Completely agree with you saying the Xbox 360/PS3/Wii generation of consoles are now retro. As much as we hate to admit it, these consoles are close to twenty years old.
It is crazy, though, how little has changed in terms of game design in the last twenty years vs., say, 1985-2005. Mostly just streamlining and refining, making games easier to play.
Dylan, first, thanks for pointing me here. I've subscribed.
I'm going to argue though those consoles are NOT retro, because I think "retro" here means that it has some sort of lost appeal. Or maybe a word like "classic" needs to be used. A 20-year-old car, let's say a 2004 Toyota Camry -- isn't retro, or classic, it's just old. But in 1984, I think even a pretty ordinary car from 1964 COULD be retro/classic. And a car from 1984 could be retro in 2004 -- I'm thinking wood paneling station wagons or DeLoreans. But car styling in the 21st century is pretty static, if you exclude the Cybertruck.
The length of time needed for something to be retro or classic isn't fixed -- it really has to do with the rate of change in fashions and technology. Personal computing technology (including games) improved geometrically during the 80s and 90s, but it started to plateau when processor clock speeds stopped improving in the early-to-mid 00s. So there's a reason that the consoles that arrived at the end of the period of geometric technological improvement feel like they're part of the modern gaming era, while consoles produced during the midst of that rapid improvement, in the 80s and 90s, do not feel modern.
It also compounds the issue when ubiquitous online multiplayer, HDTV compatibility (and the death of the CRT), and pack-in wireless controllers showed up on consoles at the same time as that last major improvement in graphics technology.
I agree and think you’re right, about how we essentially saw a dramatic improvement in tech etc, and I like the idea of the idea of being retro not being fixed!
The idea of using classic is a good one too!
We then get back to how do we determine when something is retro? Everything from 360/PS3 onwards is HD, so will it ever truly feel retro? Is it when 8K or further is the norm?
The reason I struggle not to think of them as retro is the passing of time (which like you said maybe not the best to use) but also as I was in school when I played them, so to me it’s akin to a childhood nostalgia when I think of them!
I love this discussion, and appreciate you reading and adding your fantastic points!
Nostalgia is a real phenomenon, no one can deny your nostalgia, but I think of it as things being cherished simply because they're associated with the simple joys of childhood, whether or not they're objectively much good. That's different from something old being cherished because it has legitimately positive qualities that are perhaps now absent from the marketplace or confined to a niche. Though the two feelings at times can be mixed together. Maybe something is good AND you have nostalgia for it.
On Dylan's stack, we were talking about Super Mario World vs. Yoshi's Island, and I have WAY more nostalgia for SMW, which is also legitimately a good game, but Yoshi's Island is probably, objectively, the better game.
But I think one way you can tell that something is fundamentally different about the 8/16-bit era is that a game like The Messenger exists. The aesthetic of that era has inspired a number of games to build upon and update the aesthetic, but in a way that forms an entire separate branch of the tree from the AAA, 3D aesthetic.
Early 3D games have fewer games imitating their look compared to 8/16-bit, but I'd say it's what we would call "low poly", and I think "low poly" has artistic merits of its own, independent of gamer nostalgia.
But how would you even imitate the look of a game from the Xbox 360 era and update it, without looking like a standard modern game? I don't think you can. No one is going to admire the quaint charm of an otherwise-modern 3D game that decides to be 1080p/30 FPS instead of 8K/120 fps. Or in which character models deliberately have a little extra jankiness added. It's just going to feel like a 2004 Camry.
I don't think modern-style 3D games will feel truly retro in the way an 8-bit game does unless there's a major breakthrough in graphics. Something more than just higher resolution and framerates. Maybe holograms, or seamless VR, or the ability to generate truly lifelike images on the fly. At that point, I'd bet there will be indie developers making games in the "old 3D" style (high poly?), and a community around it.
But it's also possible that won't happen, at least not in our lifetimes. Sometimes technology just matures. The Boeing 747 is 55 years old and still essentially "modern", while cutting-edge aircraft developed 25 years earlier are positively quaint.
EDIT: I realize I wrote too much, but I had been thinking about this for a while and hadn't really put it in writing!
Completely agree with you saying the Xbox 360/PS3/Wii generation of consoles are now retro. As much as we hate to admit it, these consoles are close to twenty years old.
It is crazy, though, how little has changed in terms of game design in the last twenty years vs., say, 1985-2005. Mostly just streamlining and refining, making games easier to play.
Thanks for the post!
Thanks! Yeah I still can’t comprehend all of this even though I wrote it!
But you are right, it’s more refinement rather than advancements I’d say!
Thank you for reading and sharing 🙌
Dylan, first, thanks for pointing me here. I've subscribed.
I'm going to argue though those consoles are NOT retro, because I think "retro" here means that it has some sort of lost appeal. Or maybe a word like "classic" needs to be used. A 20-year-old car, let's say a 2004 Toyota Camry -- isn't retro, or classic, it's just old. But in 1984, I think even a pretty ordinary car from 1964 COULD be retro/classic. And a car from 1984 could be retro in 2004 -- I'm thinking wood paneling station wagons or DeLoreans. But car styling in the 21st century is pretty static, if you exclude the Cybertruck.
The length of time needed for something to be retro or classic isn't fixed -- it really has to do with the rate of change in fashions and technology. Personal computing technology (including games) improved geometrically during the 80s and 90s, but it started to plateau when processor clock speeds stopped improving in the early-to-mid 00s. So there's a reason that the consoles that arrived at the end of the period of geometric technological improvement feel like they're part of the modern gaming era, while consoles produced during the midst of that rapid improvement, in the 80s and 90s, do not feel modern.
It also compounds the issue when ubiquitous online multiplayer, HDTV compatibility (and the death of the CRT), and pack-in wireless controllers showed up on consoles at the same time as that last major improvement in graphics technology.
These are fantastic points!
The analogy with cars makes perfect sense!
I agree and think you’re right, about how we essentially saw a dramatic improvement in tech etc, and I like the idea of the idea of being retro not being fixed!
The idea of using classic is a good one too!
We then get back to how do we determine when something is retro? Everything from 360/PS3 onwards is HD, so will it ever truly feel retro? Is it when 8K or further is the norm?
The reason I struggle not to think of them as retro is the passing of time (which like you said maybe not the best to use) but also as I was in school when I played them, so to me it’s akin to a childhood nostalgia when I think of them!
I love this discussion, and appreciate you reading and adding your fantastic points!
Nostalgia is a real phenomenon, no one can deny your nostalgia, but I think of it as things being cherished simply because they're associated with the simple joys of childhood, whether or not they're objectively much good. That's different from something old being cherished because it has legitimately positive qualities that are perhaps now absent from the marketplace or confined to a niche. Though the two feelings at times can be mixed together. Maybe something is good AND you have nostalgia for it.
On Dylan's stack, we were talking about Super Mario World vs. Yoshi's Island, and I have WAY more nostalgia for SMW, which is also legitimately a good game, but Yoshi's Island is probably, objectively, the better game.
But I think one way you can tell that something is fundamentally different about the 8/16-bit era is that a game like The Messenger exists. The aesthetic of that era has inspired a number of games to build upon and update the aesthetic, but in a way that forms an entire separate branch of the tree from the AAA, 3D aesthetic.
Early 3D games have fewer games imitating their look compared to 8/16-bit, but I'd say it's what we would call "low poly", and I think "low poly" has artistic merits of its own, independent of gamer nostalgia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_poly
But how would you even imitate the look of a game from the Xbox 360 era and update it, without looking like a standard modern game? I don't think you can. No one is going to admire the quaint charm of an otherwise-modern 3D game that decides to be 1080p/30 FPS instead of 8K/120 fps. Or in which character models deliberately have a little extra jankiness added. It's just going to feel like a 2004 Camry.
I don't think modern-style 3D games will feel truly retro in the way an 8-bit game does unless there's a major breakthrough in graphics. Something more than just higher resolution and framerates. Maybe holograms, or seamless VR, or the ability to generate truly lifelike images on the fly. At that point, I'd bet there will be indie developers making games in the "old 3D" style (high poly?), and a community around it.
But it's also possible that won't happen, at least not in our lifetimes. Sometimes technology just matures. The Boeing 747 is 55 years old and still essentially "modern", while cutting-edge aircraft developed 25 years earlier are positively quaint.
EDIT: I realize I wrote too much, but I had been thinking about this for a while and hadn't really put it in writing!
Thanks Thomas! I have very little to add, but yeah, these are definitely points I hadn't considered.