Vintage Enough?
Since the beginning of TVG, we’ve had 1 rule. Cover systems that are 3 systems behind the current system. With Wii U coming soon, we will cover Gamecube games when it’s out.
Our forum community leader Dillon had a good point: With the 3DS out, the original DS/DS Lite is now 3 systems behind. You have the DS/DS Lite, DSi/DSi XL and the 3DS.
The question is, does it classify as vintage or classic enough to be on the site? It only came out in 2004.
Instead, should we change the rules to 3 generations back or 10 years, whichever is older?
Post your ideas in the comments below.
Share this:
About the author
Scott Hough has been playing games since 1986. His parents bought him a used Atari 7800 for his 6th birthday. He was hooked. He loves RPGs, RTS, and Flight Sim games. He is a big fan of the Dragon Quest franchise.
Comments
Naotaru June 14, 2011
Personally I’m thinking the 10 year rule would make more sense. Though at the same time it would open up 3 more systems which seems like a lot. I mean personally I love the PS2 and the Gamecube has some great games on it as well so I may be a bit biased, but I would enjoy having those here as well. At the same time though, this is a site meant for older games and while I love those systems, they still feel fairly new to me. So I guess I’m a tad torn about it, but honestly I don’t feel they should be here quite yet, especially not the DS since it is even newer still. I kind of think we should keep the 3 generation rule and then possibly a secondary requirement of at least ten years old. Though also in the case of the DS, I don’t fully consider the DSi/DSiXL to really be new systems. They were just updated models of the DS like the DS lite was, but with more things and some exclusive downloadable games. The downloadable games makes it tricky to place, but I would still group it with the other DS models still myself.
Another thing I was thinking about is that even with the 3 generation rule, there should be exceptions. Perhaps after 15 years it could have an auto-in or something of that nature as some companies stop producing systems and also in the case of the new generations of systems, the PS3 is still leagues ahead of the competition in terms of hardware. The Wii was fairly far back and it was necessary for them to put out a new system now. Microsoft is trying to keep the 360 alive, but honestly, it has basically reached its limit in terms of hardware and they’ll be forced to release another system soon as well. I’m actually quite surprised they didn’t announce one at E3 as well. As for sony though, the PS3 has hardly even been tapped. The biggest limitation of it is that the disc can only spin so fast to collect the data, but beyond that, they really don’t have need to release a new system for quite some time. The PS3 is quite powerful. So that being said, while the PS2 was released before the Gamecube and the Xbox, It would actually be much more likely to reach 3 generations back with the Xbox and Gamecube much sooner than the PS3 which also doesn’t fully make sense.
Another possible solution would be that upon the release of any system for the new generation, in this case the Wii U, it could be considered that that is the start of that generation and even the companies that have not yet released a system for that generation are still another generation back at that point. So by that, upon the release of the Wii U, not only would the Gamecube become available, but also the PS2 and Xbox.
Anyways, theres my thoughts on that. I went on much more than necessary. I rather hope I made sense. If you’ve any questions, feel free to ask.
-Nao
Monosyllabic Manifesto » Vintage Enough? June 15, 2011
[…] Posted on The Vintage Gamers Site: Vintage Enough?. […]
Samuel Floyd June 15, 2011
How about as soon as Gamestop starts clearancing out stock of that system’s games, we can cover it? :p
William June 16, 2011
Hmm, this is an interesting question. Personally, I don’t think the DS is quite there yet, a 10 year or 3 gens, whichever is greater may be appropriate. I think in my own mind, I’ve always had a 4 generation rule to be vintage, but at the same time, I’m fairly loose when it comes to spirit. I mean, if someone put out a brand new, 8 or 16-bit game system, I would have to think about it.
I’ve been wondering about the vintage distinction with PC gaming recently myself. I’ve loosely been using the 90’s as the cut off, but I think more specifically, I think of games released prior to Win98 as vintage, but 98 is pretty old at this point. (I’m obviously scaling all this on Windows since I don’t use anything else :p) There are exceptions going both ways though. I cannot call a game like like Diablo II vintage (released in 2000) since it is still very popular and sells a LOT of copies every year to this day. Other games like pretty much everything release by Spiderweb Software scratches my vintage itch, even games released in recent years. I know they are not vintage, but you know, I think things probably just need to be more subjective than how many years or generations old they are.
Perhaps a standard like “It’s not made/sold anymore” should play a part?
Leave a Reply