Search the Community

I heard about the refreshed Xbox Series X on GameLinked as thats where I get all of my gaming news. lol But as you can deduce from the title, I'm a bit disappointed that it's digital only. I understand that discs for modern consoles act simply as glorified download codes, but like I want my wall of plastic cases! XD So I was pondering if this is actually a bad thing though. There is the concern of ownership for certain, but like maybe this isn't a bad thing? Steamdeck is digital only and the PC space has effectively been digital only for years now. Has the time come? Am I old now? Is it just an old woman yelling at the sun when I say I want and will continue for as long as possible to purchase physical media regardless? lol Though I was curious as to people's thoughts on the subject manner. Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing? Also is Riley really that white? Him and I might have something in common after all! XD

I am modding my Gamecube and replacing the digital AV port with an HDMI port. I de-soldered the port to remove it and after doing that, this the current state of the board. Does this look fine or did I ruin the board? I'm a bit of a beginner at soldering and modding but I'm interesting in learning more, I have done some soldering before but it was very basic stuff, like adding a modchip on game consoles or replacing a speaker on a gameboy and doing backlit screen mods on gameboys. Things like that, but not something as complicated as this.

Heya guys, first time posting but couldn't think of a better place to ask about advice in his matter. My wife and I will be moving into our own apartment soon, and we're looking to get a new TV for the living room. Requirements are: Be OLED Support HDMI 2.1 (we own a Playstation 5, so at least one port would be good) Between 55-65' in size From looking at past videos on the LTT youtube, I think Sony, LG and Samsung TVs are dominant in the market. So if any of you got some good recommendations, I'd love to hear them. Have a wonderful day, thanks for reading!

I was curious as to why some game developers are completely uncapable of adding keyboard and mouse support to their games. I was curious as to if anyone had at least some insight as to why this is the case. I feel like we have gotten to a point where consoles have become powerful enough to the point where if your only objective is to play video games, it becomes way more worth it than pc gaming. HOwever, games such as Doom Eternal, are exclusive to the controller, and that is a game that is pretty much optimal to play on a kbm. Not only that but ID seems to be a relatively good and engaged group, that cares about their work, yet even they completely ignore fan suggestions to add Keyboards to their game. I really can't figure it out.

Hey is there such thing as an adapter that makes USB Audio & Mic work on the Series X just like there is for Controllers on CronusMax and Titan which tricks the Xbox into thinking it's an Xbox Controller? I wish to do this for Xbox games that support Keyboard & Mouse like Sea of Thieves and others and I'll probably use my Roccat SOVA Lapboard for Xbox as got 2 USB ports (1 for Mouse and 1 for my Soundblaster G1) or use my Yamaha AG03's 3.5mm port. Closest thing I can think of is USB wire the Xbox Controller to the Xbox and connect the 3.5mm port to the Controller.

Long story short i wanted to watch an old movie I had on a DVD and plugged the thing in my PS4. I got carried away and ended up not watching the thing but leaving the disk inside the PS4 and when i went to pull it out I noticed a spot on it of what seemed like to be mold. What i am more worried about is did I infect the disk drive in the PS4 and now there are tons of spores in the console? Dose anyone have a clue about it?

Every gaming handheld I’ve ever owned has come from some big Japanese company – But these didn’t. What are they, and can they possibly be any good? Buy ANBERNIC RG351M On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/wyoXuo On Newegg (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/4vCfF0 Buy Retroid Pocket 2 On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/pNp8iqt On Newegg (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/P0MBl0 Check out the ODROID-GO Super at https://lmg.gg/QZpTN

I've got a Crucial Question. A very Big question to ask you people. Seeing as this system is Completely obsolete in 2021 and I don't have money to upgrade, A lot of people here would probably laugh their heads off knowing that this doorstop is still being used today. Anyways, Here's my question: Does anyone know what size fan the Xbox 360 SLIM Uses? I'm upgrading my units fan to a better one, and I don't know what size to get. Please, Please Kelp Me.

Hi can you turn off 4k on 4k enhanced games to just play in HD Can you do that?

So I have always wanted a PS4 to play the PS exclusives but never could afford one as they are quite expensive in our country. The used market isnt that cheap either. However when the PS5 hits the stores im expecting many people would sell their PS4s to upgrade to the PS5 and as a result im hoping the prices will go down a bit lower. My biggest concern however is their reliability. The last console I had was an Xbox 360, had 2 of them and both got RROD. I really dont want to go through another one of those situations as consoles are pretty much un-repairable to my experience because everything is on the mobo. Is it 'safe' If i were to get a used one of those early 500gb PS4 models or even the ones that came later?

we are getting a ps5 and I've heard that some games will give you the option to run it at 1440p for better performance but how will it look on a 4k screen? since 1440p is a weird resolution how will it look in a 4k 65" screen? (specifically in an LG CX in game mode). will it look blurry? since they'll have to convert two pixels into one.

So I am currently at my local used games store and I have enough money for either a GameCube, a wii with almost every accessory, a ps2, a ps3, or an Xbox 360. I need help choosing because I’m indecisive as all hell. Just something to note though, I do not have an Xbox account, and I do not want to pay for Xbox live, however the games on it might be good enough to warrant a purchase of Xbox live. thanks for helping me choose

Oh boy, I'm going to stir up the hive with this entry. I found myself in a discussion on another gaming website where the article was originally for discussing the PS4 Neo, and the comment train went on discussing the implications of if consoles do follow the hardware refresh model like cell phones and such. Or rather, if you're going to have to spend $400 on the latest and greatest thing, doesn't this drive the value of console gaming down even more? So I want to look into this topic a bit further just to see what the cost of PC gaming is to console gaming over time. But first we need some ground rules to establish clearly defined goals, otherwise the goal posts will be moved. Let's start from zero, today. Like you've had no interest in playing video games so you never had systems dedicated to it. But now you do. I am not considering game prices to be a factor. But you may go "well that's not fair, because I can buy lots of PC games for cheap when they go on sale on Steam, GOG, origin, etc." and that's the thing. You can also wait for any console game to go on sale, not to mention other perks that some online membership services provide. PS+ for instance gives you free games and rotates through discounts. Plus I can also get any new game for 20% off from Best Buy because I'm part of their gamer's club. Basically, if I'm going to consider game prices, they must be at their release price, otherwise given enough time and patience, you can pay whatever you'd like for the game. And then there's also the question of if I'm counting AAA titles, indie titles, etc. With that out of the way, hardware must be purchased new and from official retail channels. Windows also has to be bought in the same fashion. Regarding Windows, its licensing rules must be followed. Peripherals are not included in cost. For consoles this presents an unfair advantage because you're likely to have an HDTV anyway. Whereas if your computer needs were on a laptop and you get a desktop, it'll easily add another $150-$200 to get a gaming desktop. Selling back to the second hand market will not be considered due to the uncertainty of how much you'll get back. In the console side, let's assume that if they are going to periodic hardware refresh route, it's going to be every two years and the price is going to stay at $400. For a computer, let's go with a decent budget gaming build I cooked up on PC Part Picker. CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor ($125.98 @ Newegg) Motherboard: MSI B150M Gaming Pro Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($72.98 @ Newegg) Memory: G.Skill NT Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($63.99 @ Newegg) Storage: Western Digital Red 1TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive ($60.99 @ Newegg) Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GAMING Video Card ($254.98 @ Newegg) Case: Silverstone PS08B (Black) MicroATX Mid Tower Case ($43.98 @ Newegg) Power Supply: SeaSonic S12II 430W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg) Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($102.98 @ Newegg) Total: $785.87 This should last us a solid four years before the processor becomes a little dicey in performance and reviews on the i3-6100 point to it being able to push at least 50FPS at 1080p with a high-end video card. The real question now becomes how often will you upgrade? If you do the silly thing in most peoples eyes and upgrade the console once a new refresh comes out, then that comes out to $800 after four years. If you do the same with a video card though, and you should be purchasing a video card that cost the same if not higher in order to have an appreciable upgrade, you'll be spending $500. However since the computer in four years is going to show its age, if you also decide to build another computer, you're looking at another $500 to replace everything. So total cost after four years with a two year upgrade plan: Console: $1200 Desktop: $1285 if you don't build a new rig, $1785 if you do. It ends up costing the same amount if you don't build new computer to replace the one you built, otherwise it'll cost a lot more than console gaming. If you end up waiting the full four years before upgrading anything, you're still looking at: Console: $800 Desktop: $1035 if you don't build a new rig, $1535 if you do. This also includes the cost of rebuying Windows since the first machine had an OEM copy. An OEM copy means the license is tied to the motherboard and cannot be transferred. If we bought the retail copy for $120, we would save the cost of rebuying it. There's just two snags that I didn't mention: Consoles include a controller. This alone is a $60 value to the consumer meaning the console itself (minus the HDMI cable because they're like $10 on Monoprice), the console itself could be worth $340. Consoles also can play Blu-Ray media. If I were to make this as much of an apples to apples comparison, I would have to add a Blu-Ray drive (an ASUS BC-12D2HT, to match the 6x performance on both the XB1 and PS4) and software to play it. There's also the question of playing. If you want the full Blu-Ray experience, you'll have to fork over money for a player like CyberLink PowerDVD. Otherwise VLC and some other free media players can play Blu-Ray movies. But at the minimum, you're looking at whatever the cost of a Blu-Ray drive is. The conclusion here about whether or not PC gaming is cheaper, costs the same, or costs more really depends on the upgrade cycle. For this comparison I was trying to keep things as equal as possible in regards to the upgrade cycle. But the results can be skewed. What if the console upgrade cycle was every two years but the PC upgrade cycle every four? Then PC gaming becomes cheaper. But most console gamers don't do that. And certainly most PC gamers don't upgrade that frequently either. On the hardware side at least, the conclusion is there is no answer. You can say one is cheaper than the other by setting whatever upgrade cycle you want. But for the sake of conversation, let's look at the games. Immediately the PC wins out because it can in some form or another play any game made on x86 from 1981 when the IBM 5150 was released to today. However, I'm also under the impression that for someone who just recently got into play video games, they probably won't care about 99% of the library made before the turn of the millennium... So we'll just stick that as a data point. While one could say PC gaming has an advantage in the retail sector because of Steam's famous sales with all the other distributors getting on the act (Like GOG, Origin, etc, heck even Origin sometimes gives out games for free), I could also point you to a perk that console gamers have access to: PlayStation Plus. In addition to a month-to-month rotation of discounts, six games on all of Sony's current platforms are free. As in, you just have to download it and it's yours forever. You still have to have a PS+ account to play it, but it's in your library forever. Assuming Sony can rotate a unique game every time, you're looking at 72 games a year. Granted you may not own a PS3, PS4, and Vita (or a PS4 and Vita), but the potential is still there. PS+ is also $60/yr, so for the cost of one new AAA game, you can potentially get 72 games. I don't know what Microsoft offers, but I'm sure they have a similar deal. With that in mind, I would say neither side has a definite advantage to gaming potential.

A few articles that popped up on my news feed are kind of upset over the idea that the new business model for consoles from here on out may be to shell out an upgraded refresh every two years or so. That now they are copying the cellphone model and feeding on the drive that people must have the latest and greatest shiny thing, lest they look like an ancient old fart living under a rock. I don't really mind it so much, as long as they continue to not kill support for the older consoles until the average lifespan of a console generation. If Apple can make the iPhone 4S still relevant, albeit with growing pains, then I'm sure Sony and Microsoft can keep the PS4 and XB1 relevant for another three years. But here's something else that tickles me about why hating this new model seems kind of silly. It's the one feature that is so desired, a game changer if you will, and is giving the XB1 a rather good edge over the PS4: backwards compatibility. This new model makes backwards compatibility mostly a moot point. As long as the standards don't deviate terribly in the coming years, a PlayStation or Xbox under this model 5 years from now should still be able to play launch titles. Hell, if you are using a 32-bit version of Windows, you can still run Windows 2.0 apps that came with the OS. I suppose people's fears are that when you have this sort of model, the value of the previous models drops so significantly that you're stuck in a rut. Nobody's going to want a PS4 or XB1 when the Neo and Scorpio come out is the idea and so you'll get a pittance if you want to resale it. Well, for the most part, didn't this happen to consoles whose games were backwards compatible on the next generation? I'm sure nobody wanted to buy a PS1 when the PS2 could play its games. The GameCube to the Wii (though that depends if you really used the GameCube's addons), and now I'm sure fewer people are hunting for Xbox 360's now that the Xbox One has a respectable backwards compatible library. But anyway, this is a good model to follow, as long as you don't force upgrades on people too soon.

I'm going to be edgy and start off with the exact opposite headline from my last blog! Okay seriously... If there's one thing I like about console gaming development is that it challenges the developers to do creative things. It brings out the best in those developers and I salute them for that. Heck, even in the early days of PC gaming, this mentality was around and about care of the likes of John Carmack and Ken Silverman. But lately, because of the relatively long life cycle of consoles (4-5 years per generation) and with the first time the current generation of consoles performing worse than contemporary PCs at the time of release, PC gamers have been snide about console gaming development. The biggest question I do want address is this: Does console gaming development hold back PC gaming development? The answer, is a big fat NO. Here's where I appreciate consoles for aiding the development of gaming in general. Let's start with one of my favorite consoles around this subject: the Nintendo 64. From a developmental point of view, it produced a lot of the foundations for modern 3D visuals. Let's go over the hardware first, the Reality Co-Processor (RCP). The RCP is arguably one of the first consumer grade programmable hardware transform and lighting GPUs. Programmable because the RCP was fed display lists as commands (which is how modern GPUs work) and once Nintendo released the chains on the microcode documentation, developers were able to push the system even further. The RCP had support for several advanced features for the time, such as trilinear mipmapping and edge based AA (which we know in flavors such as as FXAA and MLAA). In some sense of hilarity in hindsight, the RCP handled audio because the RCP had a digital signal processor. AMD's TrueAudio doesn't look so unique now doesn't it? And now the software tricks that were used Level of detail: Yup, this trick to save on rendering polygons when something is far away had its start on at least here, as shown in this video: Use of clipping, where scenes that aren't immediately visible to the player are not rendered. Banjo Kazooie had a feature that shuffled textures in and out for detail. The problem was this caused memory fragmentation. The way Rare solved this? Adding a real-time memory defragger. Factor5 developed texture streaming from the cartridge for Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine. We can blame them for id trying to do Megatextures (although in all seriousness, that's a different beast) The N64 had a lot of framebuffer effects for things like motion blur, shadow mapping, optic camouflage effects, and one that amazes me still (and I never realized it): render to texture. You remember playing Mario Kart 64 on Luigi's Raceway and before the tunnel there was a TV screen that showed your viewpoint? That's render to texture. This was one of those features Valve was very proud of during their E3 2003 Half Life 2 demonstration. More effects can be seen at: http://gliden64.blogspot.com/2013/10/frame-buffer-emulation-intro.html The Dreamcast had a feature that is just now being utilized for efficient rendering: tile-based rendering. Tile based rendering is dividing the screen into tiles, 32 by 32 pixels in the Dreamcast's case, and rendering on just that, saving the result into a buffer. This helped save on memory bandwidth because the entire buffer didn't need to be sent at once. A side effect of this was it offered a feature that AMD proudly demoed on their DX11 hardware: order-independent transparency. The PlayStation 2 cemented how to create large open worlds when your storage bandwidth is, for all intents and purposes, abysmal. GTA San Andreas for example, has a map size as big as The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. The original Xbox introduced a rendering technique that would be used throughout the rest of the decade and then some: deferred rendering. Of all games to use it? The launch title Shrek. The creator's article on the subject can be found at https://sites.google.com/site/richgel99/home Oh, not to mention that the Xbox's GPU was essentially next generation. While it may have been based on the GeForce 3 GPU, it's specifications put it more in line with a GeForce 4. The GeForce 3 topped out at 240MHz with a 4:1:8:4 (pixel, vertex, texture, ROP) configuration. The XGPU was 233MHz and used a 4:2:8:4 configuration. It would be something more like a GeForce 4 Ti 4000 if NVIDIA capitalized on it. The PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 forced game developers to really think about multithreaded gaming. Especially the PlayStation 3. It may not have translated so well into the PC gaming world since dual-core processors were just coming out at the time and support on Windows XP was shaky at best from what I recall. One other thing I want to make note of is trying to tap into the console market for a lot of developers may have also forced them to optimize their engines. One that I can think of is what CryTek did with CryEngine 2 and beyond. Did anyone think Crysis could run reasonably as well as it did on the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3? Plus, it's easier to scale up, because you can always add more polygons, you can always add more textures, you can always add more things here and there. But even if consoles weren't around, PC game developers wouldn't target the uber high end systems anyway. Take Doom for instance. Released in 1993 guess what its requirement was? It could run (technically) on a 386, a processor released seven years prior. Though it would run much better on a 486, which was released in 1989. Quake also ran on one the lower end Pentiums back in the day. Not quite as impressive in comparison to Doom. Duke Nukem 3D though was playable on a higher end 486, but probably not without some kind of 2D accelerator card. Anyway the point is, PC game developers are always going to target lower end systems for the sake of maximizing their market base anyway. But lastly, going back to my first point about why I love console development, I see developing for PCs as being lazy, to use brute force methods because Moore's Law will pick up the slack. I see way more interesting things happening on console development more than I do PC gaming development. Sure game engines are still built primarily on the titans of PCs, but when it comes down to the more interesting things, it's probably a console that did it.

I forget where I read this, maybe it was on Reddit, but I recall someone saying that NVIDIA is screwed because consoles will heavily be using compute and since it's AMD hardware they're running, asynchronous compute. The belief is since the PS4 and XB1 are now more or less PCs, developers are going to use all the technologies advantageous to AMD hardware and when they port the games over, said advantages will come over. This is doubly true now that Vulkan and DirectX 12 are touted to offer "console-like control" over the hardware. Let me tell you why it doesn't matter what developers do on consoles. Well, as a disclaimer, just this part. For one, despite their similarities in architecture hardware-wise, the XB1 and PS4 are still about as different on the software side as consoles can be. XB1 is the quintessential "gaming PC", while the PS4 is something of a FreeBSD gaming box. Not to mention, the PS4 uses APIs that are in-house to Sony themselves. AMD offered them Mantle, but developers for Sony mentioned that the PS4 already has an API ready in that regard. Going back to the XB1 though, even though it technically runs on Windows (on Windows), the actual games themselves don't run in what you'd call a full Windows environment. i.e., the same one you and I use (assuming you use Windows). To put it simply, consoles have much closer access and can tap into the potential power of their hardware. Their environments are also custom made to provide a balance of what they offer and avenues to tap into said performance. Windows and other full blown operating systems have layers upon layers of abstraction to make them more universal and accepting of general apps. And no, Vulkan and DirectX 12 don't really expose anything more. They just allow for more control over software based resources. An application using either Vulkan or DirectX 12 cannot directly address GPU memory, cannot directly control GPU execution units, and overall, cannot directly control the hardware itself. To do so would be a terrible breach of contract as I expect the OS to protect applications from accessing my hardware directly. At the end of the day, the application not only has to go through the API, but the API has to go through the device drivers, which has to go through the firmware. The second point I want to make is that PC gaming is a minefield for compatibility, issues, and other hiccups. A console is a well known, well analyzed system. Especially almost three years into it, Sony and Microsoft and its developers know how to work out the console should a problem arises. And if they want to test out something, they can make a best guess easily as to if it's feasible or not. A random person's PC? Not so much. You may be running AMD hardware, but maybe you're not running the right drivers. Maybe you're not running the right OS with the right patch. Maybe your computer just has that gremlin in it that just won't make that thing work. And then there's the other stick in the mud, they have to make sure the games work on other compatible hardware too. So while certain aspects of console gaming development do carry over to PC gaming, if it's anything specific to the console, it's not going to make it to the drawing board when developing the PC version.

DirectStorage, which lets your GPU access your SSD directly, has promised to make games better for years now. While it’s been on Xbox Series X since launch (and PS5 has its own version), now we’re finally getting it for PC. Why was it worth the wait? Buy an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X: https://geni.us/nMA6el Buy an ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero Wi-Fi: https://geni.us/B13k Buy a GeForce RTX 3060: https://geni.us/WQMAcA

Hi everyone, Sorry for this rant post. I am a casual gamer who games 1-2 hours each week, so I bought a Xbox Series S in November 2020. Unfortunately, while the Xbox was plugged into a surge protected power bar it would not turn on one day. Took it to repair shop (uBreakIFix, was told by microsoft to go there) and got it checked. They told me the 5 Amp fuse is broken and there is a shot in the motherboard. All in all it cost me CAD 180 to get it fixed. It was a frustrating experience for me as it was my first console I ever bought and I used it so less before it got damaged ( I was also away for 6 months in which it was packed up and put into a box). Anyone else has similar experience in the past ? Are there any steps I can take to prevent this in the future (example getting a highly rated surge protector bar or plugging into wall directly ). Thanks and Happy Holidays !

I know Linus all ready posted a 3ds dev unit video. I was wondering if anyone has seen one of these. Mine is also the very last one off the assembly line. I orderd it one week before nintendo pulled it all for the switch. There very cool they even have a cut out for the sd card slot normally it is screwed in below the cover plate. It can nativly play ds games to. It also has firmware 0.0 to.

So I decided I wanted to go back to my PS2 and play some older titles again during the quarantine period. I have one of the big boi PS2s, not a slim. Upon setting up my PS2, I had to do some dust removal, as its been a while since I've touched it. Most discs read without issue e.g. Gran Turismo 3, GTA San Andreas, Juiced, and other classic titles; however, my Gran Turismo 4 disc has issues. Although having minimal scratches, and being cleaned, the disc reads for about a second then stops. Is this an issue with the PS2 or with the disc? I would assume the PS2? Considering the disc is in really good condition. If anyone could help troubleshooting, or if someone knows the issue then a response would be very much appreciated. System Information: Console: SCPH-30003 R Browser: 1.20 CB Player: 1.20 PlayStation Driver: 1.10 DVD Player: 2.10E (This information may be useful for someone who knows more about the console than me, I don't really know).

Hello LTT Forum comunity, Since the Xbox Series X will have the capability of being able to have a HDD drive connected to it to store next generation Xbox Series X games on , but won't be able to have them be played straight from that HDD drive , it should still be possible to connect a external SSD drive up to the console via USB to house games on, But more importantly for the time being... Being to be able increase the copy & transfer speed times of games from a external SSD to the internal SSD drive & the proprietary external SSD expansion card ? So weather or not the external SSD connected via USB is capable of having the games played directly from it , until proper compatible drives are released on the market. You should still be able to get the added benefit of faster written transfer speeds from SSD to SSD then what you'd typically get from a SSD to HDD drive , correct? Such as using a M.2 NVME SSD enclosure connected via Thunderbolt/USB - 3 to USB 3.1 or a 2.5" SSD drive Bay down to a regular external SSD drive should work fine to increase the transfer/copy rate from the External drive to the internal Drive ? I'd been discussing it with some friends , And we're just looking for a bit more of a Definitive answer. But logically if you can connect > House > Transfer to a HDD drive , then you should be able to do the same with a SSD to increase transfer speeds. But how much Quicker is it going to be & is it possible to get the time down to pretty much instantly transfer or at the very least down to a Few seconds 10-30 seconds. As we get closer to to release of the Xbox Series X & PS5 I'm sure this is an issue that's going to be brought up quite a bit. As I'm sure people aren't going to want to wait the same amount of time to download a game to transfer from drive to drive & are going to look for a solution in order to minimize that time as much as possible. Thank you for your time , I hope you, your family, friends & Colleagues all remain safe & healthy during these Unprecedented times .

Is buying a quad-core with HT a mistake? Or a hexa-core with SMT for that matter? Since next generation of consoles will have 8, should gamers avoid quad and hexa cores or is the 8 core Zen 2s in the new console downclocked so much PC gamers should not even worry?

Title pretty much says all. I want to get into the older console gaming to relive my past. (Since I wasn't fortunate enough to have & experience all the great games during these times. Early '90's on up.) I do have some knowledge about consoles, but not much at all. So there's bound to be certain questions since I'm learning as I go. I'll start off with a question that I haven't gotten a direct answer for. (Even from searches via Google, Bing, Youtube, etc.) As far as console gaming goes, are 8-bit games better overall or are 16-bit games better overall? That's just for starters. If anyone wishes to help me out, either comment on the post or you can directly message me. Thanks!

so im not a expert when it comes to displays, i have seen at lots of places in the internet that says tvs are bad for pc gaming because of the input lag in TV. i myself experienced this once when i connected my pc to our home TV and i felt that the sound was being played like a second earlier before it actually shows up in the TV. But when it comes to console gaming i have never experienced this. i have played xbox 360s and PS4s at different places in different types of TVs and they work well. is this because consoles are less powerful than PCs and cannot push frames past 60 fps. And if someday they get 60fps or more will TVs be not suitable for console gaming as well?

I want to know what wire to buy to make rgb cables. They need to carry RGBS signals and right/left audio (twisted prefered). I can't seem to find what wire to buy. I know connectors, and wiring but don't know if I ne 6,8,10 conductor cables.