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

DonFerrari said:

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

 

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


That last bit about paying the bills for uc4 is funny, uc4 will pay for itself many times over!... Uc3 probably already paid for it (or tlou ps3) i mean the studio must get the money to do their next game somewhere!

remakes or re-releases are obviously quick money, all of them, there is no question about that, so long as they are better onthe new machines, why not? I am sure tlou re will look better that the new wolfenstein game by example, and it could shut a few people up about 30fps being "better".

So I want this game with the enhancements, I want the uncharted and god of war games on my PS4 too, not on psnow, actual 1080p60fps ps4 games... The price may be higher than I hoped at first, but at least ill get them in better form at some point!

obviously I want new games too, but this is beside the point... And to those who think this is new, back in the nes days they had re-releases of old atari 2600 and coleco vision games on the shiny new 8-bit nintendo machine! (Pac-man, donkey kong, come to mind.. )



Around the Network
DarkD said:
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."?

Last gen many devs created super detailed, high poly, high res assets to help cut costs. On PS3 and 360 they had to cut back until the assets would render at a reasonable resolution and framerate. They knew that they would have the abillity to utilize them in future generations. Naughty Dog, Polyphony, Turn 10, Epic, and many others have discussed this time, and time agian.

Not only does this help them in future games by being able to re-use redundent never changing assets, but it also saves them from the issues making remakes/remasters of older games so difficult. Things like the premium cars in GT5 and 6 are already modeled at insane detail that could never be rendered in real time on PS3 and probably even PS4. This saves massive amounts of time and money letting devs focus on new content or easily remaster games with more than just a simple resolution/framerate/aa upgrade.

This is in no way bad news, and it is well worth it. This means that masterpieces from gen 7 will live on in remasters that look amazing in 2k then again in 4k next gen. I personally look forward to many games being farmed out or done with small teams to be remastered for an even better experience. No more wishing for remakes like FFVII, Legend of Dragoon, and so many more, now it should be industry standard to remaster classics to surrent hardware.

 



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

POE said:
the indusrty is collapsing and no one wants to admit it.


If that were true then Street Fighter II would've been the final nail in the coffin for the industry with the amount of remasters that game had.



KBG29 said:

Last gen many devs created super detailed, high poly, high res assets to help cut costs. On PS3 and 360 they had to cut back until the assets would render at a reasonable resolution and framerate. They knew that they would have the abillity to utilize them in future generations. Naughty Dog, Polyphony, Turn 10, Epic, and many others have discussed this time, and time agian.

Not only does this help them in future games by being able to re-use redundent never changing assets, but it also saves them from the issues making remakes/remasters of older games so difficult. Things like the premium cars in GT5 and 6 are already modeled at insane detail that could never be rendered in real time on PS3 and probably even PS4. This saves massive amounts of time and money letting devs focus on new content or easily remaster games with more than just a simple resolution/framerate/aa upgrade.

This is in no way bad news, and it is well worth it. This means that masterpieces from gen 7 will live on in remasters that look amazing in 2k then again in 4k next gen. I personally look forward to many games being farmed out or done with small teams to be remastered for an even better experience. No more wishing for remakes like FFVII, Legend of Dragoon, and so many more, now it should be industry standard to remaster classics to surrent hardware.

 

Depends what you are talking about.  Sure there are some games where they can and do exactly that.  I imagine things like sports games where they know what models they are going to use ahead of time.  However in a game like The Last of us I don't think that's the case.  Models have to be made from scratch for games with unique concepts.  It's the same concept as programming, coders try to make everything as reusable as possible so they don't have to make the same code ever again.  However, when a concept is unique, they still have to go back to the drawing board.  

If they did do this with The Last of Us, isn't that evidence that they made the game intending to remaster it right from the start and just kept quiet about it to trick more people into buying it.  I'd say your point is more damning than anything.  



DarkD said:
KBG29 said:

Last gen many devs created super detailed, high poly, high res assets to help cut costs. On PS3 and 360 they had to cut back until the assets would render at a reasonable resolution and framerate. They knew that they would have the abillity to utilize them in future generations. Naughty Dog, Polyphony, Turn 10, Epic, and many others have discussed this time, and time agian.

Not only does this help them in future games by being able to re-use redundent never changing assets, but it also saves them from the issues making remakes/remasters of older games so difficult. Things like the premium cars in GT5 and 6 are already modeled at insane detail that could never be rendered in real time on PS3 and probably even PS4. This saves massive amounts of time and money letting devs focus on new content or easily remaster games with more than just a simple resolution/framerate/aa upgrade.

This is in no way bad news, and it is well worth it. This means that masterpieces from gen 7 will live on in remasters that look amazing in 2k then again in 4k next gen. I personally look forward to many games being farmed out or done with small teams to be remastered for an even better experience. No more wishing for remakes like FFVII, Legend of Dragoon, and so many more, now it should be industry standard to remaster classics to surrent hardware.

 

Depends what you are talking about.  Sure there are some games where they can and do exactly that.  I imagine things like sports games where they know what models they are going to use ahead of time.  However in a game like The Last of us I don't think that's the case.  Models have to be made from scratch for games with unique concepts.  It's the same concept as programming, coders try to make everything as reusable as possible so they don't have to make the same code ever again.  However, when a concept is unique, they still have to go back to the drawing board.  

If they did do this with The Last of Us, isn't that evidence that they made the game intending to remaster it right from the start and just kept quiet about it to trick more people into buying it.  I'd say your point is more damning than anything.  


Naughty Dog did this on every one of their titles last gen. They do it to try and be as detailed as possible, then they try to bring as much of that detail to the game render as possible. It only makes sense to do the best you can with the tools available at the time. They and many other devs have been vocal about this during the 7th gen. That is why it was so easy for many games do upgrade, and why it will continue to happen. They are all starting with the cross over games from last year because, one they know a sizable group of people held off buying titles last year to save for the new consoles, and two, because PS4 has pulled in a decent amount of non PS3 gamers. Bonus reason, it gives teams a chance to work on the new consoles, and practice new techniques. Probably more important for devs like Naughty Dog who have not coded for anything outside of PS3 for 7 years, sans a few new team mates that have made PC or 360 games during that time.



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

Around the Network

The last of us butthurt thread?
The last of us butthurt thread.



”The environment where PlayStation wins is best for this industry” (Jack Tretton, 2009)

There is only one reason i didnt bought TLOU on PS3 when it came out, and thats because i knew that just like any other ND game, it was gonna have a GOTY edition with a lot of extra content and probably story dlc, and guess what? i was right only that except of just being a simple GOTY on PS3, its a GOTY edition on PS4 with improved graphics, resolution (1080p) and improved framerate to 60 fps, so FOR ME ITS TOTALLY WORTH IT!.

the only thing that i regret was finding out some spoilers... i hate SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!! AGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



alabtrosMyster said:
DonFerrari said:

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

 

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


That last bit about paying the bills for uc4 is funny, uc4 will pay for itself many times over!... Uc3 probably already paid for it (or tlou ps3) i mean the studio must get the money to do their next game somewhere!

remakes or re-releases are obviously quick money, all of them, there is no question about that, so long as they are better onthe new machines, why not? I am sure tlou re will look better that the new wolfenstein game by example, and it could shut a few people up about 30fps being "better".

So I want this game with the enhancements, I want the uncharted and god of war games on my PS4 too, not on psnow, actual 1080p60fps ps4 games... The price may be higher than I hoped at first, but at least ill get them in better form at some point!

obviously I want new games too, but this is beside the point... And to those who think this is new, back in the nes days they had re-releases of old atari 2600 and coleco vision games on the shiny new 8-bit nintendo machine! (Pac-man, donkey kong, come to mind.. )

owww man I have no doubt UC4 will profit (maybe not much because of small base at the release), just saying that the remaster will pay the company bills while UC4 don't launch.

People just like to whine about things that don't comply with what he wants... Like all companies should just release the games he wants.



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."

DakonBlackblade said:
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.


Man don't lose your time.

DLC is a bad precedent to me, but for a lot of people it probably isn't since there are a lot of people that keep buying them, so just because I don't want or like it I will put my will above the right all other customers have to buy what they want? Is DLC a rip-off? I think so, but even being rip-off is the person right to choose.

And about the DRM, there is 00000000000000 proof that Sony was going for it, the person is just trying to push his opinion and bad Sony vision as facts. And the point you put is very commendable, the DRM idea as MS had put was bad so they received the backlash, so if remasters being around for so long and people wanting it is just a proof that it isn't as the DRM.

I'm tired of the "this will set precedents" mentality on people that forget that is already a pratice of the industry. And always with hyperboles. As if by releasing TLOUR Sony decided to just put remasters and no new games.. this person forgets which company releases more new IP everygen. And I would like that all the best games (like top 10 or 100) of each gen were remade for the next gen on smaller devs to train them to the new HW.



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 said:

owww man I have no doubt UC4 will profit (maybe not much because of small base at the release), just saying that the remaster will pay the company bills while UC4 don't launch.

People just like to whine about things that don't comply with what he wants... Like all companies should just release the games he wants.

I think Uncharted 4 will release holiday 2015 and by then the PS4s install base should be close to 30mil, I'll be honestly surprised if Uncharted 4 doesn't have the strongest Uncharted launch ever. I predicted 2.1mil first week so I think it should profit a lot.