for this to be a meaningful conversation we kind of all have to agree on what "retro" means. to be honest I think this is less a conversation about chiptune and more a conversation about retro, because that's what everyone seems to be debating (judging by the fact that the word retro has quotation marks around it about 75 percent of the time it's used in the thread).
are we supposed to deem something retro based on artist intent? or are we talking purely aesthetically? because that's important -- I don't think my music is trying to be retro at all, but if you judge it aesthetically it's definitely a retro sound. I guess it IS retro-futurist but I don't go around calling my music that because that's pretentious as fuck 
it's probably some mix of the two (it always is), where the artist's intent has to be judged based on how he/she delivers the art. if the artist says that his/her music isn't retro but they don't do a very good job of convincing us aesthetically, then I'd say it's safe to call them retro. at the same time, if the artist is aesthetically modern, but he/she keeps calling themselves retro, I will disagree even if they're using old video game systems. music (and all art) is really a dialog between the artist and the audience, where the artist is trying to convince the audience of some reality being true or at least conceivable. if there's a dissonance between artist intent and audience reception, the art fails. the retro tag is really just an easy way for us to talk about art that references old stuff as a significant part of the artist's intent.
if you compare anamanaguchi to starscream (it's an easy example) I feel like the distinction becomes clearer. aesthetically, anamanaguchi is really retro (NES as the rock star, use of pixel art in a lot of their visuals, compositions that take advantage of the NES' sound) and I doubt that the artists involved will claim otherwise. starscream, on the other hand, is a band I would not call retro because aesthetically they aren't (videogame sounds fit neatly into drums + guitar without being overwhelming, use of HELVETICA and lack of pixel art in visual design, etc.) and they don't claim to be either. if you didn't know better you wouldn't even think that videogames were involved based on their sound because it's trying to be all post-rock and the videogame sounds are really just a means to an aesthetic end.
so the question stops being "is ALL of chipmusic retro" and starts becoming "is [artist] retro?" which is a more meaningful question to me. it's hard for me to conceive of a situation in which an entire medium is retro, i.e. danimal's post above, because if that were true then EVERY SINGLE ARTIST involved in that medium would have to both 1. have an intent that we could safely call retro and 2. succeed at convincing us that they are aesthetically retro. so I guess chillwave is retro 
sorry for the essay 
. Well hey I tried. I don't feel retro future is pretentious depending on how the phase is used, To me, it just congers up in image of what people in ealier times thought the future might be like, and so to me it's just the artist trying his or her intepretation of that musically or their version of what combining retro with ultra modern means to them. You of course take a risk when trying to describe new ideas but that's part of the fun of experimenting and self expression. .