• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Last of Us Part I (Remake) | Review Thread

What score do you predict TLOUS Part I Remake will get?

  • 10-20%

    Votes: 5 8.3%
  • 30-40%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 50-60%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 70-80%

    Votes: 6 10.0%
  • 90-100%

    Votes: 31 51.7%
  • 80-90%

    Votes: 18 30.0%

  • Total voters
    60
  • Poll closed .
I'm curious to know, how many of you guys that have either experienced the original version or PS4 Remastered, still purchased the Remake?
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
As for price.
This is why the remake was a bad idea. It was and is a truly great game but the end of the day it is a PS3 game. Calling it outdated is just pointless since it is a 10 year old game. Let it be a product of it's time. The PS4 version was already at 60 FPS so what else could they have done without completely redoing everything?
Not sure why they didn’t tie in a TLoU 2 Director’s Cut for the new show and then remaster TLoU for PS6 in 7 years when it would blow minds and introduce a new gen to the story. Poorly timed in my mind.
 
I am ashamed to say this is my third time purchasing this game. To be fair I still had about fifty bucks in PSN credit so I only payed about twenty which is actually a fair price.
Maybe I'm no a true fan, but this might be the first Naughty Dog game that I'm unwilling to pay full price.

I might pick up later on Steam, to me the PS4 Remastered especially played on PS5 is not outdated at all
 
Last edited:

Woggleman

Member
Maybe I'm no a true fan, but this might be the first Naughty Dog game that I'm unwilling to pay full price.

I might pick up later on Steam, to me the PS4 Remastered especially played on PS5 is not outdated at all
I don't blame you. It is not like it is a new game but I was looking to replay it anyway and twenty dollars of my own money is a good price.
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
Why does it matter? Should a remake not be full priced for some unexplained reason?

Or do you mean people who bought the first should be entitled to a discount? Did the original come with a life time coupon I’m not aware of?

Of course it matters, are you saying prices of all products don't matter? Not sure why I would have to explain why it shouldn't be full priced, but here goes.
- it's the same game, people have played it before. Typically consumers aren't keen and paying full price a second or third time for something they have paid for prior
- it doesn't take as many resources or expense to create said game
- yes, indeed a middle ground might have been nice, at least an upgrade fee for those who bought the ps4 remaster.

So of course it matters. In my case they won't get a dime, at least for now. Had they priced it at $30 I probably would have bought it right away.
 

Relique

Gold Member
lol....if I'm "too pressed" then you are white knighting it a bit too much. I think what the reviewer actually says in the review is much better.

"The Last Of Us Part 1 is not only the most expensive version of the game ever but also the most content light, since it completely removes the multiplayer element..."

Nothing wrong with that at all. So yeah, I prefer that the statements made be about a game in a review be straight forward and accurate. Should I adjust my opinion on that to align with your sensibilities?
Nah I am not white knighting it. I simply pointed out that multiplayer was equally important to some people. I agreed there was some hyperbole in that entire statement but there was some truth. You somehow landed on the other end of the spectrum.. calling it completely bullshit when clearly there is enough there to be a common discussion point between many reviews. Pulling out price charts and splitting hairs to try to dismiss a subjective opinion based on someone else's experience.

Okay bro it's half the game (if you played multiplayer as much a singleplayer) for %175 of the price (If you are paying in British pounds). Is that close enough for you?
 
Me

I enjoy TLOU1 far more than 2 in terms of pacing and story

So even if it’s basically a part 2 reskin, part 2 looks great
Call me crazy, but I actually enjoyed part 2 more.

Maybe its because I don't agree with how Joel handled the firefly situation at the end of part 1, while I understand why he did it, but it felt morally wrong for me which toked me out of the immersion. I really wished there was at least a choice.

So when he died in part 2, I felt he deserved it.
 
Last edited:

Zelphyr

Gold Member
Perfect for someone who has never played it & owns a PS5.

For me who already did 3 walkthroughs back then everything is still too fresh in my mind to give it another go.
 

Woggleman

Member
From a gameplay perspective 2 is actually much better and overall I enjoyed it more than 1. I love Joel but I realize that it was sooner or later before his actions would catch up with him and if you are playing TLOU for happy Hallmark stories you are playing the wrong franchise.
 
Call me crazy, but I actually enjoyed part 2 more.

Maybe its because I don't agree with how Joel handled the firefly situation at the end of part 1, while I understand why he did it, but it felt morally wrong for me which toked me out of the immersion. I really wished there was at least a choice.

So when he died in part 2, I felt he deserved it.

My main complaint isn’t with what happened to Joel but the structure of the game and tons of walk n talk segments
 

Sub_Level

wants to fuck an Asian grill.
Its official: the 90s voters are on sudoku watch. Last of Us Part 1 bros this was supposed to be our time…fuck Jim Ryan. Inshallah Playstation Nation, he will answer for his crimes in due time.
 
Recommended by SkillUp!

I like ShillUp's review. He left all of his bias for the game behind and judge it objectively. He made a lot of good points.

OT: I don't really care what this game scores, the OG version is the one I played. But, If I had to guess... it'll get lower than the OG if for nothing but the price, which is a valid reason. If it's not worth it to you, then I can see that affecting the score.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Nah I am not white knighting it. I simply pointed out that multiplayer was equally important to some people. I agreed there was some hyperbole in that entire statement but there was some truth. You somehow landed on the other end of the spectrum.. calling it completely bullshit when clearly there is enough there to be a common discussion point between many reviews. Pulling out price charts and splitting hairs to try to dismiss a subjective opinion based on someone else's experience.

Okay bro it's half the game (if you played multiplayer as much a singleplayer) for %175 of the price (If you are paying in British pounds). Is that close enough for you?

Or just cut out the bullshit and say it costs more and has less.
 

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
For me I'll wait for the HBO show, last time I played last of us was on PS3 been long enough that I don't remember it all. I'll pick it up on PC to show my support when it hits a big % off on a steam sale.
 
I am ashamed to say this is my third time purchasing this game. To be fair I still had about fifty bucks in PSN credit so I only payed about twenty which is actually a fair price.
Ashamed? Don't be. If it's worth it to you, then its a worthy purchase. It's not worth it to me, I've had my fill of TLOU, but I don't poopoo on those who do. It's always a matter of worth, to you the buyer.

When Returnal comes to PC I'll be double dipping and some ppl will think that's dumb. When they FINAAAALLLLLYYYY release that Bloodborne Remake/Remaster whatever it is on PC/PS5... I'll be there day one LOL
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Against my better judgement I bought this but in reality it is the first game with some visual and some minor gameplay upgrades. They could have released a patch for the PS4 version and done the same thing.

Id say its a bit more work than a patch. Has another game made an upgrade like this via a patch?
 

Elder Legend

Yoir Aee Member
How?? It’s always subjective when a person is telling you how much they like something. Unless it’s about the number of pixels or triangles or some other metric you can have an actual factual figure on I don’t see how it’s possible to be objective. You can always try though.

Reviews are both objective and subjective. However, in my eyes an Objective review is when the game is being judged basted on what it's trying to achieve and sell.

So to give you an example -

The Last of Us Part 1 is trying to sell you on new visuals, gameplay improvements, dualsense features and so on. So when I was reviewing this title those are the things I was paying the most attention to. If those additions/features are well done and do the job they set out to do.

A subjective review for The Last of Us Part 1 would end up like this - Meh, I do not like post apocalypse setting. Omg too much walking. Omg too many cut scenes and I hate them! Omg 5/10 shit game with shit themes and annoying cut scenes !

A person reviewing the game or any game for that matter needs to understand its intended design. Now whether that design and idea is well executed is a different story.

For example - Hypothetically speaking I could not like Last of Us because of its setting or the fact that it has too many cut scenes but that doesn't make it a bad game and I'd have to put my personal tastes to the side and still look at it objectively as possible.

I may not like the cut scenes , but that doesn't mean they are poorly done or the game deserves a bad score because I do not like cut scenes.

You see what I am saying? It's a hard thing to balance and not everyone can do it well. That's why when we review games we try to be honest and transparent as possible. If an individual is solely judging a game based on his or hers personal tastes then they are absolutely horrible at their job and should not be allowed to review anything moving forward. Very few people can actually properly review games.

This is why majority of the reviews you see from a variety of websites are complete shit. Either the reviewer is not getting what he or she exactly wants out of the game so they judge the game completely based of their own fantasy when in reality they should look at what the game is trying to do in the first place.

In the review I mentioned that Tess looks quite a bit older if you look at her face. Some people may like that and some may not. So I specifically said that subjectively it didn't bother me but it may bother others. However, I did not take or add points because that's purely a subjective matter. Meanwhile, some degenerate write will take the points off because his now upset that Tess looks older. This is childish and not objective at all.

I hope this explains it, it's kind of hard to do over text , but it's the best explanation I can give. Whether you agree with it or not is up to you.
 
Last edited:

Relique

Gold Member
Or just cut out the bullshit and say it costs more and has less.
Noted. The next time I hear someone say "I could eat a horse" or "It's funny you should say that" I am going to make sure to call them out on the accuracy. That's no way to interact with someone with such lies. Idioms are for idiots I say.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Noted. The next time I hear someone say "I could eat a horse" or "It's funny you should say that" I am going to make sure to call them out on the accuracy. That's no way to interact with someone with such lies. Idioms are for idiots I say.

Saying the price of a game has doubled is not an idiom. If the author had said the game costs "an arm and a leg" then I wouldn't have said anything about it.
 
Last edited:

Relique

Gold Member
Saying the price of a game has doubled is not an idiom.
Maybe not an idiom down to the exact definition but it's a common expression. You never heard "half the x for double the price" before?

Anyway I am done discussing this. It's clear that we disagree what a review should be. I thought it was widely understood that they are subjective opinion pieces on games and that people tend to follow reviewers that align more with their tastes. You seem to want this to be more of an exact science based on what I am reading. I am not going to change any opinions here.
 

SLB1904

Member
Read my explanation that I've posted above. You are mixing looking at a product with a objective perspective versus I like it or not taste.
Ii got your explanation. I was talking about in a more general term when you are try to recommend something to an audience.
For me personally I'm always on a left field when comes to movies. There movies a regard as best times the reviews reviews sometimes don't reflect thatOf course you can be objive with the technicalities of things bit when it comes down to experiencing a product it will come down to the user.
 

ChiefDada

Member
The market has spoken. Reviewers knocking review scores because they don't agree with pricing is foolish, full stop.

 

Topher

Gold Member
Maybe not an idiom down to the exact definition but it's a common expression. You never heard "half the x for double the price" before?

Anyway I am done discussing this. It's clear that we disagree what a review should be. I thought it was widely understood that they are subjective opinion pieces on games and that people tend to follow reviewers that align more with their tastes. You seem to want this to be more of an exact science based on what I am reading. I am not going to change any opinions here.

I'm not discussing "what a review should be". I'm talking about a single line summarizing a game. The only times I've heard something similar to "half the x for double the price" is when the person saying actually meant "half the x for double the price". When talking about factual matters, I prefer reviews to stick to facts. And you are right, you are not going to change my opinion on that. Not sure why you would even care to, frankly.
 

Hugare

Member
The market has spoken. Reviewers knocking review scores because they don't agree with pricing is foolish, full stop.
Perception of value is subjective, as well as reviews.

The Orange Box release made waves back then because it was 3 incredible games in one box. Its bang for buck value was mentioned in all of the reviews.

Mentioning price is part of the review process. Me as a potential buyer always want to know if I'll get my money worth.

Especially when I'll be paying "premium" for a remake

If you think that "price dont matter" just because the game is selling well, then you are a fool. Because a lot of people also wont buy it due to its price tag.
 
Last edited:

ChiefDada

Member
Mentioning price is part of the review process. Me as a potential buyer always want to know if I'll get my money worth.

That's a conclusion only you can reach. If that mindset were to be applied equitably, then every single game would have it's own thread about whether it's worth $xx. Why? Because we all value different games differently for our own unique reasons.


Especially when I'll be paying "premium" for a remake

But you're not. This is the standard price of a PS5 game.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member

good on Niel for pitching the support.
The market has spoken. Reviewers knocking review scores because they don't agree with pricing is foolish, full stop.


It's literally its launch weekend in a market where we are all starved for games. Lets see how its sales do in a couple of weeks.

Theres enough hardcore fans to purchase this week one to push it to number one in all charts. Especially for september. UK will be the same next week. I dont think it will sell gangbusters at 70 pounds but its a perfect bundle game for xmas.
 
Last edited:

Relique

Gold Member
I'm not discussing "what a review should be". I'm talking about a single line summarizing a game. The only times I've heard something similar to "half the x for double the price" is when the person saying actually meant "half the x for double the price". When talking about factual matters, I prefer reviews to stick to facts. And you are right, you are not going to change my opinion on that. Not sure why you would even care to, frankly.
Then I must have severe reading comprehension problems because half of your replies in our entire convo were just that, how the reviewer should have said it based on your preferences. You just did it here again, you prefer reviews to stick to facts when talking about factual manners. Then in another breath you go on about how most people play it for single player so multiplayer is not half the game. Why you chose to focus on some exact accuracy and then say shit like that in the next post is beyond me.

What the person said here is no less objectively correct than another reviewer saying something like "mind blowing graphics" or some similarly sensationalist statement. I think what's happening here is that you simply don't agree with his opinion on value and called bullshit when it's clear this isn't a rare opinion among other reviewers. They just said it in a way closer to your liking.

And yes I've heard "half the x for double the money" or "double the money for half the x" in many contexts both online and offline when comparing shit like cars, android vs apple, video games, etc. So knowing that this is a pretty common expression makes your problems with it even more puzzling to me. Your posts were coming across as one of those "ackchyually" lifetime defenders.

And no I don't want to change your opinion and nor am I trying to. I thought that was clear enough from my post.
 
Last edited:

ChiefDada

Member
good on Niel for pitching the support.


It's literally its launch weekend in a market where we are all starved for games. Lets see how its sales do in a couple of weeks.

Theres enough hardcore fans to purchase this week one to push it to number one in all charts. Especially for september. UK will be the same next week. I dont think it will sell gangbusters at 70 pounds but its a perfect bundle game for xmas.

Perhaps, but then how is that different from any other game? And if it isn't any different (it's not) then why are reviewers making a big deal out of it? You had most folks complaining about pricing as if Sony should have launched the game at a lower introductory price. That isn't smart business.
 

Hugare

Member
That's a conclusion only you can reach. If that mindset were to be applied equitably, then every single game would have it's own thread about whether it's worth $xx. Why? Because we all value different games differently for our own unique reasons.




But you're not. This is the standard price of a PS5 game.
I can say the same about your conclusion. It's stupid.

You think people dont value their money? And do you think that the games prices dont affect sales?

We dont have thread specific for this, but this is something that everyone with a brain think about before buying anything. And that's why its mentioned in so many reviews, not only for this game.

And you are right, this is the price of a PS5 game. Not a remastered PS3 game.

To say that it had the same budget to make as Returnal, for example, is just absurd.

I bought it, but I know that I'm paying "premium" for it, and the $70 is not justified because it had the same budget as GOW Ragnarok, despite both being sold by the same price.
 
Last edited:

hemo memo

Member
Id say its a bit more work than a patch. Has another game made an upgrade like this via a patch?
Not an upgrade but we had a full price PS5 game that before release suddenly went from 70$ to PS+ before so if this suddenly went from a 70$ to a free upgrade to PS+ subscribers it wouldn't be weird.
 

ChiefDada

Member
I can say the same about your conclusion. It's stupid.

Huh? But we both reached the same conclusion in deciding to purchase for $70, so aren't we both stupid using your logic?

To say that it had the same budget to make as Returnal, for example, is just absurd.

No one said this and budget isn't the only deciding factor when it comes to product pricing.

Hugare:

the $70 is not justified

Also Hugare:

I bought it


No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem
 
Top Bottom