Looking at the layout currently amongst
11 12 questions, we have: 45 tagged for applying to Commodore 64.
- 1 tagged for applying to Amiga.
- 1 tagged for applying to the NES.
- 2 tagged for applying to the SNES.
- 1 asking for acquiring old games.
- 1 asking for recently-developed open-source games.
- 1 asking about adaptations of old microgames.
Of these, the last two do not feel like they are about retro-gaming. The former I honestly don't know why it has the tag, while the latter doesn't actually seem to know if the games exist (in which case, how would one know if they were "retro" games?).
So excluding those, we have a bunch of questions with the tag purely by the generation of console, and one about the actual hobby of retro-gaming. The general implication by this usage is that as time passes, what generations of consoles are considered "retro games" will increase in number and we'll have to add the tag as we go along. Is this what we want to see, or is there going to be a defined generation barrier for what is retro enough? In whichever case, we really need to define a list of which consoles/handhelds count as "retro".
Moreover, what about games that are designed to be like retro gaming? For example, this question is about a virtual console game, should it get the retro gaming tag? As well, Cave Story is often cited to be a "retro game" due to its gameplay and appearance as opposed to its age. Do we categorize it as retro-gaming?
I guess my end question is - do we define retro-gaming as the age of the game, or as the design of the game as well? What other factors are being used to define retro gaming currently?