Jump to content
IGNORED

Last Of Us - 2022 Remake (careful with spoilers Plz)


Capwn
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Strafe said:


Rockstar didn’t quite have the balls to charge £70 for their latest release, mind.

 

I think the price - when you take into account that a lot of people have likely paid for it twice already and it’s ‘just’ graphics rather than doing all the mo cap, planning a whole new game and mechanics and sound etc - is a bit of a piss take. I hate that I’ll probably end up getting it, too.

 

True; Sony "only" has a target audience of 15- 20million PS5 users, until the PC version lands. Rockstar with GTA V had console & PC market. 

 

Rockstar did have the balls to outsource GTA Trilogy Definitive Edition and launch at over £50 RRP, didn't even include the bloody maps :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually quite fascinating to compare this "remake" to the Resident Evil 4 one, just going by the trailers:

 

If the trailer tone is accurate, then with Resident Evil 4 Capcom have I think wisely decided to go in a slightly different direction to the original - the art style and crucially art direction seems radically and purposefully different, and it's going for what seems like more of the horror vibe from the other recent series remakes. It doesn't make any comparisons to the original because they are pointless: it's doing something a bit different. This to me, is what a remake should do.

 

But The Last of Us Part 1 in this case seems to be going for a, "no wait, this was how we always meant to depict the story" style of directors cut sort of revisionism. It doesn't as such allow for the the co-existence of the original as a separate work, and is instead coming across as a way to put down some sort of "definitive" imagining of the game if such a thing is possible. And at the same time the demonstration had direct comparison shots as if to say "don't worry, look: we've really improved upon our masterpiece, please buy it again!"

 

It feels like it completely lacks confidence in their own undertaking. Whereas Capcom are like: no, it's going to seem familiar, but we're going in a different direction this time, because you've already seen the other game, so let us surprise and shock you in new ways.

 

Resident Evil 4 looked like an actual remake, this just looks like a slightly doctored re-release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE 4 has been around since Game Cube/PS2 era; I'm glad it looks like an actual remake 

 

Hopefully ND will introduce some new gameplay mechanics for those who've played TLOU previously and maybe new locations / enemies; still releasing at £70 RRP though :rolleyes:

Edited by aidey6
missed last words off
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the shot comparisons shown so far are between cut scenes, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of depth of field blurring going on to direct audiences at the 'more expressive' faces. Which is why some of the textures look 'worse' - they are just out of focus, and its an artistic choice that will, along with the new lighting and reflections, give the game a cinematic verisimilitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell, the criticisms fall into three categories. I hereby present the solution for each…

 

Criticism 1: It’s too expensive for an old game.

Solution: Don’t buy it

 

Criticism 2: It looks inferior to the remaster.

Solution: Don’t buy it

 

Criticism 3: It never needed to be made.

Solution: Don’t buy it

 

If it isn’t for you, then the solution is quite simple. I will happily accept arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Benny said:

I think don't buy it is a given, but if that was the response to all criticism we might just as well do away with any and all discourse and call time on the internet. And people will still buy it anyway.


But it isn’t a given is it? I mean you even admit yourself that people will buy it anyway.

 

And I don’t think it’s the response to ‘any’ criticism. You may not like a particular aspect of a game but that doesn’t mean you don’t want to play it. In this instance however, it seems like a binary choice. You either want to pay £70 for an old game with updated visuals, or you don’t. Maybe you think the people that do choose to do so are mugs, and that’s your opinion, but I’d be willing to bet you good money that there ends up being an awful lot of ‘mugs’ out there. 
 

So why are they buying it? I mean it can’t possibly be worth it can it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mystacon said:


But it isn’t a given is it? I mean you even admit yourself that people will buy it anyway.

 

And I don’t think it’s the response to ‘any’ criticism. You may not like a particular aspect of a game but that doesn’t mean you don’t want to play it. In this instance however, it seems like a binary choice. You either want to pay £70 for an old game with updated visuals, or you don’t. Maybe you think the people that do choose to do so are mugs, and that’s your opinion, but I’d be willing to bet you good money that there ends up being an awful lot of ‘mugs’ out there. 
 

So why are they buying it? I mean it can’t possibly be worth it can it?

No, they're just mugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's already going to be inferior to the original release and the remaster. It won't have the Factions multiplayer, right? That was a surprisingly excellent mode, releasing a remake with notably less content in this form is a bit shit. Though we'll see if there's anything substantial added to the single player campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cheyenne said:

It's already going to be inferior to the original release and the remaster. It won't have the Factions multiplayer, right? That was a surprisingly excellent mode, releasing a remake with notably less content in this form is a bit shit. Though we'll see if there's anything substantial added to the single player campaign.


It does include the ‘Left Behind’ dlc, which was excellent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair, but then Remastered had all of the DLC content as well as Factions.

 

I am admittedly hung up on that as over time my abiding memories of The Last of Us comes from that multiplayer. A surprising amount of depth and really gave the mechanics a chance to shine in a more creative and freeform way than what was offered in the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sick of the remake, remaster bollocks and as a concept I want it to die. Having said that if you asked me which games from my past catalog if ever remade would tempt me then it would be TLOU, RE 2 & 4…

 

If this incorporates the controls and combat of II, mixes up the levels just a bit (like the paths enemies take, how they attack, when they appear) and gives it the visual fidelity of II or thereabouts then it’s an easy purchase for me goddamit take my money.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel relatively on the fence about this, because I’ve only bought and played the remaster, not the original, so I’m reasonably happy to go in a second time… but @mexos, your invocation of Resident Evil 2 does cast this in a poor light, and makes one realise that it’s not a remake as that game was, so much as it’s a remaster, again. And that’s not what it’s being sold to us as. 
 

A remake that fully utilises the power of the PS5, is technically superior to Part 2, and incorporates the advanced AI and combat is still an appealing prospect, but it’s hard to deny that, side by side, it just isn’t selling the dream in comparison to the original remaster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happy about this news because a) haven't' played TLoU since PS3, and b) it probably means part 2 will make it's way to PC as well, yay! 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, mikeyl said:

Do you think this is made because Naughty Dog want to be arty fucks and have a need for their misery series to read as a complete piece? Or is it to make a ton of money? Either way, great as it’ll be, I’m gonna wait for it to hit Sony Gamepass probably.

 

This was originally pitched to Sony management by the leaders of Sony's Visual Arts Service Group as they were going to use it as a proving ground for their new development group, but then Naughty Dog took it over:

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-09/sony-s-obsession-with-blockbusters-is-stirring-unrest-within-playstation-empire


 

Quote

 

Michael Mumbauer, who took over direction of the Visual Arts Service Group in 2007, recruited a group of about 30 developers, internally and from neighboring game studios, to form a new development unit within Sony.

 

The idea was to expand upon some of the company’s most successful franchises and the team began working on a remake of the 2013 hit The Last of Us for the PlayStation 5. But Sony never fully acknowledged the team’s existence or gave them the funding and support needed to succeed in the highly competitive video game market, according to people involved. 

 

The studio never even got its own name. Instead, Sony moved ownership of the The Last of Us remake to its original creator, Naughty Dog, a Sony-owned studio behind many of the company’s best-selling games and an HBO television series in development.

 

 

 

Also, it seems that they are going to update the underlying gameplay systems on this version, so it won't play exactly the same as the original release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main issue I have is that the game is very story driven & so yes you can update the visuals and the gameplay, but without any major changes to the story what is the point? 

 

We all know how it plays out & on top of that we will have the TV show not long after telling wholesale chunks of the same story again.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cheyenne said:

Fair, but then Remastered had all of the DLC content as well as Factions.

 

I am admittedly hung up on that as over time my abiding memories of The Last of Us comes from that multiplayer. A surprising amount of depth and really gave the mechanics a chance to shine in a more creative and freeform way than what was offered in the story.

They're making a standalone multiplayer game – seemingly larger scale PvPvE – so you can see why they wouldn't want to go back and rework all of the Factions mode, both visually and mechanically, when it'll likely be 'replaced' in the not too distant future.

 

Currently the only official media is this image, but it'll be properly revealed (and released?) next year:

 

PtMk7sk.png

 

I'd say it's likely the multiplayer game will also release on PC, hence the groundwork being laid for the series and engine on the platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought, for a game where the whole thrust of the story was essentially a mediation on violence, where it felt like the brutality of the killing was supposed to make you at least reflect a bit on what players are asked to do to other human beings in games, it was absolutely hilarious that it had a multiplayer mode where you would be allowed to do lots more of that just for fun.

 

It's like it still couldn't break free of the medium's own trappings and had to undermine its own message because everything big budget gaming has to be an entertainment product above all else.

 

It's why despite loving The Last of Us as an experience I still can't really take any of its lofty storytelling pretentions seriously, when you could just go online right after and blow the heads off some random people in the game's world for kicks, divorced of any narrative significance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ferine said:

I'd say it's likely the multiplayer game will also release on PC, hence the groundwork being laid for the series and engine on the platform.

 

It's clearly Naught Dog's effort for the major Service Game offensive from management so will be PS5/PC accordingly. It's also Naughty Dog's 2nd attempt at this idea and sounds like they are going all out this time, hence why it's no longer a freebie bonus mode and now a fullscale project built for very long term support. At this point, they've got over a decade of experience doing multiplayer games so should be able to compete with the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Benny said:

I've always thought, for a game where the whole thrust of the story was essentially a mediation on violence, where it felt like the brutality of the killing was supposed to make you at least reflect a bit on what players are asked to do to other human beings in games, it was absolutely hilarious that it had a multiplayer mode where you would be allowed to do lots more of that just for fun.

 

It's like it still couldn't break free of the medium's own trappings and had to undermine its own message because everything big budget gaming has to be an entertainment product above all else.

 

It's why despite loving The Last of Us as an experience I still can't really take any of its lofty storytelling pretentions seriously, when you could just go online right after and blow the heads off some random people in the game's world for kicks, divorced of any narrative significance.

The Factions mode did have narrative framing: the outcome of matches informed the survival of your community, optionally populated by your real life Facebook friends, within a light interactive fiction structure. Not saying it squared that circle, but it certainly wasn't CoD levels of tonal dissonance or as thoughtless as you imply.

 

That said, I was fine with Part 2's level of graphic violence within the confines of a narrative-driven game but find it a lot less palatable when it's actual players enacting it upon each other, mainly because of the crowd it attracts. My hope is that the multiplayer game's more open structure will make encounters more meaningful – think battle royale skirmishes rather than enclosed arena charnel houses – but I'm very curious to see if Naughty Dog will dial things back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Waggo said:

The main issue I have is that the game is very story driven & so yes you can update the visuals and the gameplay, but without any major changes to the story what is the point? 

 

You can alter the mechanics and keep the story though - LoU is a well told story by any measure but most of your time is spent engaging with the game's mechanics so there's merit in making potential improvements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Benny said:

I've always thought, for a game where the whole thrust of the story was essentially a mediation on violence, where it felt like the brutality of the killing was supposed to make you at least reflect a bit on what players are asked to do to other human beings in games, it was absolutely hilarious that it had a multiplayer mode where you would be allowed to do lots more of that just for fun

 

I can't say the multiplayer component of any game has made me reconsider the story from the single player, particularly where the multiplayer has no real story of its own. They always feel like two quite unconnected entities to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ferine said:

The Factions mode did have narrative framing: the outcome of matches informed the survival of your community, optionally populated by your real life Facebook friends, within a light interactive fiction structure. Not saying it squared that circle, but it certainly wasn't CoD levels of tonal dissonance or as thoughtless as you imply.

 

That said, I was fine with Part 2's level of graphic violence within the confines of a narrative-driven game but find it a lot less palatable when it's actual players enacting it upon each other, mainly because of the crowd it attracts. My hope is that the multiplayer game's more open structure will make encounters more meaningful – think battle royale skirmishes rather than enclosed arena charnel houses – but I'm very curious to see if Naughty Dog will dial things back.

 

It's not thoughtless, but it absolutely undermines the story's lofty ambitions simply by its existence. They had to include it if course, because "product", so you can't really blame them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ferine said:

They're making a standalone multiplayer game – seemingly larger scale PvPvE – so you can see why they wouldn't want to go back and rework all of the Factions mode, both visually and mechanically, when it'll likely be 'replaced' in the not too distant future.

 

Currently the only official media is this image, but it'll be properly revealed (and released?) next year:

 

PtMk7sk.png

 

I'd say it's likely the multiplayer game will also release on PC, hence the groundwork being laid for the series and engine on the platform.

They make it sound like it’s going to be a big as The Division or something. 
If you have to go out to loot supplies and go back to base and hand them in to allow people in your guild to have upgrade points or something then I’m out!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/06/2022 at 00:50, Mystacon said:


But it isn’t a given is it? I mean you even admit yourself that people will buy it anyway.

 

And I don’t think it’s the response to ‘any’ criticism. You may not like a particular aspect of a game but that doesn’t mean you don’t want to play it. In this instance however, it seems like a binary choice. You either want to pay £70 for an old game with updated visuals, or you don’t. Maybe you think the people that do choose to do so are mugs, and that’s your opinion, but I’d be willing to bet you good money that there ends up being an awful lot of ‘mugs’ out there. 
 

So why are they buying it? I mean it can’t possibly be worth it can it?

 

I'm one of those mugs. I've played and finished twice and will undoubtedly get the remake too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only danger I fear is the infamous ‘George Lucas Syndrome’.

 

Fuck knows how many versions of Star Wars there’s now been, but there gets to a point where you’re  actively destroying all the good stuff with constant tinkering.

 

I’m fine with there being a new version for PS5 but another ten years or so are they going to look back and do yet another? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As said earlier, it's the difference between remake and remaster.  Resident Evil 2 is a remake - they take the general idea characters and story and create the game again with current hardware capability. The result is transformative. 

 

To remaster, all you need to do is upscale it all.  It's not the big ask to remaster with automated tools upscaling everything and a tweak to the engine to make it 60fps.  Or you could redraw it all by hand, redo all dialogue, motion capture it all again... But what would be the point? 

 

But the game layout and design was created for inferior hardware.  Cinematics and long pathways cover up loading times. Memory constraints limit the number of gameplay options (drag the dumpster to the wall and use it as a step, move that ladder, walk across the plank).  You're playing a game designed for a console that has limitations way below your current machine. It's smoother now and it looks better, but you could be playing a better game, designed exclusively for next gen instead of this £70 remaster. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.