Why The Last of Us Remastered Shouldn’t Really Exist

[JoeTheBro]

starcraft said:

My take: All the TLOU fans take a chill pill. The game is going to get some hate, its a very obvious cash-in.This entire thread is arguing about this. Regardless of it being a cash in or not, you are insulting a bunch of forum members who disagree with you. Saying "very obvious" just ain't cool.

Everyone does it,

no one likes it, I like HD ports and other rereleases and it seems tons of other people do too. What were you meaning by this?

 and it doesn't help gamers to support it ON ANY PLATFORM. This kinda ties in to the point above. You're just talking about buying rereleases and HD ports right? The only bad trend I could see coming out of this is future consoles once again lacking bc. That could be a bad thing, but there are many other factors that have a bigger influence on the systems including bc.

 

Plus there is good that comes out of buying HD ports and rereleases. Gamers get additional options when wanting to play their games, and pubs make money allowing them to invest in riskier titles. Stuff like this happens all the time and is very common within the industry.

There is a tiny, tiny market for whom this would have been a first time purchase - certainly not enough to justify the expense Sources? There are lots of reports saying the opposite about it being a tiny market. Do you think Sony is lying? Also how much do you think the port cost to develop? I certainly don't know, but you seem to be assuming a lot of things.

if Sony truly believed they are the only ones that will get suckered into buying it at the full (and ridiculous) asking price. Full or near-full price offerings a year (or less later) with some DLC that has ZERO marginal cost at that point included is a price-gouge. Doesn't mean it isn't worth it to a few people with money to burn, but its an unfortunate industry-wide strategy. Insulting half the people in the thread again? I'm not a sucker, and neither are the million other people buying it at full price. You don't think it's worth $50, but we do.

Also, logic dictates that this most certainly *did* distract from other gaming priorities. Developing the title, marketing the title, producing the title. All that can be debated is to what extent the distraction occured - and thats a debate we'll never have sufficient evidence to put to bed. Did it prevent the development of a unique small-scale title (ala Child of Light)? Did it simply delay Uncharted 4 by a few months, or result in less marketing dollars being spent on some other, new IP? We'll never know. But pretending the title didn't use up resources is ridiculous.

That's not how development has to work. Again you're just making assumptions while Sony themselves are saying the opposite.

Put some comments in bold. Your post was really strange man. Hopefully this gets you thinking down a better path.