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
starcraft said:
Right, I am about to fine-tooth comb this multi-reported thread for moderation-requirements. I suspect this will take some time.

If anyone would like to bribe me with cookies, this is the moment.


You'll get nothing.



Around the Network
rakugakist said:


I don't know.  I actually like it.  It's like rereleasing my favorite movies on Blu-ray.  I know Last of Us is still really new, but the game is so good, it's nice a new audience can enjoy it.


Thats your opinion and thats fine. Its just not the way I look at it.



Thanks to Carl for moderating this thread. It's really not as bad as the reports implied.

I've let comments about Halo go where they aren't too bad. As someone noted early on the article *does* mention Halo so it isn't completely off-base.

My take: All the TLOU fans take a chill pill. The game is going to get some hate, its a very obvious cash-in. Everyone does it, no one likes it, and it doesn't help gamers to support it ON ANY PLATFORM. There is a tiny, tiny market for whom this would have been a first time purchase - certainly not enough to justify the expense 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.

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.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

starcraft said:

Thanks to Carl for moderating this thread. It's really not as bad as the reports implied.

I've let comments about Halo go where they aren't too bad. As someone noted early on the article *does* mention Halo so it isn't completely off-base.

My take: All the TLOU fans take a chill pill. The game is going to get some hate, its a very obvious cash-in. Everyone does it, no one likes it, and it doesn't help gamers to support it ON ANY PLATFORM. There is a tiny, tiny market for whom this would have been a first time purchase - certainly not enough to justify the expense 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.

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.




I see Carl and starcraft have already provided their input, and I agree with them for the most part. Though, this thread really escalated far more than it needed to, and the only thing I'll say about that is that you don't need to post in every thread; if you don't like the topic of discussion or the looks of a thread just move on and try another one.

Similarly I've got myself a copy of TLoU:R and it's excellent. Sure, it may not be needed, but it is wanted and the Sony fanbase are buying it and enjoying it, as are reviewers. Surely that is enough of a justification for the game to exsist, even if you yourself won't be buying it or see the point of it. Perhaps, then, the game isn't for you.

I'm not here to deny, however, that the game is a "cash-grab" or a cheap solution to an otherwise larger problem, because it is. Doesn't mean you can't enjoy it.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Around the Network

Given that the PS4 has outsold TLOU(PS3) there is obviously a reason for it to exist. Also there is deffinetly a lot of TLOU buyers that haven't upgraded. If there is PS4 owners who haven't played TLOU, whether that was Because they didn't own a PS3, didn't have enough cash, or whatever, then that's reason enough.



KLXVER said:
bananaking21 said:

its probably the best game of all time. its going to have its fans defending it against stupidity. 


So you think us that are against remasters like this are stupid?

Thanks for that...

...hehe :) - Pretty much just on the basis of the lack of understanding why this remaster has been done. Remasters have been done for years, and not just in games, music and films. It's strange that people are moaning about a remaster they arnt going to buy. If you are not interested, no issue, but it is stupidity to tell everyone else that they cant or shouldnt buy this game.

As for Naughty dog, the team thats probably working on this is the tech team, they are the people who will be making the tech that makes UC4.. it's imperative they improve their engine to support next gen, the best way of doing that is to actually make a game with it... therefore the easiest way to do that is to do a remaster of TLOU otherwise the first game they would be testing their new tech on would be UC4... which potentially means they would make a lesser game.

Unfortunately I guess people who have a lack of knowledge of the games industry and how they work would just see this as a quick cash grab, but it really isnt, its building the tech for the big hitters. Could they have made a new game while building their tech, yes of course, but then it wont be as good as the game will now be.

Now, you might think this is a waste of time for people to buy this, but ultimately it has no impact on peoples day to day lives, if people go out and buy it, then its done the job in a quiet month. Things start to pick up from next month with a couple of other remasters (Diablo and Metro) I wonder if people will be complaining as much about them. From September new games will be appearing all over the place..so whats the problem.



Making an indie game : Dead of Day!

starcraft said:

Thanks to Carl for moderating this thread. It's really not as bad as the reports implied.

I've let comments about Halo go where they aren't too bad. As someone noted early on the article *does* mention Halo so it isn't completely off-base.

My take: All the TLOU fans take a chill pill. The game is going to get some hate, its a very obvious cash-in. Everyone does it, no one likes it, and it doesn't help gamers to support it ON ANY PLATFORM. There is a tiny, tiny market for whom this would have been a first time purchase - certainly not enough to justify the expense 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.

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.

I find this pretty offensive as a software programmer myself. This thinking that software loses its value almost as soon as it is released is what is slowly breaking down this industry. I didn't expect this kind of post from a mod, calling people suckers for paying a, in your opinion, redicilous price for a game with all DLC content included.

Anyway which is it, zero effort, cash grab, or did it cost a significant amount of time to port by a group of people? Why assume a delay for Uncharted 4, engine optimization doesn't happen at the start of a project, that group of people will have been getting experience by getting it to run on PS4.
And again which is it, a cash grab, or less marketing dollars avalailable for a new IP. If it's a cash grab they should have plenty more money after to spend on the next game.
Making a small-scale title instead would have taken people from Uncharted 4 that are needed right now. Just being a small title doesn't mean you don't need the whole gamut of creative people to make it.

IMO the price is justified. A highly acclaimed game with all extras included for a small discount, ported to a new system. Great for those who haven't played it. Plus ND knows full well that most of those that will upgrade will or already have sold their ps3 copy, flooding the market with 2nd hand copies of ps3 tlou.

Anyway it's unfortunate gamer wide mentality that 6 month old games should be 50% off or more.



GOTY once again

been playing it every day

better than any other release of the year on all platforms

Haters gonna hate

TLOU domination.


Raziel123 said:

GOTY once again

been playing it every day

better than any other release of the year on all platforms

Haters gonna hate

TLOU domination.

Now it is a 5 star game, I like it. Let's hope trolls don't go there to give 0 stars.



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."