Racing Lagoon, a unique racing RPG from Squaresoft has been translated - https://www.romhacking.net/translations/6352/

How can normalfags play games this way?

>>1646 People born or used to the 4k days have low tolerance towards visual abstractions or interpretations, also a sign of mental problems at least for young people.

>>1648 the funniest thing is when you see normalcattle asking "what are those black bars to the sides and how to get rid of them" when talking about old games they are content with the image being stretched the fuck up and all deformed as long as it's 16:9, the subhumans

Part 2 of the retro grading scam investigation. https://www.yewtu.be/watch?v=mKbuNwS-gaI Recap ends at around 8 minute mark.

Dinowars - Kyouryuu Oukoku e no Daibouken has been retranslated. https://www.romhacking.net/translations/6379/

>7th gen is considered retro now by normalfags >we need remasters of games that are widescreen and in HD

>>1842 Given how dodgy the performance is in a lot of 7th gen games it does make some sense, of course developers should be working with the hardware rather than against it in the first place.

>>1843 >Given how dodgy the performance is in a lot of 7th gen games What do you mean? I'd say the performance is dodgy now. Nowadays you need 100gig patches to fix the game which wasn't the case back then.

>>1844 Oh I'm not saying that it's any better now, rather that porting games (especially exclusives) to hardware that can actually run them properly does have a purpose.

>>1845 That would be nice if we talked about a faithful emulation of a game, basically a rom. They literally never do that. Hence why all the remasters are poorly thrown together attempts at recobbling a game to make it run on a new hardware, adding a whole bunch of previously unseen issues and pretty much destroying it in the process. Still, even in the theoretical case of 1:1 emulation with an expanded RAM or whatnot, the thought of a remaster for a game that's already in HD is comical to me because, you know, you have to buy it again. The excuse for pre-HD era remasters is at least that you're getting the widescreen, way higher resolution, maybe higher framerate - substantial upgrades that completely change the look and experience of a game. But re-buying a 7th gen game that already looks perfectly modern (it's the gen where all the modern cancer started after all) for a maybe slightly better performance? That's just wank.

>>1846 That's true, too many remasters are not only poorly made but make unneeded changes that undermine the original design. The term remaster has been misappropriated many times to give a false impression of legitimacy I think, whether it's 'enhanced ports' like the Crysis remaster that removes sections of the game or remakes that keep almost nothing from the original like Spyro Reignited. The ideal remaster would in essence run the same underlying code (with allowances made for issues when porting of course) and increase the rendering resolution (and remove the FPS cap if there is one), though of course even when that's attempted developers often manage to fuck it up (Ratchet Trilogy on PS3 for instance). >But re-buying a 7th gen game that already looks perfectly modern (it's the gen where all the modern cancer started after all) for a maybe slightly better performance? That's just wank. If the game originally ran at 30 or even 20 FPS then that's a pretty big performance boost (assuming the 'remaster' runs at 60), such things should be provided for free to existing owners though. The issue at the core of this is that developers keep designing games for the next gen of hardware rather than what we have now.

>>1850 >If the game originally ran at 30 or even 20 FPS then that's a pretty big performance boost Well, not necessarily; depends on the game. If it's some fast paced action game where FPS is actually important to the gameplay, or some bigass openworld game that stills to a crawl because the hardware can't handle it - 60 fps is an improvement. But even then I wouldn't buy a game again for that; I honestly don't know that many actually good games that are optimized so poorly on the original hardware that they run so dodgy, usually it's pretty decent. But then there are a lot of games where you don't move fast and don't explore giant environments, so 60fps is honestly not that big of a deal. But (((they))) will still try and sell it to you twice and then thrice. You're right that in an ideal world FPS shouldn't cost money.

What do anons think of "pre-HD" or "pre-widescreen" definition/cut-off date of retro?

>>1960 >definition/cut-off date of retro One would need to define Retro first, honestly one should pick eras by hardware (the current use of "Gens) and by overall creation doctrine. That last one is tough but one might think/improvise something around 2D/Sprite-focused with audio via specialized chip input, then 3D/polygon+texturemap-focused with audio via mp3/redbook, the next step/nowadays model is interesting because the change was mainly more around economic system than design, it's service-based with standardized game engines... which always existed (Renderware) but nowadays the numbers of said software is reduced and certain base library assets overused to the point of being able to identify it by glance. The thing you say i guess can be cut in the first half of the Gen 6 as i recall some Xbox and PS2 games running at HD (1080p) if you used the cheap to make, pretty tough to find composite cables. In theory the Gamecube can too, the early models had the entry still behind and under the console, but can't recall games using it. 2003/2004 i guess?

>>1961 Well, actually the idea was to specifically cut off after the 6th gen. Because all conventional cut-off dates basically split the 6th gen up, which is very much retarded. True, there technically were games in widescreen and even in HD (like Gran Turismo for example) but those are more individual, experimental examples, we're talking widespread usage here. I would say it's fair to designate the 6th gen as "pre-HD" or "pre-widescreen". See, the 6th gen fucks any attempt at a clear cutoff date because it started in 1998 and ended arguably as late as 2008. So it was contemporary with both the 5th and even the 4th gen on the one end of the spectrum, while on the other end all the "modern games" that come out now are pretty much just skin swaps of the late 6th gen games. So you have a single gen with games so old and archaic that their genres don't even exist anymore, and at the same time games so modern that their genres haven't seen any substantial update since mid 00s. There's really no other way than to include the entirety of the 6th gen because cutting it up is just silly, somebody gonna police the discussion about 6th gen games? Like opening wikipedia and going "uh, this game came out in in march 2003 but our cut-off date is may 2003, you can't talk about it in this thread"? I would rather propose a 'photorealism boundary'. Basically when games and technology started specifically aiming for a photorealistic picture, is when "retro" truly ended. To me what we call retro - both 2D and early 3D - is not about dates but rather about artistic merits of working around major technical limitations, which is what made those games so good. When every game looked absolutely different and unique because they were all hyper-stylized artistic depictions of reality seen through the prism of artistry of creative people. Not so much anymore when 90% of the entire development process goes towards making everything look how it does in real life - which is, you know, the same. When the 7th gen started we didn't just gain things like upgrades in storage space and resolution, we for the first time in gayming history started progressively losing things, losing artistry, because there were no more major technical limitations to overcome. More and more elements started becoming token. Like water for example. Water was among the most creative things to render in the absence of shaders, bamp maps and whatnot; everyone was doing it differently. But when that time came and the aiming for photorealism started, it became an afterthought. Water will look like water in every game, it's a stock engine asset after all.

>>1961 >i recall some Xbox and PS2 games running at HD (1080p) 1080 interlaced rather than progressive, Tourist Trophy and Gran Turismo 4 IIRC. >>1963 The time frame for retro used elsewhere is about 15 years IIRC, which makes sense when you consider the difference between a 2007 smartphone and a modern one, even though they have comparable feature sets and design goals. I'm not sure you can specify photo realism as a boundary, games like Half-Life and Gran Turismo aimed for those things within the technical limitations of their time. As you've said it has more to do with standardization of technology, in earlier years when 3D tech was new it was up to each studio to invent their own solution for rendering specialized elements in a scene, since game engines, royalty free assets and tons of documentation have become more widely available, there's no longer a requirement to write your own water shader for example.

>>1965 >I'm not sure you can specify photo realism as a boundary, games like Half-Life and Gran Turismo aimed for those things within the technical limitations of their time But that is exactly my point. See my line about <True, there technically were games in widescreen and even in HD (like Gran Turismo for example) but those are more individual, experimental examples, we're talking widespread usage here They may have strived for a "photorealistic" look to the best of available contemporary technology, which is perfectly fine, many other games attempted that, just looks at the Getaway game for PS2. But just like with what I mentioned about the widescreen and HD - it's more of an individual, experimental approach; case by case scenario. An artistry in its own right. Just how we look at the original Toy Story from 1995 and it still holds some artistic merit because of what a colossal undertaking it was to make it, while all the modern 3D cartoons are soulless identical-looking garbage from a conveyor-belt. What I'm talking about is specifically when that became the norm, the standard; and certainly almost every game since the late 7th gen aims for photorealism one way or another, unless it goes for a diametrically opposite approach of cell-shading for instance, which by now is almost dead too - even anime games go for photorealistic backgrounds or overall look.

>>1968 I keep forgetting anoncafe doesn't have pink text

>>1968 ><True, there technically were games in widescreen and even in HD (like Gran Turismo for example) but those are more individual, experimental examples, we're talking widespread usage here I thought you were talking about pure resolution and aspect ratio here, which aren't difficult to change for the developer. >what a colossal undertaking it was to make it The tech behind big AAA titles will have involved tons of man hours of work, a big reason AAA plays it so safe is because these projects are retardedly expensive to produce. >What I'm talking about is specifically when that became the norm This is the issue, it's less about photo realism specifically and more about homogenization in the name of what sells. For instance if Wind Waker was the biggest seller of its generation then you would see mountains of games copying that aesthetic and formula from the same time period. In other words it's trend chasing, like survival crafting or battle royale.

>>1972 >The tech behind big AAA titles will have involved tons of man hours of work, a big reason AAA plays it so safe is because these projects are retardedly expensive to produce. Maybe nowadays, when gayming, just like film, became bloated. Back in the day giant complex games were made by modest teams of actually skilled programmers and artists. Now everything is made by codemonkeys, talentless "gaym design" graduates and freelancers, through mega crunching. >homogenization in the name of what sells >For instance if Wind Waker was the biggest seller of its generation then you would see mountains of games copying that aesthetic and formula from the same time period Not really, it wasn't like that back then, overbloated sales weren't as universally commanding as they are now. If you look at the best selling 6th gen games it's GTAs, Gran Turismos, Super Smash Bros., MGS2, FFX. None really saw mountains of copies copying the aesthetics and formula. Even the GTA wannabes were distinctly different from the progenitor as well as one another. Similarly, I wouldn't say that starting with the 7th gen games began chasing photorealism because some game like that sold a lot. Rather it was an instantaneous shift, from the get go, driven by the new technology which seemed "ready"; a justification for a new generation - now it can create realistic graphics! By that point games were starting to imitate film more and more as a "superior medium", so that ability to get visually closer to film was among the chief reasons why photorealism became so prevalent: "film is serious business, non-realistic games are for babies." You started seeing a lot of hack wannabe and failed film directors/writers get into the medium because it was the next best thing, now they can finally "manifest their genius vision". And they told you in all the interviews how realistic cutscenes imitating film is the important thing, and how graphics better be fucking photorealistic or nobody will recognize celebrity actors' likeness. So basically that ability to be more movie-like is what started getting mainstream attention from the MSM and corporations, eventually turning gayming in the dead husk that it is today. And why I think photorealism is a good boundary for "retro"; apart from technical aspect it's also about before and after the hijack of the medium.

>>1973 >mega crunching I don't recall what the name of that phenomenon is but i keep seeing it and it keeps being proven right, the best or most memorable products of many eras in many mediums were made by overly skilled artists, as in people who were trained above the skill level required and didn't pull any power when trying to create their original intended products. In music an example would be the San Fagcisco area where a famous teacher (Satriani) overly trained his pupils and when they later tried to make their rock albums they ended up holding the bar higher than what was usually heard of (Bay area scene), in games this would be seen with many of the most memorable games being made by engineers and specialized tech hand that weren't really into gaming but knew many tricks the machines could do. It's a controversial take many mainstream fags hate and i've been target to them for saying it but it is true: The best results in video games have been made by engineers who didn't particularly liked them instead of passionate devs who studied something specifically to make games. It seems video game-related studies make people underachieve compared to past results, mostly due to poorly implemented (or planned) programs or merely because they end up burned out before even finishing their courses which is a common trend nowadays in many fields, so much that in some countries there's a concern about studying universities' increasing crunch times as a factor for the current generation's stigma for being already rabid or lunatics in work places despite still being young. And crunch times are very often the result of poor leadership, rarely because of an exceptional case. As a post-data i can say i've experienced much more massive crunch times and mental anguish in my first years at college than working manual labor in construction fields which was a breeze compared to the former and that including some dude falling to his death from the last floor one time in a office building project.

>>1975 >by engineers and specialized tech hand that weren't really into gaming but knew many tricks the machines could do. That is very true. If you look at the stories of game creation from the 90s, almost every single one involves some ingenious and autistic trickery and a truly divine knowledge of coding.

>>1973 That's fair, 7th gen did see a big influx of movie-style games (of course there's long been an element of that with stuff like cinematic platformers, adventure games, Quantic Dream and even Kojima). Mountains was probably the wrong word, the more exclusive nature of game publishing or even having access to devkits in the first place back then would've made soulless asset flips less sound financially speaking (not that there wasn't plenty of shovelware of course). Heck if you wanted to simplify things 7th gen is a pretty good cutoff anyway, we had: >Sizable online functionality >Game patches >DLC everywhere >Digital only titles >Complex DRM based around cryptography 7th gen has more in common with 8 and 9 than 6th gen after all.

old is good.

>>1997 >1997 best year confirms

>>1995 >Heck if you wanted to simplify things 7th gen is a pretty good cutoff Well yeah, that was my ultimate goal and point. "Retro" ends after the 6th gen - that is, we include it entirely - and 7th gen is when modernity begins: it's the gen of widescreen, HD, photorealism, standardization, "hollywoodization", as well as all those other hideous practices you mentioned and then some. This cutoff line is actually very straightforward when you realize how free of all this shit the 6th gen was; no wonder normalfags can't stand games from it already.

>>2000 Point taken in my case (not him tho) but i suppose there's salvageable games in Gen 7, despite DLC some games did end up having complete physical editions and with no indication inside the UI that something was originally DLC. Not proper examples but some others in the early years might be, despite the memes the Xbox 360 tried the japan market with now hard to get games like Blue Dragon or that one RPG with 4 discs. Also some Xbox Live Arcade titles could very well be small titles that were sold as budget in the PS2 library but decided to skip publishing, Snoopy's Air Combat game might be one example, Mark of the Ninja too if it didn't have some wallet-punching DLC special edition later. But on the whole Gen 6 was the last classic gen as we knew them, i can agree on that, Gen 7 might have some of the last ones (just like Gen 6 had some egregious early attempts at Gen 7-tier products) and Gen 8 downright made away with it unless we go into the fringe PC market backpages. Now that would be an interesting exercise, i recall ages ago checking on names from some titles that might've been worth a check but never did because i didn't mod the 360 for some reason, guess i was too much of a poorfag.

>>2003 7th gen definitely had some good games, mostly early on when devs were still figuring stuff out and it was more like 6th gen with shaders and bluray-size storage capacity; after all, going downhill means you're still near the top for some time. But it rolled down fast in all the bullshit mentioned above. Having said that, even the best gen 7 games were already palpably interior to the previous gens, I don't think there's a single game where you felt any type of evolution or improvement. I distinctly remember waiting for at least one game to come out that was just like a 6th gen game that I liked but with nextgen graphics and some basic QOL improvements. But instead time and again games were veering into bullshit trajectories of linearity, scripted events, online, general casualization, and so on.

>>2004 *excessive linearity

>>2003 >>2004 Wii has a pretty strong library even with all the waggling (NMH, Galaxy, there's some good WiiWare games etc). Honestly the best way to enjoy 7th gen on wards is to not pay the piper, I don't actually remember the last time I paid for a video game.

>>2006 I don't really consider wii a gen7 console tbh, at least morally. Obviously it is time period-wise, but it clearly produced gen6 looking and playing games. It definitely was one small window of respite during the onslaught of "modernity" in the gen7. Ironically, outside of the few well known, almost meme-tier games like Sports and all that, it feels like 90% of the Wii library has been completely forgotten. It definitely had quite a few games worth looking into, and not even the waggling variety.

>>2007 Now that I think about it in terms of hardware (at least at launch) PS3 was the only system that was fully 7th gen in a sense, Wii was a more powerful Gamecube and only ever had analog video whilst 360 phat needed the network adapter for online and had fucking memory cards specifically for it.

>>2008 360 was definitely 7th gen, just a poorly made one, remember it used fucking HD DVDs lol. But it did run all the same games as PS3. Actually 360 was the very first 7th gen console, it predated PS3 by a whole year.

>>2011 I just meant that certain design decisions hardware-wise were like half measures that didn't fully commit to the new gen, which makes sense when you consider that 360 and PS3 were rushed to market (which resulted in hardware failures for those early units of course).

>>2012 Well it makes sense really - when it came out in 2005 the internet usage was still very limited, people were only starting to get affordable broadband worldwide. They definitely didn't foresee 100gig day one patches. It was also years before the social cancer and DLC was a nearly non-existent concept so the online element was likely not considered that big of a part of the nextgen compared to HD and photorealism.

>>2014 >They definitely didn't foresee 100gig day one patches lol, I can imagine the conversation: "So we can update our game after we've released it?" "Yes, people can download them on the console and install them automatically." "So we don't actually have to finish the game before we press to disc?" "Uh..." "brb gonna develop a 2 year project in a year and a half." >so the online element was likely not considered that big of a part of the nextgen Live did well on the original Xbox though, and networking was standard with Wii and PS3 (DS and PSP also), my guess would be it was either a cost cutting measure (I wonder what the profit margins on those dongles was) or because they genuinely didn't have time to integrate it before launch.

>>2015 >Live did well on the original Xbox though It did but how big of a role it played? Not that big. It was more of a toy for "advanced gaymers". >and networking was standard with Wii and PS3 Yeah but they came out a whole year after the 360. I legit think that in 2005 (which is when it came out so think up to two years prior as it was in development) online wasn't the biggest priority. >So you're a super videogaymer, huh? Like to play with your friends online? Well, we have just the accessory for you for the low-low prince of $59.99. And then there's still the issue of broadband not being widespread until 2005-ish.

>>2016 Just remembered that the 360 has Ethernet so the distinction is built in wireless rather than networking. DS and PSP were late 2004 but 360 was probably finalized by that point. >low-low prince of $59.99 Talk about making a killing fuck me (though the components were probably a fair bit more expensive circa 2004/2005 but even so). Gotta get those hardc0re gamzer scores!!1111!

>>2017 Still not as scummy as DLC or microtransactions tho.

>>2006 >>2007 >Wii has a pretty strong library even with all the waggling While i agree there's some fun there i think the fact Nintendo went to "re-invent" what sitting down and play meant goes directly into the deconstructivism of video games which Gen 7 is known for, none spared like Metroid Prime 3 which was a break up regarding 1 and 2 simply due to having to waggle. Skyward Sword is still also frowned upon by many. There's some really interesting titles in it but very few for someone who just wants to use fingers or merely be traditional in the pad sense. >>2016 >Well, we have just the accessory for you for the low-low prince of $59.99. I remember being suckered into buying it, it was way more than 60 bucks.

>>2021 >the fact Nintendo went to "re-invent" what sitting down and play meant goes directly into the deconstructivism of video games which Gen 7 is known for While I agree with your overarching point, it's actually a misconception that Wii only had motion controls. There are quite a few games that allowed for the usage of the classic controller or even the Gamecube controller. Furthermore, some games used the motion controller as an orthodox controller as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_that_use_the_Classic_Controller

>>2022 More than i remember have to say, i see a few of the ones i remember writing down. Chart making when

>>2025 >Chart making when Of good Wii games or the classic controller usage?

The GameBoy Advance version of Resident Evil 2 was a tech demo created in the early 2000s by Raylight Studios, an Italian company to pitch their Blue Roses engine. By this point in time Capcom had lost interest in the viability of GameBoy ports, and the pitch was rejected.

>>2026 of anything really

>>2186 Might do.

Harmful Park, a colorful shooter for PSX, has been translated - https://www.romhacking.net/translations/6535/

Popolocrois Monogatari II, a PSXRPG, has been translated - https://www.romhacking.net/translations/6457/

The original Saturn version of Grandia has been translated - https://www.romhacking.net/translations/5871/