- #Super mario 64 last impact texture pack full
- #Super mario 64 last impact texture pack code
- #Super mario 64 last impact texture pack Ps4
#Super mario 64 last impact texture pack Ps4
Speculation on the subreddit linked above puts potential output for a hypothetical console using this chip in the ballpark of the PS4 performance-wise. This, of course, still doesn't confirm the existence of any 'Switch Pro' or 'Switch 2', but this does line up with the March leak from who found references to the "T234/T239".
#Super mario 64 last impact texture pack full
You can access the full details over on, however, here is an extract from the subreddit:Ĭomment by NVIDIA employee confirms existence of Tegra239 - the SoC likely to be used on the Nintendo Switch 2. The employee's comment on the Tegra239 - which can be seen below and was found as part of a message thread - is the first official confirmation we've had of this specific system-on-a-chip (SoC). Nvidia is currently holding a three-day event to promote many of its new products, including its next generation of graphics cards - of which many of the details were leaked back in March this year. This information was shared on Twitter by after being picked up on the GamingLeaksAndRumours subreddit and shared by u/followmeinblue. However, an Nvidia employee has confirmed - apparently accidentally - the existence of a chip, the Tegra239, rumoured to have existed since 2021 and supposedly meant to be powering that mystical new Nintendo hardware that we're all waiting for. And for me, I will always side with the creator and those they give the permission to, over thinking outside seizure of control over the presentation of a work is something that is OK for people not related to the product and its creators.There was a point a year or so back when it seemed every day brought with it a new 'Switch Pro' rumour, although things have recently been quieter on that front. It's essentially the question of "Who has the right to preserve art and maintain its legacy/outward perception: the creators and their functional heirs or the public?". And I don't think things like this should be held up and praised either, even if they are legitimately well done (which this seems to be, I'm not denying that). It's about people feeling like they have the right/justification to improve/alter/edit things as they see fit, because they feel they have some right to do so and I don't agree with that, at least with artworks (and yes, games are art). It's not an argument about "lost profits" or anything like that. Many/most people don't share this view and see things like this as something great and worth praising and holding up, simply because things like this improve a product that they are a fan of, so they as individuals get a tangible individual personal benefit from this. Personally, I just think that unless an artist gives express permission for their work to be altered or represented in a different form, or used as a means to create other works as a launchpad/springboard, then a work shouldn't be touched by any one/party outside of the original artist/creator or those who have its direct blessing. What I do care about is artistic control and who exactly has the say in said artistic control. I don't even care for Super Mario 64 honestly lol. This doesn't make me a "corporate shill" or "bootlicker", I just genuinely feel that if a person/group/company creates a product/property/etc., then unless they give express blessing of community power over the product/property, then they should retain total control over how their product/property is edited, altered, and presented to an audience.Ĭlick to shrink.It's mostly a philosophical thing. In the relationship of creator -> consumer, I am very much more on the side of creator than I am consumer. The majority of video game players are 100% directly opposed to my stance on this, that the ability for the community to modify and edit a work is more important than artistic control held by the creator itself. That's why I came in the thread, not because I'm interested in the project itself, but I'm interested in the philosophical impact of things like this, people justifying their existence, and who truly owns the right to control/shape an intellectual property. In fact, I'm pretty philosophically against such things.
You're right, I don't really care about fan re-appropriations of works/mods in themselves.
#Super mario 64 last impact texture pack code
How has the source code been obtained legally exactly? How does that work? Just because it doesn't contain any Nintendo crafted assets that were included in the original code, and they've been recreated, isn't it still essentially a duplication of their software/IP?
0 kommentar(er)
