By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - TLOU:R isn't worth it

DakonBlackblade on 05 July 2014
DarkD said:
DakonBlackblade said:
Well if ppl buy it than its worth if, if ppl dont buy it it isnt. A retarded videogames reporter saying its not worth it wont change ppls perception. Its that simple.


He's saying that it's a slap in the face to people who bought the PS3 version.  If they had known that a PS4 version of the game was in the works, they would have held off buying the game.  This is a cash grab from Sony plain and simple.  That's what the article is stating...


This makes absolute no sense the Ps3 game was great, I dont feel cheated at all for having played it. Theyre remastering a masterpiece for ppl who havent had the chance to play it on Ps3 or for ppl who want to play it again. This slap in the face crap is just some crazy sense of entitlement ppl seen to have nowadays. However feels it isnt worth it just dont buy the game.

 

The existence of a remaster TLOU for PS4 doesnt detract in the excitment I had playing ti on PS3 one bit, so this argument that its a "slap in the face"is moot. And if I knew in advance that a remastered version would be released for PS4 Id have got the PS3 version anyway, heck if I would wait 1 year to play such a great game.



Around the Network
Locknuts on 05 July 2014

Normally I'm against re-releasing a game after only a year at almost full price, but everyone deserves to experience TLOU. I wouldn't say go and buy a PS4 to play it, but if you have one and you haven't played it then it's a no brainer.

If you haven't played it and don't have a PS4, grab a cheap PS3 copy and a pre-owned PS3 if necessary. I bought a cheap PS3 for TLOU and don't regret it.



DonFerrari on 05 July 2014
JazzB1987 said:
Burek said:
JazzB1987 said:


Competing with ones own games is what I mean.

People can make as many shooters as they want as long as the shooters differentiate themselves from each other. Also annualisation is stupid and one reason why you cannot sell AssassinsCreed3 for 60 bucks noone would buy it if AssassinsCreed4 is out for 60. (both games are way to similar). Its also pretty bad if you talk about the next game in the series when the last game just came out this month.

None would have a problem if Assassins Creed would come out in 2014 and WatchDogs in 2015 and PrinceOfPersia in 2016 and then in 2017 another Assassins Creed. Or if the games would come out on different platforms.
Those games might share some similarities but still are different.

COD ModernWarfare vs BlackOps is still the same game which forces Activision to reduce MW3s price.

There is a reason why 3 year old fifa is sold for less than 5 bucks.


If you make sequals with a 3 year pause or whatever and/or your games are 1 game of a specific series per generation noone would expect the games to sell for 15 bucks. But if you have 5 games if the same series on 1 system then its just normal to wait for a price drop.

I am sorry, but you have absolutely no idea how this, or any other business works. What you are suggesting is so ludicrous that I don't know where to start and where to finish. 

Surely you cannot believe that Ubisoft would have sold 73 million copies of Assasin's Creed by just publishing 2 games in 3-4 year intervals. Surely Activision would not be better of by selling CoD, or EA by selling FIFA or Madden every year....That is insane. 

Do you really think someone would pay $60 for a 3 year old game just because it has no sequel? Do you really think that some other company would not have stepped in to compete?

Do you really believe that Apple would have become the biggest company in the world had they just released iPhones every 4 years, in order not to compete with themselves, and not to drop the price of iPhone 4 should they release iPhone 4S?

Do you believe that car manufacturers should not make newer model cars every year, so that the older models can maintain high prices?

Sorry, I cannot believe I've read what you wrote, I'm still in shock. I better pull out of this thread, nothing good can come out of this...

What does a car manufacturer have to do with gaming? You compare apples to well stones.  Since when does a car manufacturer make the same type of car every year? They have SUVs and other types of cars but e.g Mecedes does not have a E-Class 2013 E-Class 2014 E-Class 2015. It is basically the same thing as selling you MarioKartWii 5 years in a row for 60 bucks.

Also another company making a slightly different game is no problem at all. Battlefield and COD are completely different games. So this argument also makes no sense. COD does not need a price cut just because Battlefield comes out.

Let me give you another example okay? Mario kart. Its a game it is only once per console and it even sells without price drop. It would NOT sell that much if the game would be 20 bucks after a year and the next Mario kart would be out because the next mario kart would be 20 bucks a year later and then the next mario kart would be out. Assassins Creed sold 70m with several games and being a multiplat title.

Also are you a gamer or are you a shareholder? Who cares about the publishers when they dont care about the gamers? They would earn more than enough money by making great games.
The games get worse the less time they have for being developed and people feel that there are to many AssCreed games etc. The 2 games between AC2 and AC3 were to much. Also Ac4 being out 1 year after AC3 was to early.

GTA also comes out once every 5+ years? and guess how much that sold? Why? Because the dev takes time to make a great game.  The Last of Us is also a good game and it deserves to be bought for more than 20 bucks.

I agree with the pulling out part.

TBH I really wish you get what you want bad games you are just willing to pay 20 bucks for. Id rather play the Last of Us than Fifa (which is a 60 dollar DLC btw)

You should probably go see a doctor if you get a shock just because you encounter someone that has a different opinion.


Well anyways TLoU for 50 bucks in HD is a very good offer! Would also get it if I would have a PS4.


Your reasoning fail the second you look that there are a lot of really good game that release once or twice on a generation and even tough sells alot it needs price drops to reach that (like selling 5M full price than another 5-10M on sucessive discounts) like GT games. On the other side you say about CoD or AC, do you think if CoD didn't release annualy (making the game go from 60 to 30 or so in a year) it could sell enough to cover for the yearly release?? Because a 20M annualy would need like 100M in 5 years so go figure your reasoning.

And a about the car manufacturer they sell the same car for 5 years with at most a face lift and the older car lose on price as soon as sold and even if you buy it new when a new year come the car lose price... so it's pretty much the same case, unless you think if they made a batch of 5x the same car and kept selling it, just because they don't have another in the next year it will hold the same price than you are crazy.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 05 July 2014
Captain_Tom said:
DonFerrari said:

http://www.gamersbliss.com/2014/07/04/the-last-of-us-remastered-worth-it/

It reeks of fanboyism "The Last of Us is stepping over a very blurred line of purity". While recognizing Tomb Raider and GTA5 is doing it, but only TLOU isn't worthy and is almost a crime. Then use the excuse that re-releasing the game for US$50,00 as most GOTY games do that and never saw anyone complaining... why don't he also complain about Nintendo IPs that after 5 years don't drop in price?

Is everybody so afraid that TLOU could sell an extra million and pay the bills of the development of UC4?


I honestly don't get all the B!tching either.  If you don't want it, don't buy it!  

But you know that some gamers think that if they don't like or value a specific game or HW then it's worthless and anyone that like it is certainly an idiot... it is discuting mentality.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DarkD on 05 July 2014
DakonBlackblade said:
DarkD said:
DakonBlackblade said:
Well if ppl buy it than its worth if, if ppl dont buy it it isnt. A retarded videogames reporter saying its not worth it wont change ppls perception. Its that simple.


He's saying that it's a slap in the face to people who bought the PS3 version.  If they had known that a PS4 version of the game was in the works, they would have held off buying the game.  This is a cash grab from Sony plain and simple.  That's what the article is stating...


This makes absolute no sense the Ps3 game was great, I dont feel cheated at all for having played it. Theyre remastering a masterpiece for ppl who havent had the chance to play it on Ps3 or for ppl who want to play it again. This slap in the face crap is just some crazy sense of entitlement ppl seen to have nowadays. However feels it isnt worth it just dont buy the game.

 

The existence of a remaster TLOU for PS4 doesnt detract in the excitment I had playing ti on PS3 one bit, so this argument that its a "slap in the face"is moot. And if I knew in advance that a remastered version would be released for PS4 Id have got the PS3 version anyway, heck if I would wait 1 year to play such a great game.

Well normally a company with something amazing and memorable to remaster will wait a couple of generations first then remaster it for people who never played the original.  Take The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, they waited 2 generations to remaster it rather than just a year.  That's because there's a whole generation of gamers out there that had never played that masterpiece.  Take Age of Empires 2, they remade that after well over 10 years.  However for TLOU its not the same because there is hardly anyone who hasn't played it who has a PS4.  

Why this is a problem is imagine this, rather than coming out with new games every generation, what if half their games were just remakes of their hits from last year....  Isn't that what Sony fans always accuse Nintendo of?  Only instead of just making new installments of the same series every year, now they're just remaking the same game every year.  

Yes I admit that remakes take far less effort to make, however it still eats up resources.  If this was such a great idea, why don't we have a FF7 remake?  or a MGS remake? or a GTA3 remake?  why because its not a great idea, it eats up resources that could go to something else with new features.  



Around the Network
DakonBlackblade on 05 July 2014
DarkD said:
DakonBlackblade said:
DarkD said:
DakonBlackblade said:
Well if ppl buy it than its worth if, if ppl dont buy it it isnt. A retarded videogames reporter saying its not worth it wont change ppls perception. Its that simple.


He's saying that it's a slap in the face to people who bought the PS3 version.  If they had known that a PS4 version of the game was in the works, they would have held off buying the game.  This is a cash grab from Sony plain and simple.  That's what the article is stating...


This makes absolute no sense the Ps3 game was great, I dont feel cheated at all for having played it. Theyre remastering a masterpiece for ppl who havent had the chance to play it on Ps3 or for ppl who want to play it again. This slap in the face crap is just some crazy sense of entitlement ppl seen to have nowadays. However feels it isnt worth it just dont buy the game.

 

The existence of a remaster TLOU for PS4 doesnt detract in the excitment I had playing ti on PS3 one bit, so this argument that its a "slap in the face"is moot. And if I knew in advance that a remastered version would be released for PS4 Id have got the PS3 version anyway, heck if I would wait 1 year to play such a great game.

Well normally a company with something amazing and memorable to remaster will wait a couple of generations first then remaster it for people who never played the original.  Take The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, they waited 2 generations to remaster it rather than just a year.  That's because there's a whole generation of gamers out there that had never played that masterpiece.  Take Age of Empires 2, they remade that after well over 10 years.  However for TLOU its not the same because there is hardly anyone who hasn't played it who has a PS4.  

Why this is a problem is imagine this, rather than coming out with new games every generation, what if half their games were just remakes of their hits from last year....  Isn't that what Sony fans always accuse Nintendo of?  Only instead of just making new installments of the same series every year, now they're just remaking the same game every year.  

Yes I admit that remakes take far less effort to make, however it still eats up resources.  If this was such a great idea, why don't we have a FF7 remake?  or a MGS remake? or a GTA3 remake?  why because its not a great idea, it eats up resources that could go to something else with new features.  


Seriously youre comparing the effort that remaking a game that was launched for PS1 with outlandish bad graphics for todays standard to remastering TLOU? Remastering FF VII would be almost the same as developping a brand new game (dont get me wrong Id love a FF VII remake). ND probably got like 10 dudes and put them to work on remastering this for like 6 months. PS4 has a bunch of gamers who didnt own a PS3 it makes sense, TLOU is the most condecorated game ever.

 

And if ppl dont think its a good idea dont buy the frekaing game, if it sells bad SONy will never do it again, if it sells well than why the hell not do it again ? It worked super well for Tomb Raider and in that case the original had been launched less than 1 year before the remaster, I dindt buy the remaster only the original but obviously there were ppl who thought the remaster was a good idea and bought it. The Tomb Raider remaster founded the new Tomb Raider game beeing developed we should all be happy developers can get a little exra money for theyre work, its hard enought to make a profit on todasy AAA game market.



DarkD on 05 July 2014
DakonBlackblade said:


Seriously youre comparing the effort that remaking a game that was launched for PS1 with outlandish bad graphics for todays standard to remastering TLOU seriously ? ND probably got liek 10 dudes and put them to work on remastering this for liek 6 months. PS4 has a bunch of gamers who didnt own a PS3 it makes sense, TLOU is the most condecorated game ever.

 

And iof ppl dont think its a good idea dont buy the frekaing game, if it sells bad SOny will never do it again, if it sells well than why the hell not do it again. It worked super well for Tomb Raider and in that case the original had been launched less than 1 year before the remaster, the Tomb Raider remaster founded the new Tomb Raider game beeing developed we should all be happy developers can get a little exra money for theyre work, its hard enought to make a profit on todasy AAA game market.

Redoing the models is still redoing the models whether they're old models or new, they still have to start over from scratch.  Unless its just a cheap ass upscale in which case its an even bigger rip-off than what I already said.  Take Half Life 1 for instance, they basically just dropped that into a more powerful engine and sold it.  Total rip-off.  

It's a problem because if people do buy the game it sets a terrible precedent which we'll be regretting for the next 10 years if it takes off.  Look at locked on disc content, do you think its fair to tell people "if you don't like it, then don't buy the game."?  Take DRM eventhough Microsoft was forced to back out of it, imagine if they had just stayed silent about it, there's evidence that Sony was planning the same DRM and just changed their mind at the last minute to make a splash in the media.  Would it have been fair to tell gamers "if you don't like it, don't buy it."?



DakonBlackblade on 05 July 2014
DarkD said:

Redoing the models is still redoing the models whether they're old models or new, they still have to start over from scratch.  Unless its just a cheap ass upscale in which case its an even bigger rip-off than what I already said.  Take Half Life 1 for instance, they basically just dropped that into a more powerful engine and sold it.  Total rip-off.  

It's a problem because if people do buy the game it sets a terrible precedent which we'll be regretting for the next 10 years if it takes off.  Look at locked on disc content, do you think its fair to tell people "if you don't like it, then don't buy the game."?  Take DRM eventhough Microsoft was forced to back out of it, imagine if they had just stayed silent about it, there's evidence that Sony was planning the same DRM and just changed their mind at the last minute to make a splash in the media.  Would it have been fair to tell gamers "if you don't like it, don't buy it."?


The logic Im making and youre failling to see is how is that a terrible precedent if ppl are buying it, If ppl buy the thing is because they want it, if theres demand for a product than there is a reson to make it. If ppl dont want it and think its a rip off they wont buy it. Its that simple. If it sells 1 million coppies than theres obviously ppl interested in the product and ND (or whatever company is remastering any given game) has all the right to remaster the game, theyre a company theyre objective is to have profit.

 

And ye it would have been "fair" to tell gamers "if you dont like it dont buy it in regards to DRM". If The XOne and PS4 had DRM and ppl disagreed with it they wouldnt buy it (heck ppl dindt buy the XOne even after Ms backed off from DRM) the consoles wouldve bombed and the companys would change theyre policies (Ms did so in fear of the repercursion before even testing the market). Videogames are a business like any other, its not about beeing fair its about supply and demand, if theres demand you better be ready to supply  it or you gona loose monet, so if ND releases this remaster and it sells like hotckakes, theres a demand therefore developers should come with the supply and profit.



DarkD on 05 July 2014
DakonBlackblade said:

The logic Im making and youre failling to see is how is that a terrible precedent if ppl are buying it, If ppl buy the thing is because they want it, if theres demand for a product than there is a reson to make it. If ppl dont want it and think its a rip off they wont buy it. Its that simple. If it sells 1 million coppies than theres obviously ppl interested in the product and ND (or whatever company is remastering any given game) has all the right to remaster the game, theyre a company theyre objective is to have profit.

 

And ye it would have been "fair" to tell gamers "if you dont like it dont buy it in regards to DRM". If The XOne and PS4 had DRM and ppl disagreed with it they wouldnt buy it (heck ppl dindt buy the XOne even after Ms backed off from DRM) the consoles wouldve bombed and the companys would change theyre policies (Ms did so in fear of the repercursion before even testing the market). Videogames are a business like any other, its not about beeing fair its about supply and demand, if theres demand you better be ready to supply  it or you gona loose monet, so if ND releases this remaster and it sells like hotckakes, theres a demand therefore developers should come with the supply and profit.

It's thinking like that, that has allowed everything to spiral downhill into the hole that everything is in these days.  There are companies which releas products with fatal defects because its cheaper to suffer a lawsuit than to recall all the products.  Just because you can sell someone a rip-off doesn't mean you should or that the customer should just swallow the rip-off.  Also, if you're argument is that Sony can do whatever they want as long as people will buy it, then you shouldn't even be on this thread.  This thread is for convincing people that they shouldn't buy the game because it sets a bad precedent.  If your only argument is "let them buy what they want" then just ignore the thread and go back to buying whatever rip-offs you like.  



mornelithe on 06 July 2014
DakonBlackblade said:

Seriously youre comparing the effort that remaking a game that was launched for PS1 with outlandish bad graphics for todays standard to remastering TLOU? Remastering FF VII would be almost the same as developping a brand new game (dont get me wrong Id love a FF VII remake). ND probably got like 10 dudes and put them to work on remastering this for like 6 months. PS4 has a bunch of gamers who didnt own a PS3 it makes sense, TLOU is the most condecorated game ever.

 

And if ppl dont think its a good idea dont buy the frekaing game, if it sells bad SONy will never do it again, if it sells well than why the hell not do it again ? It worked super well for Tomb Raider and in that case the original had been launched less than 1 year before the remaster, I dindt buy the remaster only the original but obviously there were ppl who thought the remaster was a good idea and bought it. The Tomb Raider remaster founded the new Tomb Raider game beeing developed we should all be happy developers can get a little exra money for theyre work, its hard enought to make a profit on todasy AAA game market.

It does make sense, but I'd imagine that Sony got the hardware to them sooner so the ICE team could play around with it, all the experience will end up helping UC4 as well as the SDK they give out to 1st parties.

That having been said, FFVII would be a vastly bigger undertaking, if we're talking TLOU fidelity+.