this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2026
326 points (98.8% liked)

196

6143 readers
28 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OR3X@lemmy.world 54 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Pretty sure that was RARE's doing, but Nintendo did greenlight it.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It just so happens that game was Rare’s last doing under Nintendo.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 37 points 5 months ago

But without Nintendo holding them back they went BIGGER!

[–] zikzak025@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

What about Starfox Adventures?

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

And ‘Tomb Raider’ was developed by Core Design and published by Eidos.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Correct, rare.

[–] brandon@piefed.social 52 points 5 months ago (3 children)

She's an ape, not a monkey, have some respect.

[–] cowfodder@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

All apes are monkeys, but not all monkeys are apes.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 14 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Apes and monkeys are separate from each other. Apes are not a kind of monkey.

Both apes and monkeys are primates.

Edit: worth reading down the chain to find that there isn't as clear of a consensus on this as is generally presented.

[–] cowfodder@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The distinction between apes and monkeys is complicated by the traditional paraphyly of monkeys: Apes emerged as a sister group of Old World Monkeys in the catarrhines, which are a sister group of New World Monkeys. Therefore, cladistically, apes, catarrhines and related contemporary extinct groups such as Parapithecidae are monkeys as well, for any consistent definition of "monkey". "Old World monkey" may also legitimately be taken to be meant to include all the catarrhines, including apes and extinct species such as Aegyptopithecus,[12][13][14][15] in which case the apes, Cercopithecoidea and Aegyptopithecus emerged within the Old World monkeys.

Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps, but that page you linked seems pretty clear that apes are related closer to old world monkeys than new world moneys, but are still not monkeys?

I don't really intend to argue semantics, but before my original reply to you I akimmed a good dozen links incluthat Wikipedia page and they all say apes and monkeys are related but different.

[–] cowfodder@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I literally quoted the part that says apes are monkeys by any definition of the word.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 0 points 5 months ago

Oh shit sorry, it wasn't clear to me that it was a quote! It sounds like if you look too close then it's complicated!

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

All primates are spheres in a vacuum when calculating dominant forces

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey.

Even if it has a monkey kind-of shape.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

If it doesn't have a tail, it's not a monkey,

If it doesn't have a tail, it's an ape!

[–] AffineConnection@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

No. In fact, there exist tailless monkeys that are not even apes.

[–] kayzeekayzee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

From what I know about N64 hardware, that "Candy" written on her shirt is a much bigger performance sink than the polygons, which is certainly also an important decision the devs made

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Dead or Alive came out in the 90s on sony, tho.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 5 months ago

3D breast jiggle with a fighting game as a bonus

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if they had to reduce/save polygons in other places just to make these happen...

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They didn't have to with a smooth normals shader. It's basically free on the GPU. You can even try this on Blender, and any particularly blocky model will look unusually smooth at certain angles.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

We are talking about the N64... Was a 'smooth normals shader' a thing it could do?

I know the N64 was a very unusual machine that took developers a little while to learn to manipulate to its full extent; but I'm not all that versed in the details.

ModernVintageGamer has some decent videos on it if I remember right. (it's been a while)

https://youtu.be/gRslfM-MOOw

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, I found that they used a technique called Gourard shading that uses smooth normals under the hood.

Image source

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

Nice! Easily my favorite console.

[–] LikeableLime@piefed.social 1 points 5 months ago

I recommend watching some Kaze Emanuar videos as well to see what the N64 hardware is capable of

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 6 points 5 months ago
[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That's only a 4 polygon difference.