The NES isn't retro.

[jetto-setto]

Neither is the PS2. The two are equally non-retro.

I've been noticing this problem for a while. A lot of people might see this as arguing over semantics, but this is a case of a word simply not meaning what it's being used to mean at all. Here's the definition of retro:

ret·ro
ˈretrō
adjective
1.
imitative of a style, fashion, or design from the recent past.
"retro 60s fashions"

noun
1.
clothes or music whose style or design is imitative of those of the recent past.
"a look that mixes Italian casual wear and American retro"

The NES and the PS2 - to varying degrees - are both legitimately old machines. They're not imitative of something from the past, they are from the past.

Something that is retro is retro the moment it's conceived. The Atari Flashback systems are retro now and they always will be because they're imitating the style/design of an era before their time.

Look, calling old games "retro" is akin to calling games you pre-ordered that are coming out later this year "futuristic".

Who's with me?

[Ack]

What you're witnessing is the change and development of language over time. Eventually "retro" will likely just mean "old."

[jetto-setto]

What you're witnessing is the change and development of language over time. Eventually "retro" will likely just mean "old."

Well then what the hell will we say to mean what "retro" means now? We already have words to describe both old things and things that imitate old things.

I saw my father yesterday. He's not "retro", he's actually old. Though he may actually favor this shift in language, come to think of it.

[TEKTORO]

You do make a good point especially with correct definitions to put it in perspective.

Sometime I get chatty and feel like blurting shit out, hence my comments on the PS2 thread. I really don't care whether it is or not, I love all games and systems from all eras and that thread caught my attention at all moment so I filled it with random babble thoughts. Hehe

Jared Leto is that you?

[BogusMeatFactory]

I must apologize for my bluntness in this comment, but yesterday, my wife helped bring 3 people back from the dead, so forgive me when I say that this argument is silly. It isn't important and at no point is worth arguing except to make an attempt at being, "right."

That is like saying, "Star Trek is an incorrect name for their show, as their travels are done in a spaceship and not on foot." Is this really worth having a discussion over?

Some people call it retro, because that is how they define it. It isn't that insanely different than the actual definition.

[Ack]

Old-fashioned.

And your father can still be ancient, aged, antiquated, venerable, elderly, senior, advanced, grizzled, hoary, decrepit, doddering, doddery, superannuated, obsolete, over the hill, no spring chicken, long in the tooth, past one's prime, getting on, advanced in years, etc. Take your pick. He might also be a silver fox or a GILF to some folks. We have a lot of words and phrases that describe aspects of the same thing in English. "Retro" would merely be another.

[flojocabron]

[fastbilly1]

We need the change the name of the site now. It has to be Oldgaming with Racketboy...

[jetto-setto]

Old-fashioned.

And your father can still be ancient, aged, antiquated, venerable, elderly, senior, advanced, grizzled, hoary, decrepit, doddering, doddery, superannuated, obsolete, over the hill, no spring chicken, long in the tooth, past one's prime, getting on, advanced in years, etc. Take your pick. He might also be a silver fox or a GILF to some folks. We have a lot of words and phrases that describe aspects of the same thing in English. "Retro" would merely be another.

Would it make any sense to start referring to things coming out in the near-ish future as "futuristic", regardless of their content?

Look, this isn't some big deal for me, but it's something I've noticed. Words have meanings. I don't really see why a lot of people using a word incorrectly should mean the word's true meaning doesn't matter anymore.

The incorrect usage of "retro" is a misconception about what the word means. It doesn't have to be an official change in the English language.

By the way, I don't think "retro gamer" or "retro gaming" are as bad because you could make the argument that we're a throwback type of gamer. I can see that.

[MrPopo]

Look, this isn't some big deal for me, but it's something I've noticed. Words have meanings. I don't really see why a lot of people using a word incorrectly should mean the word's true meaning doesn't matter anymore.

Words are verbal symbols we use to represent objects and concepts. There is nothing intrinsic about them; in one language the concept represented by the word Gift is represented by the word poison in another. Those mappings change over time based on the shared cultural consciousness.