What's your definition of a retro gaming system?

[Tynstar]

Anything before the PS1.

[Brianstorm99]

I often think that anything that you can't buy at Game Stop any more is retro, so really anything that didn't sell over a million copies that came out over six months ago.

[AtariKSI]

They recently played a retro-game of Devils vs. Penguins in Hockey so retro probably has a wider definition.  In that game, they dressed up in uniforms from 1980s.  I would retro refers to going back to a style that was once the norm but no longer is the norm, but still carries some attraction that wants you to do that again.

[Duke.Togo]

Anything pre-CD-ROM for me. I understand that it is a floating term, but that's not what the thread title asks.

[AtariKSI]

Let me clarify a bit:

At one time Coleco, Atari, Apple, Amiga, etc. gaming was norm whereas nowadays everything is playstation, nintendo wii, xbox, and PC so those that were popular back then if you play games on those systems you are doing retro-gaming using a retro-gaming system.

[Kevincal]

To me its everything up to the Nintendo 64. I see the N64 as the turning point. It introduced analog control as well as massive 3d environments and basically paved the way for modern gaming, however it also had that classic gaming charm and used carts... so I like to include the N64 as the last "classic" style gaming console that almost could have been included in modern system ranks.

I see the Dreamcast as the obvious first modern system. I mean the graphics are beautiful and high end pc quality or arcade quality. the graphics easily rival some of the best stuff on ps2 gamecube or xbox, theres just something about the polish of dc games...

So N64 is the last retro system for me. DC is modern. DC also the first system to make a big push in online gaming. other prior systems dabbled but dc came with modem installed.

I have to say though that maybe i should split it in 3 categories... Maybe say 2600 up to Coleco is vintage, then from NES to Sega CD classic, and then 3DO to N64 retro

Those basic systems with games built in before the 2600 can be called historic maybe

[AtariKSI]

To me its everything up to the Nintendo 64. I see the N64 as the turning point. It introduced analog control as well as massive 3d environments and basically paved the way for modern gaming, however it also had that classic gaming charm and used carts... so I like to include the N64 as the last "classic" style gaming console that almost could have been included in modern system ranks.

Good point about carts and N64 but not sure if analog control was introduced by N64.  I still use N64, Atari 5200 (analog controls), Atari 800, Coleco, and others with cartridges.  To me instantly booting into a game is needed for the most part since I'm playing games with relatives and friends and nobody likes to wait around for "loading..." crap.  I have to applaud Nintendo for pushing cartridges even during time when CD media took over.  CDs are good for PC software where you can just download it into your hard drive but for dynamic usage not good for gaming (unless you have the patience).  Then on top of that, they don't have covers (unlike floppy disks) so are easily scratched.  I have so many CD games that are unusable but all my cartridges are working great.  From programming perspective, you have direct access to program/data instantly since cartridges are just a type of memory.  I'm surprised they haven't switched to flash on modern systems.

I guess vintage/classic/etc. can all be considered retro.  One thing about many retro systems is the RF output which doesn't exist on modern consoles.  This brings me to my point why I joined this forum-- I was looking for a solution for an ATSC based LCD TV to hook to an RF-based retro game system.  Anyone find a solution to this?

[Kevincal]

I love carts too but I have to think Nintendo made a mistake not making N64 cd based. Ya a bit of loading but say if they used a 4X cd drive would not have been bad at all and the games could have really been incredible and Nintendo would have never lost Squaresoft and others to Sony. And then Nintendo compounded this mistake with the disk drive flop, lol. instead of messing around with carts and disks they should have just made the darn thing CD.. They would have beat Sony probably.

As far as analog, I guess what I mean is the N64 was the first controller to use analog in a traditional sense, a controller styled around the stick and the stick being high precision, i dont think the old consoles really had this. they had analog but it was very primitive?

[FireStar]

"Retro" to me is everything before the Super Nintendo (I'd consider the Jaguar retro too but not the CD-i or 3DO)
Everything else before this gaming gen is just old.

[sektor75]

I tend to think anything that can't be played on current systems is retro. You can play Gamecube games on the Wii, (most) Xbox games on the 360, and PS1/2 games on most PS3s. Hell, PS2's are still so widespread and common I still count that as a current console as well.

Another good guideline would be any system that had games for it released on PSN/XBL/Virtual Console/DSware could be considered retro. For example, Game Gear games are on DSware now, so that would make it officially retro to me.

I think when it comes down to it, retro is whatever strikes a chord of nostalgia to you. If I see a stack of PS1 games, I likely won't give it a second glance unless I spot a game from a series I collect on top. If I see a stack of NES/SNES/Gameboy/Sega CD or Genesis games, I'm diving in headfirst since that's the era that I grew up in.

[AtariKSI]

I love carts too but I have to think Nintendo made a mistake not making N64 cd based. Ya a bit of loading but say if they used a 4X cd drive would not have been bad at all and the games could have really been incredible and Nintendo would have never lost Squaresoft and others to Sony. And then Nintendo compounded this mistake with the disk drive flop, lol. instead of messing around with carts and disks they should have just made the darn thing CD.. They would have beat Sony probably.

If they had stuck with memory devices, they would have had a much more efficient system and in the long-run beaten the competitors.  Of course, I'm not biased toward a particular console developer since I'm looking at it more from a technological point of view rather than marketing.  A little foresight goes a long way and would also have helped prevent so much garbage from saturating the market.  You have so many incompatible systems out there and so much scratched/partially working older systems due to usage of cd/dvd lasers/media. 

As far as analog, I guess what I mean is the N64 was the first controller to use analog in a traditional sense, a controller styled around the stick and the stick being high precision, i dont think the old consoles really had this. they had analog but it was very primitive?

Maybe you're right about making the analog more precise but why not digital all the way.  Regardless of which analog controller you use, you end up with uncertainty as to how much you went in which direction.  On the other hand, on digital controllers (like joysticks), you know the exact state of where you are-- 100% accurate and control.