Absolutely no idea yet as they haven't been announced.
You'd hope they'd be more than resolution and framerate boosts seeing as Gears 2 and 3 already run at native 4k and 60fps on Xbox One X and Series X.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Absolutely no idea yet as they haven't been announced.
You'd hope they'd be more than resolution and framerate boosts seeing as Gears 2 and 3 already run at native 4k and 60fps on Xbox One X and Series X.
$5 versus $70 is a huge difference compared to $60 versus $70 when it comes to trying out something new, especially when you're young and on a much more severe budget.
This post can't be for real 😂
Why, is there something you do not understand?
I'm surprised some people dont understand who would want this, even if it's not something they themselves would buy. It takes the predecessor to one of the most loved games of last generation and brings it up to match in terms of fidelity, animation, fluidity and gameplay mechanics. Not to mention accessibility, something Part 2 really opened itself up to.
So it not only gives fans of the series a means to play the story to date in a more seamless way, but offers the opportunity for more people to enjoy what stands as one of the best stories told through games.
So it not only gives fans of the series a means to play the story to date in a more seamless way, but offers the opportunity for more people to enjoy what stands as one of the best stories told through games.
Don't really agree with the post since i weirdly miss part 1 but part 2s level design is a lot better.
Do we have comparisons between this and part two graphics wise?
- The ability to go prone and hide in grass makes for a lot more potential variety in combat encounters. You can dip in and out of stealth for guerrilla attacks and because the combat arenas are generally much bigger you've got a lot more freedom to hide, move around and plan your next move. You can also skip a lot of combat areas entirely
- Having a knife instead of breakable shivs is a small but welcome change
- There's a lot more verticality in Pt 2 leading to much more interesting level design
- A lot more combat encounters where you can make the infected & enemy humans fight each other
Yeah, this summarises my feelings quite well. It looks pretty good, but due to the original already looking amazing for the hardware to my tech-ignorant eyes it doesn't seem like too much of a leap.
You know if it's not for you then you don't have to buy it? Or you can always wait for the price to drop, like I intend on doing.
Yeah, it's crazy. Are they not aware of the huge TV show coming next year, or that there might be people in the PlayStation ecosystem who haven't played any TLoU games?!
Speaking of seamless...
Since cutscenes are real-time now, I wonder if we'll have the same kind of transitions as in Part II.
Like this transition, as an example:
Because that'll be a game changer for me.
I hope so, and imagine this is something they could very well incorporate considering the new cutscenes will be in real time. Makes such a difference to that feel of pacing and a continuous story that hit so well throughout Part 2.
OK, good points, but these are mainly gameplay arguments (bonus points for the mention of TLOUS2 accessibility options) of which we have not seen anything. All we have right now are purely visual differences. Slightly more frames per second and more grass (oversimplification, watch out) do not translate to a better game on their own. TLOU1 is already enjoyable right now and there aren't any official reasons why people wanting to play this game should wait for this Remake other than "better graphics" and the assumption that gameplay will be gradually better.
Horizon and GOW are cross gen. This isn't. Would've been a great chance to experiment.
Yeah, just maybe. It's a remake, not a remaster.
People can make up their own mind and decide for themselves if they want to pay 5$ for remaster on PS4 or 70$ for remake on PS5 (not sure why are you comparing today's price for remaster and launch price for remake, btw). Sell numbers will tell.
I'm still allowed to voice some disappointment and overall confusion with this release and to also see it as what feels like a more cynical cash grab on them pushing The Last of Us so hard at a full $70. Yes, I know they're trying to a TV show and that not everyone has played The Last of Us. But the reason for most ports and remakes is the original is not accessible on the modern hardware, and that's objectively not true with the first Last of Us that plays just fine on PS5 right now. And then, OK they want to do something to coincide with the TV show? Sure, but a $70 release like that is just full blown cash grab to me. No reason you couldn't have done this at a much more acceptable $40 and recouped the investment just as easily and achieved all the other goals. It's just feels like more of the recent Sony price gouging and it doesn't really make the game more available to anyone else on PS5 as a platform.
We're allowed to be skeptical and voice concerns/frustrations with this. I've posted a few times on the first day this is announced, I'll leave it alone down the line for people to enjoy sure, but like, I still will voice my fresh thoughts on this. And I might pick it up in 5 years when it's price is around $5 too, but like, I think it's absolutely bonkers Sony wants to charge $70 for this. Spider-Man got a huge big upgrade treatment and packaged with a brand new game for $70 at the PS5's launch for crying out loud. I just think that's excessively priced to take advantage of the TV show hype.
It's not an assumption though, they've detailed that all of these things will be present and we can understand how they translate into gameplay off the back of having played Part 2. It doesn't require Casper the friendly ghost levels of seeing is believing, though obviously I can't wait for it to be shown off at some point between now and September.
So I do disagree, because the reasons in my post are official reasons, insofar as they're what's been outlined will be in this. It's not an assumption that gameplay will be better when we know what those advancements from Remastered to Part 2 feel like to play, and what those accessibility options offered. I also think 'better graphics' reduces what things like animation quality offer to the overall story and gameplay itself.
Agreed, especially OG Ellie.
And for the record, Sony never referred to this as a remake.
"now rebuilt for PlayStation®5."
Sounds like something in between remaster and remake, perhaps.
Last edited:
Because it's about availability of the game to people on the PS5? I'm comparing it because that's what any new player would see. They can get a used copy of The Last of Us Remastered for $5 - $10 basically everywhere. And because the PS5 is backwards compatible, it will play on PS5 just fine. It's also already available on the PS Plus collection that players can easily access and download with their brand new PS5 unless they cynically pull it off the service as this remake releases.
So, yes, it's absolutely reasonable to bring up the PS4 version's availability and price point for playing it on PS5 compared to the new remake. Yes, people can make their own decisions, that's not even worth bringing up though, it's understood without establishing it other than trying to shoot down a criticism around how this isn't really making a game otherwise not available on the system available and being much more cynically inclined when looking at its price point.
Also, there's a whiff of gaslighting from both PlayStation and the community members who regurgitate it here when they use accessibility options as a justification for this remake.
This game is being remade purely for money, nothing more, nothing less. They have a HBO show launching next year and they can capitalise on the excitement by re-selling a recent classic at top dollar. There are benefits such as accessibility and TLOU2's gameplay improvements, but these are not the reasons why this remake exists.
This game is being remade purely for money, nothing more, nothing less. They have a HBO show launching next year and they can capitalise on the excitement by re-selling a recent classic at top dollar. There are benefits such as accessibility and TLOU2's gameplay improvements, but these are not the reasons why this remake exists.
A masterpiece just got shinier. Looks great, but tbh I'd rather ND were creating new experiences.
Is this remake completely 1-1 with the og beat for beat or have then taken some artistic licence to add in places ?
Is this remake completely 1-1 with the og beat for beat or have then taken some artistic licence to add in places ?
Less justification and more a response over who might be interested in this release. Not sure what gaslighting has to do with anything. It's a natural consequence that bringing options Part 2 was lauded for will allow more people to enjoy the story as a whole.
Totally agree. Im not a fan of this "Its not for you, stop being negative" vibe going on from some people... I'm not saying the game will suck or whatever (it's a remake of a great game, so unless they Kiwami it, it'll still be a good game), but... 70 bucks just bothers me compared to other remakes that have done similar. Real time cutscenes and slightly nicer looking graphics? Meh, big deal... the gameplay enhancements should be great, if they are implemented in a way that doesnt mess up the original encounter design, but Im skeptical until the depth of said enhancements are shown - ideally they should be remaking the areas entirely to take these new mechanics into account, otherwise its bordering on Twin Snakes levels of "new tricks, same level design" which didnt gel there very well at all...
I also really dont think the original game has aged bad at all, heck, doesnt even feel that old, and you can already play it on the PS5 at 60FPS with nice visual fidelity... Its not like this is some old game that ran at 15FPS on the PS1... I guess I just dont get what the big deal is when it comes to playing the PS4 version instead...
Im definitely going to wait for a sale, because I can see me enjoying the gameplay enhancements, I just cant bring myself to give Sony my money, especially when Im looking at what Capcom's doing for RE4, and how that's almost certainly not going to be 70 bucks either... One feels like its going to be worth my time and money day one, and one doesnt. Both games will no doubt be really good. But yeah... not everyone has to be 100% positive on this news, its ok to be a bit critical.
Honestly I prefer the 2014 remaster aesthetically. In many cases the more realistic lighting messes up the shot compositions the original had, or how the original would use some unrealistic lighting/coloring to make characters and their emotions pop and stand out. There are so many cases in the Part I comparison where everything just blurs together even though, yeah the work that has been done there is amazing.
So I'm gonna get the remake only if the gameplay changes are significant enough, as in terms of visuals so far the 2014 version is the definite winner for me.
So I'm gonna get the remake only if the gameplay changes are significant enough, as in terms of visuals so far the 2014 version is the definite winner for me.
You're main point still was that you cannot understand users who say they do not know who this is for. It is great that you can imagine from official words given and your experience having played previous versions of this game and TLOU2 how gameplay will be better in this Remake than in previous versions. But you should be able to understand why others are not as enthused as you, given what has been shown up until now.
As I was saying in another post: Given what has been shown (and maybe promised with words), why should someone who never played any TLOU wait until the release of this game and not just buy the version that is currently available, saving money while doing so?
And yes, having played many games over the course of my lifetime, I do think that animation quality affects overall story quality to a rather minuscule degree. Gameplay perhaps more, but the increase is also rather gradual if at all.
Lol why are you acting like accessibility and improving the gameplay are bad things? No one's forced to buy it, if it flops (lol) then that's on them. Some people might actually want to play a remake of one of the greatest games of all time on PS5, and on PC (which doesn't have access to the original). So what is the problem?
You don't care for the product that's fine, but man some of you need to go and get a real problem.
Alternatively, we don't feel good about this release and are allowed to voice this disappointment without that ruining whatever enjoyment others have of this. And what a condescending way to put your own wish to stamp out any negative reception, like damn that's going out of your way to be mean.
And they could've added Part 2's accessibility options to the original remaster without charging people £70 for the privilege. That is if their actual concern was the cohort of people who didn't play the original due to its lack of accessibility settings, as you suggest.
Having played through TLoU for the first time literally right before playing the sequel, I really didn't feel like there was a huge gap in gameplay. It was a very cohesive experience. TLoU2 doesn't really do anything gameplay-wise that is revolutionary or wasn't technically possible in 2013.
Why are you so offended that people think this remake is a cynical cash grab? It is.
You can release TLOU on PC and add expanded accessibility without charging £70 for it.
I couldn't care less if it flops or not. I personally think PlayStation will make a lot of money out of it. Good for them, that's their goal.
Correct.
Laughing at people that feel the original game doesn't hold up because you can't go prone.
"No one's forced to buy" is such an overused and cynical thing to say in our hyper-capitalist, super-consumerist world that does nothing but say "don't criticise capitalists doing their capitalist thing". Buddy, that is what some of us will never not do.
Spot on. They could have also offered it at a reasonable price point. Or offered an upgrade option. It is a cash grab. People might be OK with that, but that doesn't mean it is impervious to criticism of that fact.
Lol, how many faces has Ellie had in last of us one alone now. She's has two games and is already at Chris Redfield numbers.
I've never not been able to understand that. The only confusion I have is how someone can't see why anyone else would want it, despite not wanting it themselves. I didn't say "I don't understand why someone wouldn't want this", I said "I'm surprised some people don't understand who would want this, even if it's not something they themselves would buy".
Reasons they might wait could include wanting to play through both parts of the story in the most seamless manner, when speaking to fidelity, gameplay mechanics and general quality of gameplay. I have a friend who hasn't played either game but is holding off for the new one so he can experience both parts back to back at a similar standard. I think that would make up a large proportion of those who haven't played either, but are waiting for the upcoming release to do so. Obviously, as we've mentioned, another factor would be accessibility for those for whom the new options will open up the game to.
We disagree on animation quality having a minuscule affect on stories told within games, but there's another reason why some people might wait if they're like me and it makes more of a difference. Same for gameplay, since animation can affect how fluid a game feels to play in motion to a large degree, for me at least. So it isn't misunderstood again as well, that's not me suggesting you're wrong for not feeling this way. It's me offering that it's another reason why someone might wait to play the remake (or prefer to play it in general) over playing Remastered.
I didn't suggest that though. I pushed back on your odd use of 'gaslighting' and said that accessibility is being noted in response to the question of who would want this release. The natural byproduct of including these accessibility options is that it opens the game up for more people to enjoy.
Tlou 1 as a game is pretty meh like the AI and stuff is trash, that's the thing with p2 it's just a much better game.
Agreed, but this is coming out in September this year. What full-length UE5 title coming out this year looks noticeably ahead of this? (I don't think demos count as those aren't full titles and are merely there to show off the tech)
Comparing to the trailers we have seen for upcoming UE5 games, sure. There are some REALLY impressive UE5 games coming out in 2023 and beyond. But it would probably be more fair to compare those against Naughty Dog's next major project, which we haven't seen yet and will likely be a step or two above this TLOU remake.
The more I see these comparison trailers the more I just laugh at how Sony spent millions of dollars in years of development time remaking a game that still does not look bad to this day. Yes obviously this game looks better but the PS4 remastered version still gets the job done
I mean, I would hope a PS5 engine would look better than a PS3 engine but it's not night and day. If there was full blown RT, sure, but that's for PS6
I mean, I would hope a PS5 engine would look better than a PS3 engine but it's not night and day. If there was full blown RT, sure, but that's for PS6
Yeah I guess these sorts of remake-comparisons really expose the lies are memory tells us! But I guess that's the beauty of games and how graphics have evolved. We remember that PS2 game we played a lot as a child looking very realistic but when we go back to it now we laugh at the idea of that.
That's why I'm ok with the concept of remakes that are faithful to the original (such as this), as it gives you the opportunity to relive how you remembered it in your mind's eye. (It being a full-priced 70 USD title is another matter, though)
Loudninja don't forget to mention Remastered cutscenes and gameplay both use the same models: https://www.polygon.com/2014/5/9/56...4-cutscene-character-models-higher-resolution
gearnuke.com
The Last of Us Remastered Cutscene Models Are Used In-Game, Confirms Naughty Dog; Models Compared
The Last of Us Remastered has been released on the PlayStation 4 and as more players are getting their hands on the game, we are getting more details
gearnuke.com
I'm sure I'm not alone, but after playing TLOU2 I can't go back to play TLOU1 again as it is now on PS3 (I didn't get the PS4 remastered version)
Hopefully this remake brings it up to TLOU2 standard and I'll probably get it down the line lol
Same, the sideview shot with Ellie on the "bridge" in particular almost completely erase the firefly graffiti on the wall for example.
The OG release is much more colorful and stylized, now everything is like color graded.
IF the show different encounters and level design then it's different, but if the game is literally 1:1 but only with gameplay/AI of TLoU2 (and TLoU 2 AI is surely an improvement but not THAT amazing anyway), then I don't see the appeal.
I didn't play the PS4 remastered even if I have access to it, but at this point I could play the PS5 version, but not at 81€ or even 60, I'll wait some very low price.
Expensive and personally won't be getting it after buying the original and the PS4 remaster but I still don't understand the "But why?" mentality about (hopefully) creating the best version of a game for people to play. Yes you may not see the point but I reckon most people could easily think of reasons why a lot of people would want to play this.
There are ways to play the game cheaply on PS5 if you don't want this version but if you do want the best option, or you have a PC, then I see nothing wrong with giving people that choice.
There are ways to play the game cheaply on PS5 if you don't want this version but if you do want the best option, or you have a PC, then I see nothing wrong with giving people that choice.
The crazy part is that the original remaster looks amazing as well.
It's remarkable how close to a 1 for 1 enhancement it is, but one artistic change I'm seeing is that there is way more vegetation.
Interesting change because I always thought that (while I understood it was a hardware limitation because the PS3 couldn't produce THAT much vegatation), I also thought it was a sort of world progression thing where in TLoU1 plant life had begun taking over buildings, but in TLoU2, it had REALLY started to sink it's green teeth into it.
But then again, there is only a 4 year time skip between the first and second games, so maybe it's better to have that internal consistency. Still, I liked that visual delineation.
Not even sure if the PS5 remake uses RT to render the off screen refelections or they just rely on the same old mixed cube maps woth SSR that worked with TLOU2. Then again what is the purpose of making it PS5 only to not use RT? This is BS if true. And since they did not mention they are using RT so they are obviously not using it.
Lol I'm saying you can't critique capitalism now?
Look not everything is going to be for you; you won't be the audience; there will be people that actually want to play this. Everything will be fine.
Let your criticisms fly but you aren't making a grand stand against capitalism by moaning about a remake that's meant for people's entertainment.
It's a remake in the style of how Shadow of the Colossus, Demon's Souls and (likely) Dead Space are. In that it's completely remade into a new graphics engine with new animations and physics, new lighting, some new gameplay elements and some re-recorded audio, but the story and level design all remain fundamentally the same.
I wonder if as an industry we are lacking terms to differentiate these types of projects, as it's clear this is much more than a remaster but isn't a remake in the way that Final Fantasy VII Remake is.
I kind of see 4 tiers in this:
- Remaster: upgraded resolution and/or frame-rate, fixes to graphical and/or gameplay bugs, potentially upgraded textures and lighting, but same graphics engine with no changes to story or gameplay.
- Rebuild (?): same game made into a new graphics engine, changes to animations and physics, completely new lighting system, some changes to gameplay but none to story (ie. SotC, Demon's Souls, TLOU, maybe Gears of War: Ultimate Edition and the original Resident Evil: Remake can fit here as well).
- Remake (?): same as above but completely modernising and reworking the gameplay and level design, allowing some changes to the story but mostly following the same plot (ie. remakes of Resident Evil 2, 3 and likely 4).
- Full-on remake (?): a completely new game re-made from the story, characters and ideas of the original. The essence and spirit of the game may remain but this is essentially and entirely new game in terms of gameplay, level design and plot beats (ie. Final Fantasy VII).
And there is reboot and soft reboot. Like the examples I gave before.
You misunderstand. I am not saying that you claim noone should criticise capitalism. What I am saying is that your use of platitudes is cynical and in support of an exploitative regime. Moreover, you used it to counter the argument that this remake is just a money grab, i.e. you used the platitude exactly as it is generally used. That is why I called you out on it.