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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why The Last of Us Remastered Shouldn’t Really Exist

Tagged games:

 

Do you think TLOUR shouldn't Exit?

YES 150 30.99%
 
NO 220 45.45%
 
WHO CARES? 107 22.11%
 
Total:477
KLXVER on 02 August 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
KLXVER said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

Well they did, it was called the PS3. Turns out people care more about a cheap price point then backwards compatibility cause the PS3 got torn to shreds while it was BC.


I bought it the day after release. Still havent gotten a PS4...

I'm playing my PS3 right now, seeing as PS3 was tied in US and tied for second globally with a console with weak internation presence and its predecessor outsold the competitors predecessor by 700%. We're in the minority.

Price > BC.

Its quite selfish to force an extra 200$ and make a company lose a billion dollars just because you want to save 50$ on The Last of US.

You're just gonna hafta #DealWithIt.


They dont have to force BC. Just make two versions of your console. Like they did with the PS3.

The PS3 did come in 2nd place, but it did not tie for 2nd in the US. Just saying.



Around the Network
KLXVER on 02 August 2014
overman1 said:


ummmm.....maye be because the same people probably didnt own a PS3...?


Exactly. Why would they buy a PS4 for TLOU if it couldnt make them buy a PS3?



Euphoria14 on 02 August 2014
KLXVER said:
Euphoria14 said:
KLXVER said:
If you guys think these remasters are great for people who couldnt or wouldnt or didnt bother or whatever to get it the first time around, then fine. Just think the people who did buy Sonys previous consoles should be their priority...


Naughty Dog is still working on Uncharted 4 and an unannounced IP along with the work they did on TLOUR and are likely going to be giving us TLOU2, which along with UC4 would be for those same people who bought their previous consoles?

You're point makes no sense. 


It does make sense. TLOU still exists. If people wouldnt buy a PS3 for it, then why would they buy a PS4 for it?

Easy, people are not made of money. If someone bought a 360 and invested their gaming funds into it, they aren't just going to buy a PS3 too. Same goes people who bought a Wii. You can't act like everyone buys a console the moment something that interests them arrives

Those of us who buy multiple consoles are not the majority.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

DonFerrari on 02 August 2014
KLXVER said:
If you guys think these remasters are great for people who couldnt or wouldnt or didnt bother or whatever to get it the first time around, then fine. Just think the people who did buy Sonys previous consoles should be their priority...

And what part of the remaster or no backward is going against previous owners? I'm pretty satisfied with their offer on ps4 and I'm their customer for 20 years now.





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."

KLXVER on 02 August 2014
Euphoria14 said:

Easy, people are not made of money. If someone bought a 360 and invested their gaming funds into it, they aren't just going to buy a PS3 too. Same goes people who bought a Wii. You can't act like everyone buys a console the moment something that interests them arrives.


You say people are not made of money and yet Sony makes people buy the game for almost the same price and if you want to play PS3 games on your PS4, you have to rent them for ridiculous prices. Yeah, people are not made of money indeed.



Around the Network
Dr.Henry_Killinger on 02 August 2014
KLXVER said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
KLXVER said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

Well they did, it was called the PS3. Turns out people care more about a cheap price point then backwards compatibility cause the PS3 got torn to shreds while it was BC.


I bought it the day after release. Still havent gotten a PS4...

I'm playing my PS3 right now, seeing as PS3 was tied in US and tied for second globally with a console with weak internation presence and its predecessor outsold the competitors predecessor by 700%. We're in the minority.

Price > BC.

Its quite selfish to force an extra 200$ and make a company lose a billion dollars just because you want to save 50$ on The Last of US.

You're just gonna hafta #DealWithIt.


They dont have to force BC. Just make two versions of your console. Like they did with the PS3.

The PS3 did come in 2nd place, but it did not tie for 2nd in the US. Just saying.

I already corrected it. It was Dead last in the US. And Sony lost a ton of money. Butting BC in the PS4 is idiotic. Like you said the PS3 had two versions and? ITS STILL LAST in US, why would they make two versions? So the losses from that could eat up the profit of the PS4? Get real.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

DonFerrari on 02 August 2014
KLXVER said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
KLXVER said:


I bought it the day after release. Still havent gotten a PS4...

I'm playing my PS3 right now, seeing as PS3 was tied in US and tied for second globally with a console with weak internation presence and its predecessor outsold the competitors predecessor by 700%. We're in the minority.

Price > BC.

Its quite selfish to force an extra 200$ and make a company lose a billion dollars just because you want to save 50$ on The Last of US.

You're just gonna hafta #DealWithIt.


They dont have to force BC. Just make two versions of your console. Like they did with the PS3.

The PS3 did come in 2nd place, but it did not tie for 2nd in the US. Just saying.


Well they didn't make 2 versions they took hw backward on one revision and sw backward on another one to reduce cost and make more collections. They never made a no backward version available on launch, so you are reaching.



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."

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 02 August 2014
KLXVER said:
Euphoria14 said:

Easy, people are not made of money. If someone bought a 360 and invested their gaming funds into it, they aren't just going to buy a PS3 too. Same goes people who bought a Wii. You can't act like everyone buys a console the moment something that interests them arrives.


You say people are not made of money and yet Sony makes people buy the game for almost the same price and if you want to play PS3 games on your PS4, you have to rent them for ridiculous prices. Yeah, people are not made of money indeed.

Yes because PS Now 1) beta and 2) optional is making people pay for it.

But making people pay 600$ for a PS4 is giving them an option.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

KLXVER on 02 August 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

I already corrected it. It was Dead last in the US. And Sony lost a ton of money. Butting BC in the PS4 is idiotic. Like you said the PS3 had two versions and? ITS STILL LAST in US, why would they make two versions? So the losses from that could eat up the profit of the PS4? Get real.


So youre fine with Sony offering you less as long as they make money?



KLXVER on 02 August 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

Yes because PS Now 1) beta and 2) optional is making people pay for it.

But making people pay 600$ for a PS4 is giving them an option.


Im not sure BC would cost them 200$ to add...