Edited on by skywake

Some Aussie musics: King Gizz, TFS, Genesis Owusu
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

Kermit1

Yesterday is retro

Currently playing: Xenoblade Chronicles 3

DA-2802-3315-4367

#TeamSlime

Matt_Barber

@skywake Oh, sure. The thing with handhelds is that they've usually been a clear generation or so behind home consoles on account of having to juggle the extra variables of power and ergonomics alongside price and performance.

However, even that is starting to break down now that we've got the Switch, which I'd think by now has proved itself at least a passable home console alongside being a handheld powerhouse. Similarly, the Steam Deck might not be able to overpower the Series X but it pretty much can play all the same games (although some might require installing Windows or just a heck of a lot of tweaking) and the difference is merely measured in terms of frame rates and resolutions. There's not that big a gap between it and the Series S either.

The Switch certainly isn't the first machine to have been emulated at least fairly well, while still being commercially successful, either. It's just the ability to do so on handhelds that's novel.

Anyway, retro is pretty arbitrary. I doubt anyone could come up with a hard and fast definition that would satisfy everyone.

Matt_Barber

Ryall

In terms of hardware I would say anything that can’t connect to a modern TV through the HDMI port with the original cables that came with the console is retro.

So Wii, PS2 and early Xbox 360 a where I draw the line. Wii U, PS3 and most Xbox 360’s A plug and play with a TV bought today therefore and are not retro.

If TV technology changes again meaning that today’s games no longer appear as intended on the screens at that time. They will become retro to me.

Ryall

Ryu_Niiyama

I’ve always measured retro as two gens old or older.

Taiko is good for the soul, Hoisa!
Japanese NNID:RyuNiiyamajp
Team Cupcake! 11/15/14
Team Spree! 4/17/19
I'm a Dream Fighter. Perfume is Love, Perfume is Life.

3DS Friend Code: 3737-9849-8413 | Nintendo Network ID: RyuNiiyama

Slowdive

Let me just say that everything beyond the 8-bit, third-generation is modern enough to me. 16-bit games still hold up well enough, and I'm not willing to call the games retro despite the common classification.

VISUAL SHOCK! SPEED SHOCK! SOUND SHOCK!

Eel

That’s if you assume that “retro” has a negative connotation.

There’s 8-bit games that still hold up really well, just like how there’s 3D games that don’t hold up well at all anymore.

Edited on by Eel

Bloop.

<My slightly less dead youtube channel>

SMM2 Maker ID: 69R-F81-NLG

My Nintendo: Abgarok | Nintendo Network ID: Abgarok

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic