I'm having an argument with a kid born in 1987 (I was born in 1981)...

I'm having an argument with a kid born in 1987 (I was born in 1981). He thinks that he's part of the NES generation because the NES was still popular among his classmates in kindergarten and first grade. He wasn't, really, not in my opinion. By the time 1987 babies turned three, the SNES was already released. 1987ers are more SNES/Genesis kids imo. I was in kindergarten when the NES was released nationwide, and in middle school when its final games were released in 1995. People my age are the true image of NES kids. What are Yea Forums's thoughts on the matter?

Attached: 220px-NES_Kirbys_Adventure.png (220x206, 39K)

Born in 93 and people were still on Nes, heavily discounted and hand me downed. Cheaper option for poorer folk

Depends on what you had and what your parents were willing to buy and friends had. I was born in 87 as well and while I did eventually get a Snes and Genesis because my dad was into gaming, I had an NES for years before that happened. Are we defined by the timeframe or what we had growing up is the question.

If he started with NES he's part of NES. Global trends don't just happen simultaniously for all regions and individuals.

I'd say he's gen 5. Reason being when he was 9 (halfway to adulthood) it would be 1996 and my dad was easily a 2nd gen guy when he was 9

OP uses the term "kid," so maybe you could use age 6 instead since the teenage years start at 13? In which case your dad might be gen 1.

I was born in 88 and I would argue that I’m definitely in the Genesis/SNES era, but you have to remember that most kids didnt necessarily have the latest console, and may have older siblings who owned an NES. I played tons of NES before getting a Genesis one Christmas. So the timing is absolutely SNES generation but that doesn’t mean he didn’t grow up with the NES library instead

Born in 90 and I still consider myself a NES/SNES kid.

We had the newer consoles a few years late anyway.

>I'm having an argument with a kid born in 1987
Nigger that's a 32 year old, not a kid. And you're pushing 40. Yikes!

>being so much of a autist that you have to argue against someone that grew up with a nes that he isn't a nes kid

>He wasn't, really, not in my opinion
You are a retard and nobody fucking cares
t. 87 guy who grew up playing fucking NES first, SNES later

I was born in 86, I think you would need to have an older brother that had an NES.

Yes, he as an individual grew up with the NES. That doesn't mean he's a part of the NES generation, any more than a child who's given a Magnavox Odyssey in 2019 is part of the Odyssey generation.

He's a kid to me ;)

Note that in slavic countries there will be a time delay - I was born in 1986 and when I was 6-7 most kids had a NES. Computers were rare and NES and various bootlegs of it were commonly played until 1994-1995. After that, PC has exploded. Consoles such as Saturn, PSX had zero presence here, for some reason N64 was mildly popular, but never really a thing. We only fully equalized technologically in the first half of the 2000's

There's no such thing as the "NES generation" anyway so your entire point is an arbitrary distinction you're making in your head. If he grew up with an NES as his main system he's an NES kid and you're an autistic faggot.

>kid born in 1987
>(I was born in 1981)

you're both 30 year old men. jesus fucking christ.

I'm 33 and I was part of the NES generation considering we got one in 87. You're an idiot for pulling the age card anyways.

If the fag played NES in his childhood he wasn't an SNES kid, how much of an autist are you?

No, I'm closer to 40 and he's closer to 30. Six years is a big difference. I could have changed his diapers.

I was born in 1990 and I only had a NES and a MegaDrive unil 1998. Back then people held onto consoles for a lot longer: They had lower failure rates owing to the simpler technology and more durable cartridge based games.

Not everyone immediately upgrades when a new system comes out moron.

Also, nice larp.

You're almost 40 and you're still arguing about this stuff?

I don't know if this is true in general, but it definitely doesn't hold true for the NES. They were notorious for breaking down after a few years due to bad design. Ours became unplayable after about 7-8 years.

Born in 90 and my first console was the 64.
Kind of related, anyone else find themselves thinking that vidya is a waste of time as they get older? A couple of times a year I'll go through a phase where I'll play for a few weeks (played TF2 for the first time in years yesterday), but I find myself gravitating towards woodworking, hunting, and lawn maintenance as of late. Am I going to be okay?

I played NES games on a bootleg 100 in 1 console. Am I part of NES?

I'll still be arguing about this stuff when I'm 90.

You've caught 30 Year Old Boomer Disease.

1987 here. I 100% agree. Despite my first console being NES and playing many NES games, I remember SNES much more fondly.

They didn't break down. It was just the shitty right angle pin adapter. you can take the top off and play them just fine

That's interesting, though it's functionally a distinction without a difference since most of us who were kids in the 90s had no idea.

Different generation in technology allowed for people to be 'atari gen' or 'NES gen' for much longer as anyone growing up at the time. You would find hidden gems from early on in the consoles lifespan even years later because information was all spread by a limited amount of gaming rags and word of mouth.
Once gaming magazines started to really take hold and internet was available to more and more people the information about games became more widespread and really changed people's purchasing habits because they knew more about the most current stuff and it's library while early 90's and before, you were very limited in information and games in general so everyone ended up playing mostly the same stuff even for really oddball titles that now wouldn't get a second look unless some e-celeb shilled that shit.