So what counts as "classic" gaming?

[TheObscureGamer]

I'll say that the Dreamcast and back is retro. Sooner or later the PS3 and Xbox 360 will be retro and there's nothing you can do about it...

[TheObscureGamer]

Double post comment removed by the NSA

Edited July 19, 2015 by TheObscureGamer

[BydoEmpire]

It would leave less room for argument if we started referring to periods of gaming - golden age, silver age, etc. - like they do with comic books and science fiction books, rather than using subjective terms like "classic" and "retro".

 

Sure there will be some debate on where the more recent end-points are, but it will be less heated if someone doesn't feel their beloved 2600 is being lumped in with a PS2.

Yeah, I agree. I look at "classic" as an era, as opposed to a timeline. Just because a system is X years old doesn't mean it's classic gaming... to me, anyways.

[Reaperman]

For me, there's 1984 8-bits and below

16-bits from 89'-95' (intellivision counts as 8-bits)

and 32-bits from saturn through nuon and DC (to include n64, saturn and psx)

past that is semi-modern (DC, NUON. PS2, etc.)

 

I know 'bits' are stupid, but for the exceptions and not the rules.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Reaperman

[mbd30]

The original Playstation/Saturn/N64 era is a decent cutoff point if you count 3D gaming and disc based systems as classic.The relatively primitive 3D graphics seem quaint by today's standards. In terms of chronology, these consoles are as old as the earliest video game consoles were when the Playstation and N64 game out.

 

You've definitely entered the modern era by the time of the PS2/XBOX/Gamecube generation. The Playstation 2 was in stores competing with the Playstation 3 and XBOX 360.

[BillyHW]

In the "What have you actually played?" thread we count anything Dreamcast and earlier to be classic. Seems like a good cutoff to me.

[VectorGamer]

I'm going to be in the minority here because I'm a relic when it comes to gaming

 

Consoles: everything up to and including NES, Atari 7800, Master System

 

Arcades: anything up to and including laser disc games

 

LIKE this post so I can see who's a relic like me

[thetallguy24]

I ask because I got my hands lightly slapped (and post deleted) for straying too far from the definition of "classic" in another online community. I'm not complaining, they were right, but it caused me to wonder how far back one really has to go in order to really be on topic?

 

So I ask you AtariAge, wise sages of all things video games, what fits into your definition of "classic"? Is the N64 classic but the GameCube not? Or do both count because they are both at least two generations back? Is anything released this century off the table? How about the Dreamcast? It was released last century but I have a hard time accepting it in the "classic" realm. Or is "classic" more about what a system does and less about when it was created? Should the strict "classic" definition be 16-bit and below with the need for a different title for later, but not modern-gen, systems?

 

I am very interested in your thoughts. Thanks.

 

I had posted about this recently, and its been discussed at length on many forums.

 

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/236658-what-system-do-you-consider-retro/

[Yoss]

The original Playstation/Saturn/N64 era is a decent cutoff point if you count 3D gaming and disc based systems as classic.The relatively primitive 3D graphics seem quaint by today's standards. In terms of chronology, these consoles are as old as the earliest video game consoles were when the Playstation and N64 game out.

 

That's an interesting way of looking at it. The N64 really is creeping up on 20 years old now. Where does the time go?

 

The N64 era is a pretty good dividing point for me too. Maybe it's the cartridges. I like to collect for cartridge-based systems but discs just don't scratch the itch in quite the same way.

[billysastard]

since i have no childhood memories of console or arcade games that doesn't colour my view, i also think there is a line between classic and retro, for retro i'd simply go with anything from gen6 or before but classics is far more limited, to me a classic system is one that has plenty of classic games so 2600, nes, snes, genesis, ps1, n64 and dreamcast, when it comes to arcade i make a simple delineation when they were 10 or 20p a game and when they went up to 50p (or more) a game as arcade companies spent a fortune on expensive hardware and cabinets in an attempt to outpace home systems.

[Jess Ragan]

Oh yeah, this is a really hard one to nail down. I'd say maybe twelve years or two console generations. The last generation of consoles (360, PS3, Wii) isn't retro yet; it's just old.

 

The line used to be drawn at 1984, but since the PSOne I think defining systems as pre-crash and post-crash is a little antiquated. Post-crash gaming is a much longer span of time than pre-crash gaming.

[cimerians]

For me classic games are starting to blend into age's like comic books:

Golden Age = 1970's - mid 1980's

Silver Age = mid 1980's - mid 1990's

Bronze = mid 1990's - mid 2000's

 

For me the next age would start with the Xbox 360 and include what we are playing now. The biggest thing to change is that both the 360 and the PS3 were made to last for a decade.

 

This is just my opinion....how I look at it. Doesn't mean it's right and it certainly isn't detailed to the degree I've seen some people post. All I've read are great arguments though and fun to read. For the sake of simplicity when someone asks, that's what tell them.

[BassGuitari]

As others have said, or at least alluded to, words like "classic" and "retro" are ultimately meaningless since they're so subjective. For argument's sake my cutoff is 20 years. But again, that's subjective.

I like the idea of separating the collective history of video games into "ages," but aside from the risk of getting too academic and simply taking it all too seriously, that's essentially what people are doing when they talk about defining console generations, only on a more macro level, and we all know how well that works out. It's also complicated by the fact that there's so much "generational" overlap. The Atari 2600 library alone could be split into three or four distinct periods.

[Cynicaster]

To me, "classic" simply refers to an era when the state-of-the-art and its associated constraints dictated that games be done in a way that is fundamentally different from what is done in the "modern era".

 

IMO, this roughly corresponds to the wholesale transition from 2D sprite-based gaming to 3D gaming. When that happened, a whole new set of game "genres" was settled upon, which has remained largely unchanged for 15-20 years. PS1 and N64 had games in the mid-late 90s that are very similar in many respects to games made in the present day, they just look more crude due to the lower-powered hardware of the time.

 

Conversely, if you go back just 5-6 more years, you're into the 16-bit era when games were completely different from games of the present day in every facet imaginable: graphics engines (2D vs. 3D), player perspective (band scrolling vs. 1st and 3rd person), sound effects (noise generators vs. recorded and digitized sounds), music (chip tunes vs. actual recorded music), controller style (d-pad vs. dual analog), etc.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Cynicaster

[high voltage]

All Atari is classic, the others are 'also runs'

[78001987]

"Classic", in terms of cars for registration/license plate purposes typically refers to anything 20+ years old, and "Antique" refers to 30+ years old.

 

So anything 1995 or earlier is Classic at least, and anything NES or earlier could qualify as antique.

 

So for today anyway, the cut off point appears to be the PS1/3D0 era.

[+wongojack]

To me, "classic" simply refers to an era when the state-of-the-art and its associated constraints dictated that games be done in a way that is fundamentally different from what is done in the "modern era".

 

IMO, this roughly corresponds to the wholesale transition from 2D sprite-based gaming to 3D gaming. When that happened, a whole new set of game "genres" was settled upon, which has remained largely unchanged for 15-20 years. PS1 and N64 had games in the mid-late 90s that are very similar in many respects to games made in the present day, they just look more crude due to the lower-powered hardware of the time.

 

Conversely, if you go back just 5-6 more years, you're into the 16-bit era when games were completely different from games of the present day in every facet imaginable: graphics engines (2D vs. 3D), player perspective (band scrolling vs. 1st and 3rd person), sound effects (noise generators vs. recorded and digitized sounds), music (chip tunes vs. actual recorded music), controller style (d-pad vs. dual analog), etc.

 

This is a convincing post

[mbd30]

To me, "classic" simply refers to an era when the state-of-the-art and its associated constraints dictated that games be done in a way that is fundamentally different from what is done in the "modern era".

 

IMO, this roughly corresponds to the wholesale transition from 2D sprite-based gaming to 3D gaming. When that happened, a whole new set of game "genres" was settled upon, which has remained largely unchanged for 15-20 years. PS1 and N64 had games in the mid-late 90s that are very similar in many respects to games made in the present day, they just look more crude due to the lower-powered hardware of the time.

 

Conversely, if you go back just 5-6 more years, you're into the 16-bit era when games were completely different from games of the present day in every facet imaginable: graphics engines (2D vs. 3D), player perspective (band scrolling vs. 1st and 3rd person), sound effects (noise generators vs. recorded and digitized sounds), music (chip tunes vs. actual recorded music), controller style (d-pad vs. dual analog), etc.

 

The 16-bit era hadn't completely faded away in the mid to late 90's. "Super Mario RPG" was released in 1996. A good cutoff date might be 1996 or 1997, which would include the beginnings of the 3D era as well as games like "Super Mario RPG" and "Donkey Kong Country 3".

Edited July 21, 2015 by mbd30

[omegadot]

I usually don't agree with the Dreamcast being retro because of the heavy focus on online multiplayer. I'm aware that PC and other areas had it for years but it really seemed like the cut over to our PSN / XBL focused world.

 

But it's all subjective.

[wolfy62]

This topic is completely age sensitive.

 

For me, since I am 52 anything before the Nintendo is a classic game. There are actually a couple different generations of them now for sure though!

[VGC1612]

Easy: A timeless game

[Schizophretard]

I think a console should at least be 21 years old. Something just doesn't feel right about classifying a console as classic, retro, or whatever if there are people that have it as a childhood memory but aren't able to legally drink yet.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Classic = all pre crash systems plus 7800

Retro = 3rd, 4th, 5th gen plus GBA & Dream Cast

Modern = 6th, 7th, 8th gen

Post-Modern = 9th gen and up online only plus mobile

 

I demoted the 7800 to classic because it was supposed to debut in 1984 and the type of games released for it are predominantly arcade style. Dreamcast was demoted to retro because it got killed early on in 2001. GBA demoted to "retro" because it is predominantly a 2D system.

 

Dedicated systems without separate media, whether console (PONG units) or LCD handheld (G&W, Tiger) or standalone table tops, I would consider classic catagory even if released during the retro years. Likewise, I consider TV-Game plug in units to be retro, even if released during the modern years.

 

I'll create a fourth group, post-modern, which includes internet connected consoles and mobile devices which completely lack physical media. All 8th gen consoles support downloading, and 9th gen will likely see the slow discontinuation of pre-purchased media. Post modern consoles will rely on the cloud/online servers and largely become e-waste once servers are pulled, while previous generations continue to function offline.

 

Obviously in a few more years, "Classic" will become "vintage", "retro" will become "classic", and "modern" will become "retro." Ultimately "vintage" will eventually become "antique" and so on. Disc or cart, there will be a huge divide between physical media which will continue to work offline, and download/cloud gaming devices, which will cease to function once servers are unplugged.

 

No future nostalgia will exist for discontinued online "e-waste" consoles, as the games will no longer be playable. This will segregate the retrogaming ecosystem. Desirability of the vintage, classic, and retro consoles which relied on physical media will only increase over time since these will be the only systems that still function...

Edited July 22, 2015 by stardust4ever

[Andromeda Stardust]

I think a console should at least be 21 years old. Something just doesn't feel right about classifying a console as classic, retro, or whatever if there are people that have it as a childhood memory but aren't able to legally drink yet.

I spoke recently to a young boy I met at a yogurt shop (about 10 ish) who complemented my N3DS. He told me he actively plays Atari and NES. You may want to rethink you're "childhood memories" statement. Edited July 22, 2015 by stardust4ever

[Schizophretard]

I spoke recently to a young boy I met at a yogurt shop (about 10 ish) who complemented my N3DS. He told me he actively plays Atari and NES. You may want to rethink you're "childhood memories" statement.

Maybe clarify but not rethink. By childhood memories I'm talking about memories of when a console was new. This 10 year old has no memories of when the Atari and the NES were modern consoles. To put it another way, if there are people that are still children and have memories like getting a console for Christmas when it was launched then it seems odd to me to put it in a retro/classic category. I mean, when a kid is talking about a console from "back in their day" they are talking about "their day" that they are still presently in. On the other hand, if a console is 21 years old then there isn't a single child in the world with these memories. This 10 year old will have childhood memories of Atari and NES but it would be memories of a past generation of children's consoles which their parents could be a part of. It is like how I have childhood memories of 50's music but that was my parent's generation of music and it would have been strange if my parents considered them golden oldies back when they were kids but it would have made perfect sense for me to consider them golden oldies when I was a kid. In short, if a kid is refering to one of their consoles as classic/retro it doesn't make sense to me because the kid themselves aren't even classic/retro yet. They are kids talking about consoles from the same childhood that they are still a part of. If one can't even legally drink yet and are talking about a console from their lifetime then the console being discussed seems just as young and modern as they are. I remember the NES being launched but it wasn't until at least 2005 or 6 before it started feeling retro and in something like the last year the PlayStation has started to feel that way too.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Schizophretard