We’re now roughly six months into the PS4′s first year and we’ve seen some fairly interesting exclusives release, the most recent being inFamous: Second Son. However, there are still complaints about the relative lack of exclusives, especially considering that before launch, SCE Worldwide Studios president Shuhei Yoshida announced that 30 games were in development for the console with 20 of those releasing within the console’s first year. Out of those 12 will be new IPs.

The question is, does that include certain titles The Last of Us: Remastered – a PS4 edition of Naughty Dog’s PS3 title that has been significantly revamped in terms of visuals?

A NeoGAF member named “Demonite”, who works as an employee at Sony, although his actual identity is unknown, did offer some rather interesting clarification on the list. In response to a comment about whether The Last of Us: Remastered Edition should be included, he stated that, “I didn’t include ports to that list.”

So it’s safe to assume that the 20 games doesn’t indeed include games like The Last of Us: Remastered, which has been designated as a port in this case.

Also, Sony filed two new trademarks recently for Intwined and Kill Strain. Folklore: Intwined confirmed? Well, at least we know what it’s not as Demonite stated that, “I loved Folklore, but its not going to be that.”

Link

it's also not on the list of 100 games coming in 2014.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/03/26/sony-over-100-games-still-coming-to-playstation-4-in-2014

:)

Wouldn't the vast majority of indies be ports (pc ports)?

Cool and its pretty much a new exclusive for people that didn't own a ps3. 

If they were including those wouldn't we already have passed the 20 mark? :p

If it's news that someone at Sony has made a statement about it, Neogaf member or not, then there must be a lot more people complaining about ports than people in other threads tried to make believe.

Well, obviously, because it is not exclusive.

I really don't understand why anyone would be against them... They take little effort and money to accomplish, so won't be distracting from their primary projects. It's just a simple way for new PS customers to play some of the PS3's best games, old customers to double dip if they are so inclined and an easy way for the PS division to pull in some extra profits (which leads to more new games).

I really don't see the downside >.<

Anyway, i don't think this statement tells us there was any kind of mass outcry. Someone was probably just curious as to if this counts towards that number (seeing as it isn't a 'brand new' PS4 game), and they were given an answer.

You don't call publishers taking the cheap way out and porting all their games instead of developing new games a downside?  Porting games obviously takes resources and manpower.  Some publishers might even think that if they're going to make the same amount of money porting a title instead of creating a new title then why not make the port.  

If people keep buying into all these ports, more and more developers are going to jump at the idea of rerereleasing a last gen game at full MSRP instead of developing a new game.  There's no guarantee this will happen but there's also no guarantee that this gen won't be flooded with last gen ports.  So far that's just about all we have to play. 

I agree. All games should just be made on PS4, and no ports should be made for those who dont have a PS4. Why should they bother if they can make a new game instead?