Welp looks like the guy was only responding to the UC4 easter egg question.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=98326625&postcount=133

Is it that bad? The PS3 may be more than 7 years old but the graphics of The Last of Us are remarkable. I always thought that PS3 couldn't quite create realistic-looking charcters but Joel and Ellie almost fooled me sometimes. I would rather have it created ground-up for the PS4 - something that would be considered impressive for the system. 

I don't understand why people let the fact that a game is not running on the most powerful and up-to-date hardware substantially limit their enjoyment of a game. If you do that, you're only limiting yourself.

It is limiting my enjoyment because I know how it COULD look. 720p with muddy textures and no AA is not comforting my eyes. Sure it is great on the PS3 but it could be much greaterer on the PS4.

It would only be much better if it were rebuilt almost from the ground up, using the power of the hardware instead of a quick port. Every muliplat looks better on the PS4, but the difference doesn't nearly reflect the leap in technical capability. Naughty Dog cares a lot about the public perception of their studio and their IPs, and a port of The Last of Us after only one year could be detrimental to them in the long-term.

And the existence of the PS4 doen't mean the PS3 should be thrown in the trash. It's a great system and that's why developers haven't dropped support yet. If people really didn't care about the PS3 anymore, then games and consoles wouldn't still be selling and PS4 demand would be even higher than it is now.

They are to busy on PS4 projects to dedicate time for pointless goty editions.

Id rather Uncharted 4 in 2014

First, Naughty Dog would've loved to have a stronger system to work with for TLOU so that they can bring their vision as close to life as possible. I don't know how a port on a next gen console would be detrimental. It's not too early, it's too late. The time difference is just the difference of the launch windows for the game and PS4. Would you object to a port if they were released simultaneously? How could a port on a more powerful system be bad for a franchise? People who haven't played it will be able to enjoy it on a fresher system. People who already enjoyed it will be able to enjoy it again with sharper visuals. ND and Sony will make a shitload of money by putting the GOTG on a next gen console for a giant boost for the launch lineup. Everyone wins. I don't know why they should change anything other than the visuals for a simple port. You said it yourself how great the game already is.

The last gen systems aren't still successful because they are great systems. They are successful because it's the only thing most people have to play with. No one who owns a next gen console will still buy cross gen titles on the inferior system. You contradict yourself when you say on the one hand that a game shouldn't be ported to a newer console and on the other hand feel that the last gen systems should still be supported. Why shouldn't the next gen consoles which need games more than any other system not be supported by great games?

I think you misunderstand. Naughty Dog and Sony would certainly make  a lot of money off a port. However, as stated before, It might not be a good idea in the long term. Naughty Dog is held in very high regard by hardcore gamers and is touted as Sony's most elite studio. People often look to Naughty Dog to bring out the power of a Playstation console, and this as important as ever considering the generational leap is not as immediately noticeable as past ones. A port that makes too few improvements could be branded as a repackaging and an attempt by Naughty Dog to make a quick buck. And if they spend too much time trying to improve it, it would detract from time that could be spent making an original game. If Naughty Dog wants to focus on delivering fresh and immersive experiences like they always have, then original games are the way to go and ports may have to take a back seat.

Regarding last-gen systems, I meant that developers should look to properly balance support between the last gen and current gen. They should gradually reduce support for last-gen while increasing support for current-gen. And this generally what they're doing. It isn't smart to completely drop support for the older systems as development costs are low and money made from last-gen versions can be used to invest in current-gen exclusive titles. If games that are exclusive to current-gen (or put substantial emphasis on current-gen versions) are marketed well, people will go out and buy the PS4/XBO.

It would certainly not damage ND as a brand to bring their best game so far to the best system on the market. Who would consider it as damage? People who already played it will not like it or ND any less. Some like me will like them even more. People who switched over and don't own a PS3 will have a chance to play the game without investing in an outdated system. If anything a port will broaden the fan base. If it is not branded as a remake but a simple port people will not expect anything more than just slight graphical improvements. It's a port after all. Not once in the history of gaming has a cross gen port damaged a brand.

Did the ICO collection damage Team Ico? Did the GOW collection damage Santa Monica? Did the MGS Collection damage Kojima? Did anyone object those ports because they were just graphical ports without new mechanics? No, no, no and no. These are alongside ND the most highly regarded developers on Sony's side. Not only did it not damage them, it boosted their popularity for people who didn't know them so far because they didn't have a PS2. It made them more money to concentrate on future projects.

To say a cross gen port is damaging to a brand is pretentious elitist nonsense.

Look at it this way. If Naughty Dog announces that they're porting the game to the PS4, people who already played the game might be annoyed because they want a new game. They might think that Naughty Dog is wasting their time. It might sound stupid that porting would go so far as to damage Naughty Dog's brand, but Naughty Dog is MUCH more famous than Sony's other studios. A lot of people outside of the Sony fanbase don't know that it's Sony Santa Monica that makes GoW or Media Molecule that makes Little Big Planet.

And a collection ≠ a port. A collection is 3 updated games for the price of one, and is usually a really good deal. Furthermore, the fact that it has multiple titles means that it can't be construed as a simple repackaging. While a port might be a no-brainer for some companies, it might be a risk for a developer like Naughty Dog who's become expected to deliver high-end graphical spectacles.