
How to Play Your Retro Games as Authentically as Possible
Before we get started, let's take a moment to mention the collection of modern systems that do a great job of making your games feel true to the original, but on modern systems. There's a growing number of emulation devices that can play older cartridges without any need for conversion cables. Ignoring the fact that handhelds are much easier to get into than the bigger consoles, there are numerous Game Boy-like devices that cost less than $100. We've enjoyed models like the TrimUI Brick and Anbernic RG34XXSP, but despite their pedigree, the most fine-tuned Game Boy Color recreation is currently the ModRetro Chromatic with its pixel-perfect screen. However, if you don't want to deal with ModRetro lead Palmer Luckey's other job as an arms dealer, you could check out the Analogue Pocket. Beyond handhelds, there are many controller options that recreate the feel of older systems, from Nintendo's own GameCube controller exclusive to Switch 2, to Gulikit's Sega Genesis-like Elves 2 Pro device, to 8BitDo's mod kits for the Nintendo 64 controller that lets you play them on modern systems. You don't have to look too hard to find something that emulates the feel of retro content.
Strange as it sounds, acquiring the gaming hardware and software is the easy part. The true test of your retro chops is how far you'd go for a quality screen. The olden days of gaming were built for big, boxy cathode-ray tube televisions. These screens sat in front of an array of vacuum tubes capable of shooting electrons to display images on a phosphorescent screen. Those color images you see on your childhood TV were created by controlling three separate beams representing the three primary colors: red, green, and blue. Recreating that effect on a flatscreen isn't easy, even with official console remakes. The Atari 7800+ lets you play both Atari 2600 and Atari 7800 cartridges from any TV, though it won't offer picture-perfect visuals. There are future systems like the upcoming Analogue 3D that can play your N64 cartridges on a 4K display with 'CRT reference quality' even on a flatscreen. Unfortunately the system was delayed until next month, with the console maker citing tariffs for its ongoing shipping issues. Soon we'll even have a Commodore 64 emulation machine, but the problem will continue to be sourcing a screen that will display these games accurately to how they appeared at the time.
When you get up close and personal to a CRT TV, you'll start to see a collection of phosphor dots generating each of the colors you see on the screen. Game developers of the time understood this technology and built their games around it. Pixel art of today looks blocky—and while that has its own charm—a game present on a CRT TV with scanlines muddled these individual pixels together, akin to how an oil painter blends colors on a canvas. It created an image that would look like actual art, rather than a blocky approximation of an image. Today's larger screens with higher resolutions only exacerbate the problem. The old 8-bit titles of the NES days ran on screens showing 256 x 240 pixels. A 4K panel displays images at 3,840 x 2,160. The picture has to upscale by 15 times to display fully on a modern television, and that will simply look piss-poor compared to what you're used to.
Some systems produce better visuals for old-school games. The NES Classic emulated some of Nintendo's most-touted games with better fidelity than most third-party emulators. However, the reason games looked the way they did is not only a result of the limitations of the consoles themselves but also of the screens. For a full explanation, check out this video from YouTuber Displaced Gamers, which breaks down how CRT standards—all those that remained unchanged for decades—helped inform how game developers created games with and for CRT televisions.
Which brings us to the problem with emulating games today. LCD technology does not present scanlines natively, which means every time you play Street Fighter II on today's flat panels, it will look blocky and unappealing. Not only that, but games were built with the squared, 4:3 screens of yesteryear. That matters for more than just resolution. Super Mario Bros. was a platformer innovator because it kept the screen moving in line with Mario from screen to screen, though it also allowed players to traipse backwards up to the screen edge. Few games up through the GameCube and PlayStation 2 era accounted for widescreens. Out of all the retro games Nintendo has made for Switch Online + Expansion Pack subscribers, only Super Mario Strikers supports the 16:9 aspect ratio natively.
You can simply buy a CRT TV or monitor secondhand, hook up a retro console to its old ports, and play away. But those of us who aren't collectors or don't have the space for even more screens have to be far more choosy.
As far as old monitors go, you won't have much difficulty finding a CRT device on eBay or through other resellers. As retro gaming has become more popular, prices on older tech have gotten untenable. If you're shopping around, you also should get to know the terminology. You'll see some old CRT monitors claim they are 'NTSC'. That acornym denoted the U.S. standard for analog TVs throughout the 20th century before the popularization of digital displays. You should look for one of these TVs if you're trying to accurately depict the scanlines of games from your childhood. Meanwhile, PVM TVs were professional-grade monitors that could produce clearer images though they won't be as accurate as what the average 1980s console owner would expect. If you don't plan on transforming your basement into a recreation of your gaming den, you're better off with a monitor. For example, the Commodore 1702 color video CRT monitor from 1984 is compact enough to fit on most desks, plus they fit the time period. They also go for well over $200 on eBay, not accounting for delivery. Sony Trinitron monitors and TVs from back in the day could easily cost than $300. If you can't find one cheap online, you're better off searching your local thrift stores for a piece of TV history rather than paying exorbitant prices to ship your heavy TV across the country.
In today's retro-fueled environment, it is easier to connect an old console to a modern TV. Upscaling devices like the RetroTINK-5X Pro can take old-school consoles and their limited resolution up to 1080p. With a few extra HDMI converstion cables, you would be good to go. The big problem is your games won't look accurate on a modern TV. If you want to see the old-school pixel art in its prime, modern conversions are on the wrong tack.
What if you don't have an old-school console but happen to have an ancient CRT TV lying around? With enough time, patience, and money, you could potentially hook up a modern system to a CRT TV. At the very least, you'll need an HDMI-to-AV adapter, but it's often more complicated. Depending on the system you're emulating, you may need to convert an image to a lower resolution, in which case you'll need a separate transcoder or downscaler. Most people are better off finding modern ways to recreate the look of retro titles using software.
What if you can't acquire a CRT TV and you instead want to play official retro recreations or use definitely not-official emulators? Nintendo's own gallery of retro titles includes the option for a scanline filter applied over the game image. However, this is more of an aesthetic choice than anything. The scanlines effectively break up an image so you're not seeing every individual pixel, but they're not introducing the blur needed to fully merge pixels into a more seamless image. The best virtual recreation you can achieve is through third-party emulators and shaders. These are a separate instance of visuals on top of whatever game your system is rendering. With some visual trickery, modders have managed to craft visuals so close to CRT, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless you looked at each frame pixel by pixel.
First, let's briefly discuss what emulation is. Essentially, independent creators recreate the hardware of a console, whether it's a Commodore 64 or a Nintendo Wii U, as software. The more powerful the system, the more complicated and demanding the emulation. This means you can play any number of homebrewed games built for these systems, but most players use them to play games ripped from their cartridges or discs, collectively known as ROMs. The emulators are, for the most part, legal to download, but ROMs exist in a much more tenuous state. We can't tell you how or where to get ROMs, and if you emulate ROMs you should know the legalities of it in your region (typically boiling down to only playing ROMs for which you own a legal copy of). Gizmodo doesn't condone piracy. But you can feel safe dealing with the emulators or the front-ends to emulators, namely Retroarch.
Thankfully, the active scene of retro emulation offers us great options for emulating games and old-school visuals alike. Emulation platform RetroArch is open to a host of shaders that can offer an image as close to CRT as possible. Of course, you'll still lack those wavy lines and the static-fueled glow that was emblematic of old-school play. There are a legion of independent developers creating CRT shaders, all of which have different flavors that try to maximize the accuracy of the on-screen image. Shader packs like Mega Bezel go as far as to include options that simulate the curvature of non-flat CRT TVs. Others may add a green filter or a 'VHS effect' to introduce more visual distortion to an image. For the sake of actually playing your games, simpler is better. The issue with this is, depending on your shaders, you could introduce stuttering or frame rate dips, depending on how capable your system is. Shaders are very CPU dependent, and if you device isn't up to the task you may need to hold off on some more intensive shaders in favor of others.
RetroArch's shader library is extensive, and anybody starting out will likely be confused out of their gourd. To enable a shader in RetroArch, you need to be in a game then access the 'Quick Menu' (by default F1 on keyboard) then go to 'Shaders' and turn them on. From there, you'll see a laundry list of shader presets to enable, and it's not easy to find you're looking for. Mega Bezel, for instance, is found under 'shaders_slang, bezel, Mega_Bezel.' Even then, you'll find so many to choose from, and you can even create your own preset. CyberLab on Libretro forums created some of my favorite preset shader settings, though you need to install them into the correct folder yourself. You don't necessarily want to use the same shader for every game, either. A Game Boy look won't be anywhere near the same as what you should see on CRT.
RetroArch is compatible with most systems you can think of, including hacked consoles. The issue is, by itself, it can be a complicated piece of software to use, especially on PC. YouTuber Russ Crandall on his channel Retro Game Corps has a great starter guide for the software. Simplicity is paramount, which is why my personal favorite emulation device is the Steam Deck, and it's what I recommend to most people who want to play games up through the PSP and still use some intense shaders. For ease, I prefer EmuDeck, which is a larger collection of emulators that install all in one batch, making it easy to plug in your various ROMs without much fuss. It also installs RetroArch, which makes things easy. Installing new shaders you find online can be complicated, since the Steam Deck hides some folders in desktop mode, but YouTube channel Retro Crisis has some videos to help you navigate the file path.
The next thing you need to think about is the size of your native display compared to the game you're playing. If the emulated content was made for a screen at 240p or even 480p, then you may not get the correct look if you let it upscale naturally. For games that used to run on handhelds like the Game Boy, it's better to adjust for integer scaling. This ensures the game upscales by a whole number rather than any decimals. Now, when you're playing your game, you won't have a blown-up ultra-wide image that matches the device's native widescreen. If you're more focused on console emulation, then different shaders may require you to input different settings into RetroArch. For instance, Mega Bezel asks users to disable integer scaling and allow for its custom TV framing.
There are so many dials you can turn to achieve some extra fidelity with your retro games, no matter the size and resolution of your screen. As hard as you work to fine-tune each shader, emulation and shaders will never offer anything as evocative as a static-filled CRT screen. But we can get close, and for the sake of playing some great games with modern amendities, close is more than good enough.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rivian vs. Lucid: 1 Reason Jim Cramer Likes One Stock Over the Other
Key Points Lucid closed a deal with Uber to power its robotaxi division. Wall Street veteran Jim Cramer is doubting the deal's long-term potential. Rivian may be a better buy due to a deal with VW. 10 stocks we like better than Lucid Group › Lucid Group (NASDAQ: LCID) soared in value following the announcement of its partnership with Uber Technologies. According to the deal's terms, Uber will invest $300 million in the electric vehicle (EV) maker. Uber also committed to purchase 20,000 vehicles from Lucid to kick-start its robotaxi division. Wall Street veteran Jim Cramer recently weighted in on the deal, and his take was surprising to many. He compared Lucid's deal with Uber to a partnership Rivian Automotive (NASDAQ: RIVN), another EV stock, made earlier this year. If you're invested in either Lucid or Rivian, you'll want to give Cramer's comments some consideration. How big is the Uber and Lucid partnership in reality? The details of Lucid's partnership with Uber are fairly straightforward. The latter says it is expecting to launch a robotaxi service later next year in a major U.S. city. To power this launch, Uber plans to order 20,000 Lucid Gravity SUVs over the next six years. According to a press release, the vehicles will be owned and operated by Uber or its third-party fleet partners and made available to riders exclusively via the Uber platform. To help Lucid scale up enough to produce this many vehicles, Uber also agreed to invest $300 million into the business. Around the same time, Lucid announced a 1-for-10 reverse stock split, but it's not clear how connected these two events are. While all of this looks promising on paper, there are two obvious problems. First, Uber's robotaxi division remains in its infancy. Whether it can actually grow big enough to acquire 20,000 Lucid vehicles remains a huge open question. Second, $300 million won't do much to keep Lucid financially viable over the next six years. While it ended 2024 with more than $6 billion in liquidity, the company also posted a net loss of $2.7 billion, roughly the same net loss it posted in 2023. A $300 million cash infusion is helpful, but it will hardly cure its ongoing financial challenges. Jim Cramer thinks Rivian's deal with Volkswagen is superior When Jim Cramer was asked about Lucid's partnership with Uber last week, he called the deal a "dalliance." In other words, he views it more as a short-term arrangement than a bona fide long-term partnership. "I think that you need a commitment, like the Volkswagen commitment to Rivian is extraordinary," Cramer said. "That's an open-ended check from one of the biggest car companies." He is referring to a joint venture between Volkswagen and Rivian that was announced in November 2024. The German automaker will receive crucial access to Rivian's software operating platform and technological back end. In exchange, Rivian receives up to $5.8 billion in funding. It's not hard to see the difference in commitments here. Uber is investing just $300 million into Lucid, with the promise of buying vehicles over the next six years. Rivian, meanwhile, is receiving up to $5.8 billion in funding by the end of 2027, starting with an immediate $1 billion convertible note. To be clear, Lucid's deal with Uber is still very exciting. ARK Investment CEO Cathie Wood eventually sees the robotaxi market being worth up to $10 trillion by 2030. But Rivian's deal with Volkswagen gives more credence to Rivian's tech stack and differentiation. If you're excited about the Uber-Lucid tie-up, be sure to dive into Rivian's and Volkswagen's partnership, as Cramer correctly points out. Should you invest $1,000 in Lucid Group right now? Before you buy stock in Lucid Group, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Lucid Group wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Ryan Vanzo has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Uber Technologies. The Motley Fool recommends Volkswagen Ag. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Rivian vs. Lucid: 1 Reason Jim Cramer Likes One Stock Over the Other was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Gilded Age EPs Defend That Tragic Twist in Episode 6: ‘I Jumped Out of My Skin When I Watched It'
The Gilded Age Oscar van Rhijn will never cross the street without looking both ways ever again. More from TVLine IT: Welcome to Derry Trailer: A Missing Child and Evil Spirit Cause a Small Maine Town to Freak - Plus, Get Premiere Month Save the Dates: Solar Opposites Swan Song, E! News Shuts Down and More The Gilded Age Star Takes Us Inside Marian and Larry's Romantic Moment in Episode 5: 'I Think Both of Us Cried' Sunday's episode ended with the shocking death of John Adams (Claybourne Elder), who was struck by a speeding horse carriage after sharing one last affectionate moment with Oscar on the streets of New York City. 'You've defied the odds,' John told Oscar after leaving an important meeting that set him back on the path to financial stability. 'You are my savior,' Oscar replied, practically bursting to express his love for John, yet forced to settle for a firm handshake. 'I thank you with all my heart.' Even if it wasn't the L-bomb per se, at least Oscar can take some solace in knowing that his final words to John were of affection; poor John stepped off the sidewalk moments later, leaving Oscar gasping for air as he watched his lover's limp body hit the ground. It was a bold swing, one viewers aren't necessarily accustomed to seeing on The Gilded Age. Sure, Ada lost her husband last season, but at least Luke's illness provided some warning, both for Ada and for the audience. John's sudden death on the city streets was brutal, shocking and, as many viewers are likely to point out, somewhat problematic. We weren't realistically expecting Oscar and John to live happily ever after as out gay men, certainly not in the late 1880s, but did their heartbreaking story really need to take yet another tragic turn? Even a life of secret trysts and unspoken love would be better than *checks sidewalk* no life at all. For what it's worth, co-showrunners Julian Fellowes and Sonja Warfield have no regrets about this particularly grim turn of events, as it apparently serves to propel Oscar's storyline in a significant way moving forward. That much will become clear in the next episode, once the initial shock of John's death has subsided. None of those upcoming developments 'would have been achievable if John Adams had lived,' Fellowes teases to TVLine, adding that they were 'quite careful to kill him with a straight accident, not with anything with political overtones. He's just killed in an accident, like anyone could be at any time.' 'Those shocking things are true in life,' adds Warfield. 'I've certainly experienced those traumas. They change you, and we wanted to bring about that change in Oscar.' Putting emotions aside, purely from a technical standpoint, Fellowes believes the show pulled off John's death 'quite well,' saying, 'I jumped out of my skin when I watched it for the first time.' Elsewhere in Season 3, Episode 6… Bertha made good on her promise to George, traveling to Buckingham to remind Lady Sarah who's really in charge now that Gladys and the Duke are married; rather than raking Maud across the coals, Oscar chose a more graceful path, giving her enough money to leave town and start over; furious that Larry lied about visiting an establishment of ill repute, Marian considered ending their engagement; Jack was awkwardly fired once Agnes learned how much he earned from his invention ('It's hard to believe there's a God in heaven!'); after realizing that her so-called 'psychic' is a total fraud, Ada found unexpected comfort in her sister's arms; and Peggy began to tell William about her complicated past, but he assured her that the present is far more important to him. If only his dear, sweet mother felt the same way. OK, let's talk: On a scale from one to 'WTF,' how surprised were you by John's death, and do you the think the show went too far by killing him off? Did you also relish Bertha's scenes with Lady Sarah in England? (She really has been in need of a worthy female sparring partner this season.) And which relationship has you more concerned — Peggy and William's, or Marian and Larry's? Drop a comment with your thoughts on all things below. Gilded Age IRL: See the Cast Out of Costume View List Best of TVLine Mrs. Maisel Flash-Forward List: All of Season 5's Futuristic Easter Eggs Yellowjackets Recap: The Morning After Yellowjackets Recap: The First Supper
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Should You Buy XRP (Ripple) While It's Under $5?
Key Points XRP's value has surged nearly 480% in just 12 months. Deregulation, ETFs, and general crypto enthusiasm are driving the coin's value higher. XRP is priced for perfection, and it's looking increasingly like a speculative gamble. 10 stocks we like better than XRP › Cryptocurrency XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) has gained lots of attention from investors lately, resulting in a 480% increase over the past year. Whenever any type of investment rises that quickly, it's worth evaluating to see if it's worth owning. Unlike some cryptocurrencies, XRP (sometimes called Ripple) has real-world applications through its blockchain, which can act as a bridge currency in foreign transactions, saving both time and money compared to traditional financial transactions. But XRP's rapid value increase calls into question whether the crypto is overvalued right now, and if it's being driven higher simply because of investor sentiment. While XRP isn't necessarily a meme coin, here are three reasons why it may be best not to buy it right now. 1. It's very volatile If you're interested in owning cryptocurrencies, then it's likely that you're OK with some volatility. Any type of investment will have price swings, of course, but cryptocurrencies are more prone to make big movements on little to no news. While XRP isn't unique in its volatility, I think it's significant enough to dissuade some investors from owning it. Consider that back in February, XRP's value fell about 30% in just a five-week period. XRP regained its footing temporarily, but then fell 16% in just one week following the announcement of President Donald Trump's tariffs in early April. Those are just two examples of XRP's tendency toward volatility, both occurring within weeks of each other. Of course, the coin's value has subsequently rallied again, but if you're not used to investment value shifts to this degree and they might cause you undue stress or prompt you to take action without thinking, then it's probably best to stay away. 2. It's fairly speculative It's important to point out that some of the price movements XRP has experienced are tied to concrete reasons. For example, some of XRP's price gains over the past year have come from investors getting excited about crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) focused on XRP and the Trump administration taking a more open approach toward cryptocurrencies. But while crypto ETFs can signal more legitimacy for digital coins and open them up to more investors, there's still a lot of speculating involved. Some analysts have estimated that XRP's price could surge to $25 because of the launch of the ETFs -- only to see the value then fall by 90%. While that's just a prediction, it's a good representation of how speculative the price of XRP can be. What's more, XRP's value jumped more than 70% in the past month after the House of Representatives passed the Genius Act and the Digital Markets Clarity Act in the House, both of which clarify regulations for crypto and stablecoins. While it's good news for the industry, a 70% surge in XRP's price is likely unwarranted. Huge value movements over a short period, whether for stocks or crypto, often signal that investors are pushing up an investment solely based on how they feel. 3. It's already richly valued XRP's massive run lately means this crypto is priced for perfection. Its price already includes optimism around crypto deregulation, the launch of XRP ETFs, real-world usage of its blockchain, and a general optimism that's fueling a surge in crypto prices. In short, XRP is already on a huge run based on a handful of tangible reasons, and any more gains from here are likely purely built on the whims of crypto investors. Unlike stocks, cryptocurrencies don't have cash flow or earnings to judge their value by, and based on XRP's 480% jump over the past year, it looks like the coin's price is now detached from the already speculative metrics used to judge crypto values. Could XRP still go higher? Of course. Many cryptocurrencies have shown that they can continue to climb even without being tied to any concrete metrics. But there's no getting around the fact that buying XRP means you're paying a premium. And with optimism for XRP sky-high, any unmet expectations from the crypto could cause a substantial sell-off. Should you invest $1,000 in XRP right now? Before you buy stock in XRP, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and XRP wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Chris Neiger has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends XRP. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Should You Buy XRP (Ripple) While It's Under $5? was originally published by The Motley Fool