Will we ever stop calling old games "retro"?

[MonkeyWrench]

I was browsing around for some old PC DOS games last night and noticed how many of the sites were named Retro-something, and this reminded me of something Steven Poole mentioned in his book Trigger Happy - why do we call old games retro? Whilst the use of the term is correct, he comments that we don't use retro to describe any other media. We don't call Dante's Inferno retro, or Citizen Killzone Kane, or the Beatle's White album. To be fair these are all classics within their medium, but examples that aren't widely regarded as classics are still not referred to as retro. More often than not we refer to them by the decade they were released, especially film and music, so maybe the gaming industry is just too young....I dunno.

Anyway, whilst I was looking around for Poole's site I found that he did a documentary for the BBC which is available here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8221616346838822371&hl=en

Not watched it yet, but I noticed Molyneux making an appearence in the 5 seconds so it must be good!

Edited April 4, 2009 by MonkeyWrench

[Nachimir]

Very interesting point about the word retro not being used for other media.

It only came into it's modern usage in the last 50 years or so; I'm sure coming after the invention of books, radio, recorded music, and films has something to do with what it's used to describe.

It's also an easily understood shorthand for older games. While most people understand genre distinctions for books and films, terms like arena shooter and sidescroller still might not make much sense to most people, and won't until they're a lot more popular.

Retro is used widely for design and fashion, and to a lesser extent technology (rockets and computers being two good examples). Maybe some of its use in games comes from confusion over whether they're technology or media; retro is very much the kind of word that would be used to describe old hardware, so probably easily carried over to the games that ran on it.

[LOPcagney]

I though retro referred to things that were made in a style reminiscent of an earlier time. Isn't an old game, book, or movie just old (or "classic")?

[Nachimir]

It can be used to refer to things from the era itself, not just later replicas or tributes made with those aesthetics.

[Sergey]

At least they're not called "oldies"

[MonkeyWrench]

Or even worse "Golden Oldies". I can just imagine cheap-o complilations boxsets that can only be bought from infomercials.

[ThunderPeel2001]

I wonder if it's because the medium itself has progressed quicker than any other medium in history? Fashion can be called "retro" and it progresses, changes and ages very quickly.

I think the term "retro" is used affectionately, and for a lot of people it means bringing back fond memories... Does The White Album bring back fond memories? Or Citizen Kane? *shrugs*

[LOPcagney]

Along with it's rapid development, it may have something to do with the changing hardware and the fact that, while methods and stylistic techniques in movies and print have changed over the years, the method of delivery has remained relatively the same, while the style of a video game is almost inextricably linked to it's hardware (traditionally) so a game like Mario is a more obvious departure from some modern platformers than Metropolis is from Transformers.

That's not a fully formulated thought, but I think there's a gem of an explanation somewhere in there.

[soupface]

@Nachimir, I like your observation that "retro" is used in fashion. It's also used with cars, somewhat. From my experience, I'd say the property of "retro" is related primarily to the look or style of a thing, and not so much the underlying technology. Also, that it has to be from an era that is undoubtedly older than the current one. (For example, a 1955 Pontiac Star Chief certainly is retro, a 1979 Pontiac Grand Am less so, and a 1997 Grand Prix not at all.)

For games, "retro" goes hand in hand with a certain look (low-res, limited-palette sprites) and sound (chiptunes), less strongly with feel (simple mechanics, merciless difficulty). I mean, Super Mario Bros. is retro because of its look, sound, and feel, but The New Super Mario Bros. (for DS) isn't really retro despite having the exact same feel. As in fashion and cars, something is "retro" when it looks and sounds like something from an earlier era. If something is in between identifiable stages of visual/aural quality or style (say, the first Tomb Raider), it's retroness is less certain.

In games, the look and sound are tied to the tech, but the tech itself isn't what's retro about the game. I mean, Mega Man 9 and Retro Game Challenge are retro, but run on modern hardware; as do emulated Commodore 64 games.

[BooJaka]

I think it's used in games more because they're definitely "of the time". While people are still making music which could be found in an decade from 1500 to now, fashion and games are much more defined by the time they came from.

In both worlds of games and fashion no one ever makes pieces which could simply slip into other decades or even years, they make pieces which are reminiscent or influenced by those times. People aren't making paisley bellbottoms anymore than they're making true 16-bit sprite games from the early 90s. As a result the "retro" designs become dated.

The only music I can think of which is mostly seen as dated is that of the 80s, the whole synth pop sound which was a result of cheap synthesizers and all that. This is seen as dated because it is made on or using "retro" technology. Most, if not all, other music is largely interchangable in time from the moment they are produced to the present.

[Nachimir]

I think it's used in games more because they're definitely "of the time". While people are still making music which could be found in an decade from 1500 to now, fashion and games are much more defined by the time they came from.

If genre distinctions don't replace it anyway, I could certainly see a time when games technology plateaus and retro might die as a term for games anyway.

I take your points on a lot of music, but what about stuff like this? It has really strong retro associations and isn't heard much in contemporary culture.

I find it really strange how a load of contextual meaning can lead to quite arbitrary "retro" and "not retro" judgments