/vr/ will prosper because aspies will never tire of arguing about what belongs and what doesn't.

It's to give /v/ermin yet another board to shit up while moot continues to ignore the rest of the site

File: 1363609617325.png-(199 KB, 750x479, vr_culture.png)

199 KB PNG

Thank moot we have a board for that now!

>>484237 (OP)
>/v/ has zero issues discussing older games.
Mate. I've done more discussion on /vr/ in the six hours it has been here than I've done in six years of /v/.

This doesn't make any sense. Most of the population of 4chan is too young as is.

People are literally fighting over what is considered a retro game by today's standards.

Because /v/ is massive and moderating it is fucking hard.

To think we wouldn't need to fragment the most popular boards if only moot would get better mods.

>>484339

And since you have been here for six years you surely remember the start of /vg/.
>Mate

/v/ isn't video games, let's face it.

/v/ is Gaming News, Console Wars, Twitter Discussion, Let's Play Discussion, and my personal favorite, let's laugh at stupid pictures drawn by autistic losers.

The first few hours of /vr/ have been far more video game oriented and it's nice. RIP /v/, only idiots will browse you.

Face it, /v/ is a shit board full of shit people who would rather post about gaming journalism and Anita. This is merely to get away from your fucking terrible "community".

>>484375
>>484373
How people don't realize they're the vocal minority is beyond me.

>>484373
And that's the same shit that happened with /vg/ for the first few days.

Im guessing moot hates /v/.

>>484344
I get that, but there's several far better possible splits.

Like making a board for vidya industry discussion or something. Allowing /v/ to be just vidya and making all the "Vidya Journalism, vidya companies, console shitstorms" go somewhere else.

/vr/ is either gonna die after a few weeks when they realise they have nothing new to talk about, or it will turn into a terrible nostalgia circlejerk where even mentioning MGS games past 1 will have people making death threats.

Do we really need three video game boards? We're already arguing over what is /v/ and what is /vg/. Now we get to fight over retro too.
Thief II is from 2000. Not retro by definition. Same for half the IE games. What about these? If we allow them because they're very similar to earlier games, what about the new "old school" Kickstarters like Wasteland 2 or PE? /vr/ is one huge fight waiting to happen.

All these new boards seems destined for the trash bin apart from the gay people board and the wrestling board.
What I want to know is why didn't moot add /kr/ or /cel/?

It really is /vg/ all over again. But it won't last.

Mark my words /vr/ will die out and become a husk of repetetive circlejerks about the same shit over and over. In the end elitst tripfags will claim it and rape its corpse.

After the hype fades away there won't be any new content released. Nothing to debate, nothing to argue. Just a bunch of dudes wailing in nostalgia, nothing wrong with that, but that's not enough for a whole board. /vr/ might not become as slow as /i/, but only because of idiots bawing how /v/ is awful, was always awful and just got more awful.

It also makes /v/ actually worse.
There has never been a problem with retro threads on /v/. Most of them were really pleasant, but now trolls and kids will redirect any thread about a game before 1999 to /vr/ spamming it, shitting it up.

I hope /vr/ bores itself to death before moot's judgement day, because I don't want to constantly switch between /v/ and /vr/ just because I don't seperate the video games I like by the millenia they launched.

>>484439
This. We've been through this already.

>>484339
Yeah, that's the start of every board, now those 6 hours are gonna be repeated over and over for the next week

>>484373
That's funny i saw plenty of discussion about games in /v/(though now is a lot harder thanks to moot) maybe you don't look hard enough

>>484439
Absolutely. Threads about old series and games never really had that many problems, there was the odd faggot crying about nostalgia, but he went ignored. Now /v/ is going to be impossible to post old games on, and /vr/ will be dead or shitty after a few weeks.

/vr/ can never be relevant, there will never be new content discuss and you'll just have to go back to the same old games you've already discussed a million times.
I think for discussion to be interesting there needs to be new things releasing and coming up to discuss.

>>484339
Same with /vg/ and look what happened to that.

Most generals turn into tripfag circlejerks, off-topic discussion or facebook faggotry after a few weeks.

I strongly disapprove of /vr/. Sure, that probably doesn't matter to anyone, but I still feel the need to say it. There would have been better ways to further split /v/.

>>484482
Exactly, it'll be fun for a week or two, but no way can it survive in the long run.

That is unless they also allow threads about new games in old series. But that would be redundant since half the modern games go under that category. And it would make it even less clear what goes on /v/ and what goes on /vr/.

>>484487
the threads on /vr/ allready existed on /v/ and were generally pretty quality threads, I dont see the need to split them, we had /vg/ for focused discussion and /v/ for general chat about old games.

I kind of understood the logic behind making /vp/ and /vg/, it stops huge threads clogging up the board.

But what the fuck is wrong with retro games? Also, what exactly are we considering retro, anything that isn't current-gen?

And if we can still post about retro on /v/ anyway, what's the point?

Mootikins dropped the ball here imo

>>484494
His reasoning is that since threads about old games where just fine they didn't belong on /v/, since he apparently thinks /v/ is beyond saving.

moot's a faggot.

>>484373
>/v/ is what i choose to see
Nice cherry picking.

/v/ is the second fastest board on 4chan and even surpasses /b/ on occasion. Breaking it down into smaller boards isn't a bad thing at all.

>>484514
Noone says breaking it up isn't a bad idea, but making /vr/ is a bad idea. There's plenty of alternatives that would work much longer in the long run.

>>484526
>Noone says breaking it up isn't a bad idea

That sounded retarded, meant to write "Noone says breaking it up is a bad idea"

File: 1363612151282.jpg-(15 KB, 243x200, no grafics.jpg)

15 KB JPG

>>484491
Agreed. It seems pointless.
In my opinion, a more meaningful split would be to create a non-worksafe sister board for /v/, for discussion of anything erotic. Sure, we have enough porn boards as it is, I won't deny that, but if you take a look at /v/, tons of people every day get banned for posting vidya Rule 34, erotic games get discussed often enough, but pictures are prohibited. So there's definitely a strong demand for non-worksafe /v/ content.

tl;dr, an NSFW /v/. I think it would be widely popular and help vanilla /v/ a lot. What does /q/ think?

>>>/vr/1

>>484498
But /v/ kinda is beyond saving. It's the second-fastest board on here and is pretty much a transition board for newfags who feel like venturing beyond /b/.

moot should have just split /v/ into two boards:

/vc/ (video games - casual)
/vh/ (video games - hardcore)

Would have been quite a magnificent shitfest, and since "/v/" no longer exists, newfags would not be sure which board to go to to shit up. And sorry for the usage of the word "newfags" but I really can't think of any better word.

>>>/vr/2

>>484558
That's an even worse idea than /vr/. There can't be a definitive line between casual and hardcore, there are many great areas. Both boards would be without a clear direction.

>>484570
>great areas
meant to say "grey areas".

>>484570
I know. Like I said, "magnificent shitfest".

>>484570

>/vh/
>Dork Souls
>DF

The rest of the board is just >>>/vc/ over and over and over again.

>>484577
How would that help anybody?

I don't get it. Did retro games shit up the board or something? Whenever there are threads about "old gems" if you excuse me calling them that they hit the bump limit however they weren't frequent enough to be annoying.

I would much rather have /vc/ so we don't have to deal with console plebs flavor of the month 24/7. e.g. donte, dark souls, ps4 etc.

>>484588
Only one way to find out!

>>484593
>donte
Available on PC
>dark souls
Available on PC

So on /vpc/, any game that's also available on console wouldn't be allowed, correct?

>>484593
>Did retro games shit up the board or something?
No. Nobody else gets it either.
This seems to be an attempt to lower /v/'s user count, and that's definitely a good intent, but I don't think it'll succeed.

>>484613
I think a board for japanese games would be better, would fit 4chan and those are actually hard to discuss on /v/ nowadays.

>>484621
But that would create an intense board rivalry between Western /v/ and Japan-themed /v/. Seems counterproductive.

>>484237 (OP)
>/v/ has zero issues discussing older games

This is wrong.

>>484621
While I see your point, that would also be problematic since it would result in some extremely strong "grorious nippon" tendencies, not to mention arguments over games like Dark Souls and MGS, which take a lot from western style and mentality.

File: 1363612907414.jpg-(3 KB, 126x118, 1306454857219s.jpg)

3 KB JPG

>three video game boards

I'm confused, where do I talk about what now? What's next, a board for every genre?

>>484613
I'm still calling for a "Vidya Industry" board. Vidya journalism, new consoles, controversies and all that. Easy to distinguish and set clear lines, much material for continues discussion, would reduce the overflow on /v/ by a large margin.

>>484642
Seems like a personal problem. I see terrific retro threads all the time.
Bad threads can occur in any topic. You're pretending all retro threads on /v/ were shit. That's a boundless exaggeration.

>>484654

>pretending to be retarded

I think it's an attempt at splitting up /v/.
Smaller boards = less trolling. That's just how it is. Though the question is whether the boards will actually get smaller or if people will just visit both boards.

File: 1363613060945.png-(152 KB, 425x608, 1328705780193.png)

152 KB PNG

>>484654
Yup
/jv/ - Japanese video games
/wv/ - Western Video games
/tbv/ - text based adventure video games
/vj/ - video game journalism
etc etc

So, I guess nobody likes my NSFW /v/ idea?

>>484673

The problem is video games threads are head deep in shit. /v/ is dead. Dead.

>>484687
I think a western drawn porn board would be better for that.

File: 1363613138798.jpg-(102 KB, 640x427, 1356146238423 2.jpg)

102 KB JPG

Wrestlingfags got robbed lol. I'd rather a Wrestling board than a Retro Games board. But oh well, suck on it faggots. I finally got my trap board.

>>484688
Sure, but only because it's overcrowded.
Really, that's /v/'s ONLY big problem.

I was just about to ask this on /q/, actually.

>>484700
But it wouldn't be video game themed. It would do nothing for /v/.

>>484704

And /vr/ separates old games from newer games, how is that bad?

>>484712
It's a pointless split, nobody had issues discussing old games on /v/.

>>484548
Interesting. I like it.

>>484687
I'm pretty sure Moot has never ever responded to a request for a nsfw version of a sfw board. There isn't a good reason for him to now, given how narrow what you're proposing is.

>>484722
>It's a pointless split

No it isn't.

>>484722
It splits up /v/ (hopefully) making threads less crowded. It's a more meaningful split than /v1/ and /v2/. And it probably generates less of a shitstorm than /masterrace/ and /console plebs/.

>>484726
Narrow? Please, pay attention to how many /v/ users wish to post NSFW content. Don't underestimate the power of porn.

>>484730
Elaborate how it isn't. What was the issue with dicussing old games on /v/?

>>484708
Goddamnit. Wrong thread.

>>484741

Elaborate how it is. So far there's more healthy vidya discussion on /vr/ than there has been on /v/ for the past month.

>>484754
But what about in 1 year, when every game ever before 1999 have been discussed to death, what then?
There will never be new content for discussion.

>>484739
>It's a more meaningful split than /v1/ and /v2/.
Not by much.
And I predict a very low user count for /vr/ because I doubt I'm the only one who fails to see the point.

>>484754
Elaborate how it is.
Read the OP.

Moot really fucked up with /vr/.

Only real problem with /v/ was non-vidya related shitposting. Well, maybe crybabies who keep complaining about /v/ too. Everything else (including alleged "stop liking what I don't like" attitude) is non-issue.

Instead of fixing this one problem, moot just made a new board, and made crybabies absolutely insufferable as they are shitting up /v/ with "ha-ha, fags, I'm moving to /vr/ now, stay in this filth" (and for some reason moot does not touches said threads, but destroys every thread with /vr/ criticism).

>>484741
>What was the issue with dicussing old games on /v/?
There is no issue with any particluar thing being discussed on /v/. The issue is that /v/ is too big and a possible solution is to split the board into subcategories - even if both categories can be discussed just fine.
Imagine if /po/ would become too big. You'd split it into papercraft and origami although both things are discussed just fine.

>>484765
>>484769
>low user count, no new content, turns into circle jerk fast
Though that might indeed be a problem. Well, it IS a trial board.


Alternative suggestions for a split then?

>>484688

>>>/v/181500768
>>>/v/181501706
>>>/v/181491772
>>>/v/181501697
>>>/v/181504073
>>>/v/181491845
>>>/v/181488927
>>>/v/181499713
>>>/v/181502058

And that's just the frontpage.
You fuckers are the worst.
>baaaaw everything is shit
>/v/ is shit

>>484765

>when every game ever before 1999 is discussed to death

There has been more games made in <1999 than >1999. Those games are also generally more complex so there's more things to talk about.

So glad /v/ is getting split again! Maybe now /v/ will be completely shitposting. Thanks moot!

It's use is to split up the vidya community even more.

NO ONE asked for a Retro Games board, but Moot actually wasted his time making it to confuse people even more and make people believe that games that are a generation old don't belong on /v/.

But still, who the fuck asked for a Retro board? In the 4 years I have been on /v/ daily, I don't think I've ever seen anyone who asked for this.

>>484786
>Alternative suggestions for a split then?

There's been plenty through the thread.

>>484741
Good for them. There's absolutely no reason that porn can't go on one of the existing porn boards.

>>484765

>when every game ever before 1999 have been discussed to death, what then?

you don't understand old people. listen to a classic rock radio station; it will play the same exact songs every day, year in, year out, and the listeners love it.

Agreeing that the board is useless.

At least we have /gd/, which is the only useful new board.

>>484786
>Alternative suggestions for a split then?
Suggestion is simple: there is no need for the split.

>>484788

First thread is some faggot saying Skyrim is better than Oblivion, obviously a disguised shitposting thread.

>>484803
Also, I can see it easily becoming the /mu/ of video games, but maybe even worse.

>>484812

Here's an idea: I am tired of the shitposting on /v/, there can be no healthy discussion when there's thousands of shitposters shitting up the board. I only hope moot gets some tight janitors for /vr/.

>>484805
There is. Those boards are already brimmed with content themselves. People getting banned to hell and back all the time on /v/ for breaking the NSFW rule should be enough of an indication how much sense that board would make. Are you pretending non-worksafe video games don't exist? Or that they're not worth discussing?

>>484813

I think you should get your terminology right and maybe read the thread.

4 vidya boards? Really, mootles dear?

Nostalgia goggling faggots who refuse to grow up.
Oh well, maybe /v/ will be good for a ch- pfft hahahahahaha! I couldn't even type it with a straight face.

/v/ is cancer along with all of the shit boards it has spawned. Fuck that board so hard.

>>484838
Don't worry , they'll be more to come

>>484842
/a/ pls go.

pls

>>484804
There haven't been any even worth considering. There's been, what, vg porn (Lolno), casual/hardcore (fucking terrible idea, you people are complaining about confusion regarding what goes where now, that'd be much worse), and making a PC board (closest to valid but has many serious issues).

>>484854
>vg porn (Lolno)
Why the fuck not?

>>484824
Define "shitposting" here

>>484389
So fucking what? Vocal minority or not, the board is still shit. Shitposting taking up the board due to 90% of the posters or 10% of the posters has the same effect.

>>484854
This isn't a worthwhile suggestion?
>>484667

>>484854
Every single board suggestion ITT is a much better idea than /vr/. Every single one.

>>484796
The problem is, only a handful of people have played DOS games, and even less have played Obscure Game X. More than that, barely anyone has played said game recently and feels like discussing particular aspects of the gameplay, instead of wallowing in nostalgia. The games that had a big player base and a lot of content to talk about already did well on /v/ - see SMAC for a perfect example. The rest won't suddenly get popular just because /vr/ was created. Look at it now, most of the threads that aren't about popular classics are basically: "Know game X?" "Yes, it was funt/No. Know game Y?
Let's look outside of 4chan for a moment. There's a site with a similar premise, called RPGCodex, dedicated to old cRPG worship. The funny thing is, they spend 95% of their time discussing NEW releases, kickstarters and other events in the video game industry. You simply can't talk about the same bloody games over and over again. The same will happen to /vr/.

>>484825
People get banned all the time for posting Anita shit on /v/ all the time too, should we make a board for that?

I've seen this argument time and time again made by people who can't be assed to go to the real porn boards to post porn. I've seen it on /tg/, /co/, and /v/. And every time it's the exact same shit: a bunch of people who think they're too special for the porn boards and should be allowed to post porn where they want to because they're special snowflakes.

>>484894

If you don't like /vr/ don't browse it. Why are you so buttmad about it?

>>484905
Because now I have to dig through two fucking catalogs instead of one.

It's a good idea since now I don't have to deal with people who think Doom is the best fps ever made.

Nostalgia-fueled idiots on /v/ are the worst.

Western games and Japanese games.

/wv/ and /jv/ is the most sensible split right now with the huge portion of retardedly militant anti-"weeaboo" fuckheads on /v/ right now. That shit is unbearable. And the best thing is, all the "feminism" bullshit, gaming journalism bullshit and EA and friends being cancer would be exclusively limited to /wv/.

You could have stopped this /v/. You could have not been fags and complained about vidya in your board.

Now you're gonna get more splinter boards until /v/ has nothing to it's name except another place for /b/ to stick their dicks into. Sucks to be you guys.

>>484926
What about slav vidya?

>>484926
>retardedly militant anti-"weeaboo" fuckheads on /v/ right now

Don't forget the actual weeaboos, you know, the one's crying about how grorious nippon is and how baka gaijin western games are cancer.

>>484903
Anita shit isn't really a worthy base for discussion.

There's a fine difference here. Erotic video games are a big thing, many people love them, they want to discuss them, and they can't do so on /v/. You want to tell them to go to /h/ or /d/? That's just redeploying the problem to somewhere else. /b/? Useless board.
I could come up with dozens of topics that could be discussed on Ero /v/. I don't see how anyone could disagree so strongly, unless they hate fap games by default.

>>484946
/cb/ - Cheeki Breeki

>>484951
>and how baka gaijin western games are cancer.

And people going on about Objectively Superior Western Game Design (fuck the gooks) is any better?

As for actual weeaboos, these are, and always have been, extremely rare on all of 4chan. It's not weeaboo to prefer Japanese game design.

>>484952
Wait, are you actually implying that people can't discuss H games on /v/? Bullshit, I see generals for them all the time.

>>484969
>And people going on about Objectively Superior Western Game Design (fuck the gooks) is any better?

No. When did I ever say so?

> It's not weeaboo to prefer Japanese game design.

There's plenty of faggots who just can't shut up about it, though.

Fuck you, I already love /vr/

>>484984
Yes, and they get the banhammer if they want to post related content. It's a highly restricted discussion because /v/ is supposed to be SFW. And then there's of course the frequent vidya girl threads and so on and so forth.

I'm curious as to where games that are designed to look and play 'retro' should go.

Or indie games, like Cave Story, Yume Nikki, etc. Not that I'd expect anybody on /v/ these days to even know what they are, let alone discuss it, but y'know, I could be wrong.

>>484334
HE'S NOT EVEN GETTING A PROMOTION COME ON

>>485074
No one knows about Promotions anymore

>>485061
>Expecting /v/ not to know Cave Story or Yume Nikki

You must be new here.

>>485079
The guy that posted that image probably got that image from me. I sometimes try to bring back Promotions from time to time.

File: 1363616184040.jpg-(54 KB, 288x428, 1351991394039.jpg)

54 KB JPG

>>485061
>I could be wrong.
More than you know.

>>484237 (OP)
I can't believe people pretend that /v/ isn't wall to wall shit posting. One person mentions feminism or Anita and thread is fucking dead.

File: 1363616459458.jpg-(64 KB, 290x236, mariosad.jpg)

64 KB JPG

Welp.
Guess I'll just stop caring and instead pretend nothing happened.

>>485153
But that never really happens.

>>485153
Thank you for admitting you have no idea what you are talking about. Do you often make baseless generalisations about other boards on 4chan?

>>485111
/v/ of 2008-onwards is completely different of /v/ 2007 and before. I honestly don't expect /v/ to play anything other than cowadoody, brofield, skyrim and whatever generic AAA title is on the horizon.

Compared to /v/ in the past which had a nice balance between big titles, indie games, Japanese games and Western titles as well.

Hell, I doubt anyone who browses /v/ these days would remember this getting a sticky and that was only in 2007, if I remember properly. So I honestly wouldn't be surprised if people on /v/ didn't know about Cave Story or Yume Nikki.

http://www.dango-itimi.com/jam/

>>485129
This is unfortunate.

>>485170
>>485168
Except it does, all the time.

>>485179
Well, CS+ being released on steam didn't hurt.

>>485187
Except it does not.

>>485179
>This is unfortunate.
He was telling you that everyone knows what Cave Story and Yume Nikki are. Cave Story is a big hit on the Wii Store, Steam and the freeware and everyone knows about Yume Nikki from wrod of mouth.

That no fifth generation rule was not thought out well at all.

>>485207
Go make a thread bioshock infinite. See how long that will go before someone starts jerking off about feminism is destroying video games.

>/vg/ is created
>people can finally discuss certain games without shitposting
>CIRCLE JERK CONTAINMENT BOARD
>/vr/ is created
>people can finally discuss certain games without shitposting
>CIRCLE JERK CONTAINMENT BOARD

lol /v/ IS the containment board

>>485207
Oops, then that's my bad. Still, I'd be shocked, based on what I've seen on /v/ in recent times for them to laud any game that isn't published by a big name, Western developer.

Again, I could be wrong, but this is the impression I get from /v/ these days and that if you were to discuss such games, you'd just get your thread shitted on by the 'anti-weeaboo' contingent.

>>485216
Truth.

/v/ loves raising shitstorms so much that if a topic can be connected to feminism, console wars, or a 'blunder' /v/ will try its fucking hardest to make it so.

>>485236
>you'd just get your thread shitted on by the 'anti-weeaboo' contingent.
Those are just the new wave of shitposting trolls who are desperate to get a response from anyone. If you ignore them it stops. Cave Story gets huge threads when people post it.

>>485254
Console wars are an entirely different breed to those other two.

File: 1363617369905.png-(115 KB, 1000x1000, 1351042439335.png)

115 KB PNG

>>485236
For CaveStory it's the "antifurry" group.


That isn't exactly without warrant though...

>>485222
>people can finally discuss certain games without shitposting
Except it's not the same games /vg/ was created in the the first place for. See: LoL generals, SC2 generals, KS generals, FTG generals, etc. There's still plenty of shitposting on /vg/

No seriously, I tried to make a Snowboard Kids game thread, which came out in 1999, and it got deleted. Meanwhile there a thread for Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid. That's some hypocritical busllshit on the janitor's part.

File: 1363618066971.jpg-(536 KB, 659x873, 1363225483738.jpg)

536 KB JPG

It's not like /vr/ is taking away from /v/, you are still allowed to post older retro games on /v/

It wouldn't matter much anyways since probably less than 5% of the threads on /v/ have been retro games

/v/ does need to be splintered too since it's almost as fast as /b/, slower boards are easier to moderate and, if you don't mind waiting longer for a reply, much better for discussion. This is coming from someone that is constantly on slower boards

maybe moot should just kill /v/ and create a bunch of tiny video game boards

>>485347
>/v/ does need to be splintered too since it's almost as fast as /b/, slower boards are easier to moderate and, if you don't mind waiting longer for a reply, much better for discussion. This is coming from someone that is constantly on slower boards
This.

I'm not so sure why people are all mad about it existing anyways.

/vr/ is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever seen someone do, I can't believe moot is this incompetent

Instead of fragmenting discussion of video games he should have made a /pc/ board, which makes a lot more sense than /vr/

Kill /v/, keep breaking it up into smaller niche boards until there is no need to have /v/ any longer. Easier job for mods and janitors and it's less appealing for Rebbitors and newfags just leaving /b/

/vr/ is for talking about games you played during your childhood in the late 90s/early 00s because that's what retro means!

>>485383
Because it's absolutely pointless. What's the point of adding in a new board to talk about video games when there's already another one that does the same job? Not to mention that moot clearly doesn't go on /v/ enough to know what the board actually needs, all he's done is split up the board again.

>I'm not so sure why people are all mad
How frequently do you go on /v/?

This is probably the most useless board I've seen.
Give it a week and it wil lbe left to die or it will become ground zero for shitposting and circlejerk.
Thank you Moot, no better way to start a morning than with you making dumb rules.

>>484567
>"Fifth Generation" is not considered retro
>PS1 and N64 are not considered retro

They came out nearly 20 years ago! How aren't they retro?

>>485401
/pc/ is idiotic and you know it, the userbase would be elitist scumbags and relations with /v/ would be horrible, each board would shit up the other endlessly, then there's the practical problems, hardware and software discussions would be redundant with /g/, multi-plat games would cause endless shitstorms over where it goes. There's really no point in it.

A better solution would be a Video Game Meta board, vidya journalism, vidya industry, console wars, all that would go to /vm/ and /v/ would be purely video games.

>>485416
>because it's pointless
See:
>slower boards are easier to moderate and, if you don't mind waiting longer for a reply, much better for discussion.
Not pointless at all.

>How frequently do you go on /v/?
Fair point. Okay, there's no GOOD reason to be mad.

File: 1363618746506.png-(49 KB, 484x278, 1363618073356.png)

49 KB PNG

>>485454
Because the mod is a fanboy.

>>485401
i was just on /vr/ and its fucking awesome, what are you talking about?

>>>/vr/14491
>>>/vr/2062
>>>/vr/17079
>>>/vr/973


Throw in about 3 janitors, and two mods and we got ourselves a solid board.

add some BGM every other week or so, and its fucking golden

>>485464
I still think thats absolutely beautiful

File: 1363618879949.png-(126 KB, 381x385, 2005.png)

126 KB PNG

>>485464
Now that's just fucking golden.

>>485464
Mods confirmed for nintenyearolds.

>>485475
I think it's fucking retarded since the rules say anything from before 1999 yet no 5th gen. moot should hire someone from /v/ who actually knows how to handle the board instead of doing stupid shit on a whim that will do nothing but turn /v/ into the new /x/, although he's enjoying drawing out the process.

>>485470
>a bunch of threads that happen in /v/ everyday
Not sure what is your point

>>485470
I've seen all of those threads on /v/ in the past 4 days.

>>485470
>its fucking awesome

Yeah, try going in there in 2 weeks.

The idea of /vr/ is stupid to begin with, the board is only for ancient games, there's no new material to debate. After a few weeks everyone will realise that they've discussed everything there is to discuss.

>>485470
>add some BGM every other week or so
Would be neat

>>485501
>>485504
Might be able to avoid some of the digital vs physical arguments that tend to break out.

>>485470
The majority of those threads used to show up on /v/ regularly but now they are intended to be moved over to another board.

Yes technically you can still have these threads on /v/, but this is /v/ you're talking about. Any thread about a game on /v/ that happens to have a general thread gets shitposted in and the person is told to fuck off back to /vg/. Even if they aren't being serious it's going to happen with /vr/. Hell I've already seen it happen, people are spamming a Metroid thread telling the OP to fuck off back to /vr/. /v/ is full of idiots who are obsessed with shitposting.

>>485512
No it won't, is the same people who made those threads, it have nothing to do with the board.
The "what's your favorite sonic game" already have people talking about the new ones, it proves how pointless this segregation is.

/vp/ and /vg/ actually made sense when they were created, both in retaliation to a type of thread that was quite frankly dominating the front page of /v/. I don't see the point of /vr/ though. Was it because retro games didn't have a chance to live on /v/? If that's the case then I disagree as I've seen plenty of retro-based threads live natural and active lives

File: 1363619313164.jpg-(69 KB, 550x710, 1317066872555.jpg)

69 KB JPG

I think the solution to Moot's problem about /v/ would be making a Game industry or culture board. That way you get rid of EA hating threads, gamegrumps/pewdiepie or any let's player they want to discuss, Anita Sarkeesian and her feminism bullshit, Twitter discussions between game developers, popular reviewers like Yahtzee and Angry Joe and everything else that aren't the game themselves.

But no, let's make EVERYTHING shit and create a board that doesn't do anything but hinder videogame discussions in /v/ and /vr/ ending up dying being a hipsterfest where you can't discuss games that have modern sequels like Tomb Raider and Final Fantasy.

>>485531
I forgot to specify that I was talking about the collectorfag thread only.

>>485528
And noone's to blame for this except moot.

He fucking knew it would end out like that, and now all threads about old games are doomed to either end out on /vr/, which will turn into circlejerking after a few weeks, or /v/, where it will be shitposted to death.

What's the point? threads about old games used to be just fine.

>>485536
i think moot fears that if he actually admits that video games have their own culture that the board will be destroyed overnight

>>485536
>I think the solution to Moot's problem about /v/
What problem? The shitposting? Heavy moderation solves that far better than anything he can come up with.

>>485542
Yeah I don't understand this move at all really.

/vg/ was needed, /vp/ was needed but /vr/ was not needed, there was absolutely no problem with Retro Video games, all this did for /v/ was add another level of shitposting, like /v/ really needed any more of that.

>>485569
Problem is that /v/ has a massive population, it's downright impossible for the mods to keep order in it all.

First they have to find some way to reduce the amount of threads.

Of course, /vr/ is a stupid fucking solution.

>>485579
Is not that massive, i can keep order quite easy if i ever get the power to do it.

>>485579
This, /v/ can be helped with some moderation but the board needs to be thinned out a bit for it to make any real impact. /vr/ was not needed though, if there was some way for moot to get rid of the console war threads it would be help. Maybe make a business of video games board, or something?

>>485579
It's not as hard as it seems to keep track of many threads at the same time. It would be even easier if moot had decided to get in a fuckload of new janitors and mods for /v/.

File: 1363619933491.png-(498 KB, 492x620, wah.png)

498 KB PNG

Now I have a serious dislike for rebbit, but I have to admit their split of r/games and r/gaming seems like it would work well for us. Just make

>/v/ - Video Games (Post your favorite vidyas, discuss games and whatnot)
>/vm/ - Video Game Media (Post your favorite game videos from youtube/twitch/etc, discuss why slowtaku is shit, etc)

It gives people who bitch about Game Grumps/Anita Sarkeesian/PewDiePie a place to go and talk about why gaming journalism has been dead for the past five years

>>485563
>culture
It's 5 month old /b/ shit.

It's absolutely pointless, all it does is create an arena where people know they discuss games of a certain age.

Is anything not current gen considered retro?

>>485612
He's not refering to stuff like 4 AM threads and Daily Dose, he's refering to "Gaming Journalism, Gaming Industry, Consoles, LP'ers etc."

>>485611
Oh yeah, throw in thread IDs just for the heck of it just to get rid of samefagging in threads.

>>485614
5th gen and over goes on /v/.

>>485611
It's not only Redd1t. I think 2ch or 2chan (or both) have the same split so it's only Moot the one going full retard.

File: 1363620173617.jpg-(587 KB, 1031x4477, JAPAN TIME.jpg)

587 KB JPG

>>485591
>if there was some way for moot to get rid of the console war threads it would be help. Maybe make a business of video games board, or something?
We don't need a new board for a different aspect of /v/ the moment something big pops and becomes the focal point for a while.

Are you going to demand a new board for /v/ when E3 or Japan Time 2 come around? /v/ can handle console wars, or any big event for even years if you don't intervene with a new board. Things always die down, but they won't if you don't let them. They won't if you take that big event out of its zone, throw it in a new, sterile board specifically created for it and expect things to work better.

>>485644
Console war threads inherently aren't supposed to be allowed on /v/ anyways though.

>Flaming/flagrant "fanboyism"/etc. will not be tolerated.

File: 1363620340814.png-(91 KB, 500x591, DON'T THINK FEEL.png)

91 KB PNG

>>485644
>Japan Time will probably be pushed to /vg/ by newfriends who weren't here for it the first time

The only explanation I can find is that moot hates /v/. Which is strange considering /v/ is actually one of the better places to discuss videogames on the internet and while there is constant negativity it also forces people to try out more games and develop some actual fucking taste.

Moot obviously has no idea how /v/ works.

>>485671
There's a difference between fanboyism and console wars. When Neogaf gets involved it's fanboyism. It's also against the rules to post image macros.

If anything should get a retro board, it's /a/. Most of the discussion there is about currently-airing shows and everything else has a hard time getting attention. In comparison to /v/, it's much harder to discuss old stuff there.
And despite this it'd still be dumb to create an /ar/ board because it'd grow old fast. /vr/ is absolutely pointless.

It's kind of useless, but it already has much better discussion. I think we should give it a bit more time before we decide if it's useless. Plus /v/ is too fast now anyway.

All moot did was make 5th and 6th gen games impossible to discuss on /v/, since people will spam >>>/vr/ even though those games aren't allowed there.

>>485782
no one fucking said that.

>see board is shit
>decide to move discussion of older games to its own board
>/v/ talks about games even less and any vidya discussion is told to go to /vr/ or /vg/
Thanks, moot

>>485789

Read the sticky in /vr/.

>>484237 (OP)

Because Moot's a fucking moron who thinks "if we split up the board even more /v/ may not be so shit anymore!!!"

The only two ways to fix /v/ is to either destroy it, or to improve the moderation system and go full Nazi Germany on their asses.

/vr/'s true failing is the fact that moot chose 1999, which was the threshold for retro back in the MID-LATE 00'S. Times change, and at this point the sixth generation (which began no more than a year later) is easily retro too.

>/vr/
>not /slov/

Retro games are slow and all, but there are games that cannot survive in /v/ that are newer than 1999. The best example off the top if my head is Treasure Planet: Battle for Procyon. Nexus: The Jupiter Incident is another. Great games, but too slow for /v/.

Let games like that on /vr/ and I'll be happy.

>/asp/ isn't for autism

The fuck are "alternative sports" anyway?

If anything we need a proper health board. Since /fit/ don't know anything outside of lifting.

>>485871
Take down /v/ and all /v/ associated boards for a few months and bring /v/ back as a secret board. /v/ was fixed and back as one.

>>485899
Other boards would get filled with the shit from /v/.

ok, so maybe we'll end up discussing everything in about two weeks...

that's pretty fucking probable

then it'll turn into
>what games are ya play /vr/ ?
>ITT: we play for highscores with time stamps
>old vs new game threads

Good points made /v/ I think that it'll last a bit longer than two weeks. I'm gonna say it'll last till summer, then it'll die off in one of two ways
>we discussed everything
>cancer, EVERYWHERE

File: 1363622981604.jpg-(57 KB, 556x516, q in a nutshell.jpg)

57 KB JPG

>>484654

It's funny how m00t said in the past he isn't going to break up /v/ yet that is pretty much what he is doing.

I guess if you bitch long enough on /q/ you get your way. I wonder what sort of shit I can force on the whole of 4chan. I don't like being called Sir, maybe if I make a few threads every day for a month I can get it wordfiltered and make it ban worthy offense using it.

Probably to split up content even more on one of the fastest boards on the site. Not to mention a re-branding of a board keeps it a lot more on topic (at least at first)

>>485899

If Moot does that, he will at least have to give some notice like "this will be the final week of the /v/ boards or something" and not just suddenly.

Cause we will probably have another /b/ incident on our hands and remember what happened to /x/ that time?

Are you fucking kidding me, moot? Another fucking video games board? Just axe all of them, their userbases are shitty as hell you will never get to pander every single subdivision they have.

>>484654
I still can't believe we have an entire board for pokemon.

>>485908
That was never shit from /v/ to begin with. That was overflow from other places like /b/, /new/ and /r9k/.

>>485932
Moot's current actions involve turning /v/ into /x2/ through a painfully slow and stupid method.

>>485939
I still can't believe we have an entire board for Katawa Shoujo and Starcraft 2.

Why is there a board for underage boys but not girls?

>>485959

Holy shit there is one....

>>>/lgbt/

Well I like /vr/. For the moment at least it's on topic with good discussion, something /v/ has been sorely lacking for far too long, which is I assume one of the reason's moot made it.

The funny part is that lately /v/ wasn't even all that bad. I've made multiple threads which hit bump limit and fostered a good discussion throughout their entirety.

Retro gaming discussion never had any problem on the board, and the board never had any problems with retro gaming.

This whole ordeal seems like a spiteful mess made by moot and other fag mods in an attempt to take a stab at /v/ for some reason I can't understand. It's disgusting, pointless, and should be removed ASAP.

File: 1363625468939.gif-(495 KB, 500x223, 1YSJ.gif)

495 KB GIF

>Moot makes a board about vidya
>Call it /v/
>/v/ thrives and becomes a popular board for being unique and enjoyable.
>rage comics, Japan time, the console wars, Harmony, many great moments in /v/'s history were forged by the love and hatred of vidya.
>Then people started not wanting vidya on their board.
>Started small, like not liking the large amounts of pokemon generals and trying to contain them to a single board. Didn't go too well and now /vp/ festers in it's own shit unless a new pokemon game comes out.
>Then people wanted generals completely out of /v/. /vg/ was made, and now that generals were forced out, people just started spamming topics about the same crap over and over again instead of containing it to one thread. Plan backfires and /v/ gets even shittier.
>Now people want anything involving retro or older games shoved out of /v/, even through nostalgia is an intricate part of /v/ in the first place.

>People complain about shit like feels threads and no girlfriends threads. Others say 'M-MY /v/ CULTURE!'
>It gets to stay.

If you assholes wanted to be on /b/, then go fucking be on /b/. Why must you keep stripping vidya from /v/? I mean goddamn people, get your priorities straight.

so if /vr/ gets a board why can't manga get its own board?

/v/ is too fast.

/vr/ means /v/ slows down, which also translates to quality threads sticking around longer and it being easier to moderate.

>>486271
Culture threads are almost a thing of the past. The mods have been doing a GREAT job at keeping that shit down.

Consider the fact that just last week Anita fucking Sarkeesian released her tropes vs women video. Now try to recall how many threads you saw survive for more than a few minutes.

The fact is that the community has gotten more active at reporting culture threads, and as a result, discussion has drastically improved.

This is why this split is just so confusing, and the way moot phrased it made it seem like some snide attempt at punishing a board which was on its way to healing.

>>486271
>Now people want anything involving retro or older games shoved out of /v/

I don't think anyone wanted this before today.

>>486271

Clearly, the solution is to destroy /vp/, /vg/, and /vr/ and force their subjects back to /v/.

>>486268
Well, no shit. Moot has publicly said how much he hates /v/, so he sees /v/ is doing alright recently and has to come in and shit all over it so all the other boards can cry that AMG /v/ IS SOOOOO BAD ALL OUR PROBLEMS ARE /v/'s FAULT!

>>486304
I agree. Culture threads are being contained somewhat, but it feels like just removing games from a board that is struggling to stay relevant about video games. With this new board, though, /v/ will be even less on topic than it usually is. Still, they do exist. Buzzwords and shitposting are still fairly common.

>>486312
Apparently enough people complained for it to be merited. That or moot and the mods are being fags. Either way it's retarded.

>>486317
I agree with this. Considering /vg/ hardly contained the large amounts of Dark Souls and Walking Dead threads that popped up late last year in /v/, it's purpose is pretty much null and void. It would be much more appealing to remerge it, /vr/, and /v/ back together so that the generals will serve their purpose proper once more: Containing specific game discussion to one or two threads.

/vp/ I am unsure of. Unless pokemon battle threads got stickied for easy access I could see /vp/ having SOME use, but I do want /v/ to be whole again.

>>484498
>he apparently thinks /v/ is beyond saving.

/v/ is /b/ 2.0

I can understand if a newfag wants to argue and whine about how it isn't but it is, even moot knows it. He moved on to /sp/, but /v/ used to be his favorite board

>>485259

I have never seen a CaveStory thread get shat on for being furry.

Last night there was a Solatorobo thread with proper discussion and there was only one shitposter claiming it was furry shit while posting 2 pictures of bestiality.

He got his shit deleted by the mods.

What's up with these drones crying about how there is no discussion on /v/? Every board has trolls so what makes /v/ trolls so special that we need new boards?

>>486320
i don't think he's ever said that.

EVER.

if he has then link up where he said it.

>>486419
Read the stick on /v/ right now.

File: 1363626656260.png-(207 KB, 705x2949, i am b.png)

207 KB PNG

>>486406
There used to be a comic about /v/ being corrupted into the new /b/ several years back. Back then it was just a fear. Something that could be and we should avoid it and keep what made /v/ unique.

It's funny how what the comic predicted pretty much happened exactly as it was fortold.

>>486406
>newfag
Get the fuck out of 4chan you piece of trash. Take a look at /v/ right now and try to notice (aside from /v/ threads, which are reasonable) how many /b/ threads there are.

Vita thread
BF4
STALKER
Bioshock Infinite
Metroid
Hotline Miami
Wind Waker
Resident Evil
Dwarf Fortress
ARPG
Kickstarter
MGS4
How many of these are non vidya?
It's like you don't even visit the boards at all, much like moot and his merry gang of dicksucking faggots

>>486677

one

>>486677
Moot's repost on the front page sums it up nicely.

>That's not the issue at hand here, The issue is that /v/ basically shitposts and rages and bickers amongst themselves all fucking day, and then when moot does something and makes a board where it's okay to actually talk about videogames without it getting pushed off the board by filenames and console wars, they get up in arms and say "QUICK, TALK ABOUT VIDYA, MAKE IT LOOK LIKE WE HAVEN'T BEEN WALLOWING IN OUR OWN FILTH FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS!"

>>486720

That's really funny, son.

Moot reposting opinions that fit his agenda. Moot uses shitposter terms like "sonygger" and he gets to decide what fits to term "retro" and what isn't video games.

Are you implying that getting angry and bickering over video game opinions isn't video games? Does every video game forum have to be a hugbox where only positive opinions are allowed?

>>486720

But that doesn't fucking happen. /v/ has tons of video game discussions, the vast majority of its threads are video games. Yes, it has a problem with off-topic stuff, but to say that's prevalent is the kind of massive over reaction that you people are prone to. This isn't some case of people suddenly deciding to talk about video games to cover it up, that idea is retarded and baseless. This is people who don't really post there kneejerking to what a select group of retards say.

>>486720
Ok let's break this down:
>/v/ basically shotposts and rages and bickers amongst themselves all fucking day
Aside from shitposting, /v/ has ALWAYS been this way. This was one of the key aspects of /v/, even from the olden days, /v/ was about RAGE. Shitposting is a problem that can be easily alleviated, seeing as most of the time, it's the same small group of people that shitpost, this is hardly a problem in its own right, considering you'd see a shitpost maybe once per 50 posts in a decent thread about a decent topic.

>when moot does something and makes a board where it's ok to actually talk about video games
This implies that it's not OK to talk about video games in /v/, which, again, is a load of crap, as pointed to by my previous post, which discusses both old, new, console, pc, indie, and AAA games on one page at the same time. Nobody will get in your way if you make a decent discussion in which other people are interested in. I think this is fine, and this sort of discussion has always been in /v/.

>filenames and console wars
There's only ever one filename thread on /v/, and, same as before, console wars was ALWAYS a thing.

>Last statement
Again, moot is making a false assumption that /v/ doesn't talk about vidya, and he's attributing the anger and frustration at the formation of the new board towards that, rather than his making a stupid mistake.

His hatred, mistrust and misunderstanding of /v/'s nature are extremely apparent.

Thank you m00t. Seriously. Thank you. I usually hate board splits, but this is perfect.

The one thing I want to ask is if the year limit will be raised yearly to accommodate with the times.

>>486803

He removed 5th gen, because and I'm using his words "Sonyggers".

What a great guy, that moot fellow.

File: 1363629114253.jpg-(150 KB, 469x544, jewbreaker.jpg)

150 KB JPG

I have just been marked for a ban, which is good because that means /vr/ has janitors. Except I wasn't even bumping the offtopic thread, so thanks for that, fagget.

>>486830

Posting in off topic should always be bannable. It doesn't matter if you bumped it, you added to an off topic discussion.

>>486841

I understand that, it was a thread ban apparently, since the thread was deleted. I thought sage would render you immune to it, though.

>>486853

It shouldn't. Why were you posting in an off topic thread?

File: 1363629547442.png-(19 KB, 200x200, 1295441458347.png)

19 KB PNG

>>486860

I-I was telling them to stop.

>>486879

When was the last time that worked?

I wonder if moot did this because /v/ would shitpost all his BF3 threads.

Well it didn't work. You still can't talk about games /v/ shitposters don't want you to talk about.

Just try posting about Call of Duty and watch as /v/ tries to self moderate you out of existence.

File: 1363629879401.gif-(18 KB, 275x300, Farfetchd[1].gif)

18 KB GIF

>>486914

This makes no sense.

>>486914
I mean, the obvious solution to /v/ is better moderation.

But if all moot can do is create new boards, why not modern games instead of retro? It was damn easy to talk about retro games. It's impossible to about current or upcoming games because people keep posting shit about paid reviews and CASUALS whenever you do.

>>486928
What doesn't make sense? What I said?
How?

>>486937

Why would a new board fix that? The problem here is moot thinks that if you make a new board, only the good people go to it, when, as /vg/ has proven, that is in no way accurate.
The true solution to /v/ is to moderate shitposting, and leave everything else be. Creating a million separate boards does nothing.
We also need to accept that the part of the /v/ user base that posts off topic is not the same part that shit posts.

>>486937
>paid reviews

Too bad that's an actual problem in the industry. See:

>TORtanic
>Mass effect 3
>DmC: Donte May Cry
>Fez

Just to name a few from the past few years

>>486988
And too bad no one can show legitimate approval for those games without getting shitposted and labeled as a marketer. Its fucking stupid.

>>486960

By moderating "shitposting" then any form of dissent and criticism against stuff like CoD, reboots of old series and casualized sequels would be a bannable if some fanboy decides to report you.

Wouldn't that be a bit silly? I mean everything can be interpreted as "shitposting" from someone's point of view.

>>486988
That's great. But why is it is necessary to come into a thread where a few people are talking about a game and then spout bullshit which adds nothing to their conversation and derails it?