• otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    I can understand the PS360 argument. It was probably the last generation where most games were actually playable off the disc without a bunch of patches.

    With how common DLC and stuff was becoming that generation, though, I feel like it’s sort of a soft boundary for retro. I can equally accept retro being anything before the PS360, or before/including that generation.

    I don’t look forward to the days where “retro gaming” refers to “any console with physical releases at all”.

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      It doesn’t feel right to count that generation as retro, for reasons like GTA 5, which was initially released for those consoles, yet it’s still considered a current game, with no significant overhaul beyond graphical fidelity. It’s the greatest example of how games haven’t drastically evolved since then.

      Compared to the jump from SNES to N64 and PS1, or from PS1 to PS3, we haven’t had any major breakthrough, just moderate incremental improvement.

        • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s not about holding up, it’s about playing pretty much the same, while mostly just looking prettier.

          While lines are never quite so clear cut, from SNES to N64/PS1 we unlocked a whole variety of 3D games, and by PS3/XB360 we added open-world games, immersive sims and console MMOs to our repertoire. But what new horizons were unlocked by technological advancements since? Only battle royales come to mind.

          Surely today’s games are larger, more beautiful and have embraced QoL aspects that we discovered along the way. But today’s games don’t feel as markedly different as any previous leaps.

          • AProfessional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I agree it’s not clear cut. The PS2 generation defined many core concepts of 3D games; Like Gran Turismo 7 plays the same as Gran Turismo 4.

            The 360 gen did define a lot of the more complex concepts.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        I agree that it doesn’t feel right, but I can understand the justification, haha

        “Retro gaming” is a pretty broad description, anyways. There were probably people who didn’t want to include the 3D consoles, and even those who didn’t want to include cartridge-based consoles, haha