The Last of Us, Part 1 Remaster Remaster [PS5, PC]

I played TLOU for the first time on the PS4 remaster and honestly the combat was eminently forgettable. The story and presentation stuck with me though.

I’m trying to recall the combat and all I can remember is a generic TPS with guns and a bow. I don’t recall anything novel that would motivate me to master combat dynamics during the first play through or to attempt another.

Having said that I never replay story driven games anyway because who has time for that.
 
TLOU wasn't really a TPS though because you didn't have unlimited ammo. Shooting was a last resort for the gameplay, at least as far as the little I played.

I'm not at all following the argument about quality of gameplay that's linking it to 'room to master/speedrun'. Why can gameplay not be slow and methodical and based on thinking skills and decision making rather than hand-eye coordination and reactions? Does Chess have sucky gameplay because you can't speed-run it? My fave ARPG, CON, allowed barrels to be pushed. I could box off corridors and cheese monsters as a result. I could take time moving exploding barrels into a room and trying an explosive ambush. These were slow, 'boring' activities that I found very rewarding because I was using lateral thinking to solve the problem of defeating monsters instead of the simpler mash-buttons-and-quoff-potions of the basic gameplay loop and other ARPGs like Diablo 3.

I think variety and choices constitute a large part of good gameplay. It's probably a subjective thing.
 
Caveat - that's what PS has traditionally been. Companies change, values change - maybe we're starting to see a new Sony that prefers to double-down on IPs? Don't know, but we can't take prior behaviour as inherently indicative of future behaviour, especially when we're seeing othwe changes such as bringing their IP to PC. A few years ago we'd be saying, "Sony are a company that keeps its content to its own platform to drive their value," only to find they are moving on from that mentality.
Its kind of funny though how mad people are with Sony, as if they have been milking franchises by tradition and have had enough of it, but a lot of others have been doing it far worse and for much longer.
Like Capcom for example.
They make a fist version. Then a final version. Then a final of the final version. Then a final of the final final version. Then the next generation of consoles come and we ve got the ultimate final "next gen" renaster. Only to have another remake of the ultimate final "next gen" remaster.
We got like 2 main Halo Games on XBOX, 2 main, 2 Spin off, 2 strategy Halo games on 360, we got the Halo Collection and one main game on One, 2 or 3 games on mobile, and Halo Infinite as a Cross gen on Series and One. And not sure if I miss anything.
We ve been getting a shitload of COD games, including remakes/remasters.

I ve seen less complaints about these :LOL:

Sony makes one remake (which I agree we probably didnt need) 9 years later and everyone complaints like Sony stopped producing new games.
 
I think there would be a lot less complaints if Sony put their PlayStation Remakes and Remasters on their PlayStation Plus Extra/Premium service on day one.
 
TLOU wasn't really a TPS though because you didn't have unlimited ammo. Shooting was a last resort for the gameplay, at least as far as the little I played.

I'm not at all following the argument about quality of gameplay that's linking it to 'room to master/speedrun'. Why can gameplay not be slow and methodical and based on thinking skills and decision making rather than hand-eye coordination and reactions? Does Chess have sucky gameplay because you can't speed-run it? My fave ARPG, CON, allowed barrels to be pushed. I could box off corridors and cheese monsters as a result. I could take time moving exploding barrels into a room and trying an explosive ambush. These were slow, 'boring' activities that I found very rewarding because I was using lateral thinking to solve the problem of defeating monsters instead of the simpler mash-buttons-and-quoff-potions of the basic gameplay loop and other ARPGs like Diablo 3.

I think variety and choices constitute a large part of good gameplay. It's probably a subjective thing.
If we are talking about 'combat and gameplay design' here. I'm not talking about game design - mixed in with emotional story, narrative, pacing, characters etc. If I'm strictly looking at what players can do during the game play moments here.
If so, I am defining game play as decision making whether it’s a board game or a video game. As you get better at a game your accuracy at making the correct decisions should go up therefore the speed of trivial decisions should be made faster. Mastery of the mechanics of any game should reveal the different and faster ways to solving the problem because as you understand mechanics your brain should interpret the mechanics as different ways to solve a problem, the method of least resistance.

There is nothing wrong with cheesing monsters and boxing off corridors, just like there is nothing wrong with finishing God of War using just the basic light, light, heavy combo. It's certainly a SLOWER, less exciting and more grindy repetitive way of finishing the game, but if that is what the player likes than so be it. Most of us are looking for something a little deeper than the basic combo. All I'm saying is that if people want to tell me that combat is this amazing thing in TLOU 1, then people should be replaying the gameplay repeatedly because there is nothing else like it. I disagree with the assessment that the TLOU is ground breaking gameplay, and IMO, it is largely, for most players, an incredible rollercoaster experience that is largely driven by the environment, characters, story and narrative, I don't think people are actually engrossed by it's gameplay loop to want to play it repeatedly. I get that a few people love it enough to go back and play it again, but I don't think that's the majority of players.

Back to my TLDR; I think the fact that they are improving and modernizing combat for the REMAKE is a great idea, because I don't think it aged well and is by far the _weakest_ element of the TLOU. It's certainly not the driving force as to why I play the game (and others echo this as well). And for players like me coming to the game for the first time in 2022, I do feel that ND made the right decision here to give their combat a one over.

As noted, you play CON because you enjoy the gameplay. If the main driver for you to play a game is for it's gameplay then I agree it's a game with good gameplay at the heart of it, the debate for me is not the speed, speed is just a result of getting better at making choices. Creativity in combat is a result of getting better at understanding choices. Fighting style is just a result of getting better at understanding choices. Video games do have a hand eye coordination component that doesn't exist in board games, but this mastery of this opens up additional options not available to those who haven't mastered it, and for some games entirely, is the main gameplay loop - see racing games.

That's how I see good gameplay. I look at titles like Hades, like Ori, like Slay the Spire, like RTS genres, like shooters, etc. but I just don't feel this way about TLOU. In TLOU, I don't come out of a battle thinking, man that was great, let's do play that again; I definitely don't come out of a clicker stealth moment thinking I want to run through that again after dying several times. I mean, can Halo, Gears etc be a slog? Sure, it definitely can be if you decide to never leave cover, never realizing that health is a resource that replenishes after a few seconds of not getting hit. Can racing games be a slog? Sure, for people that don't want to understand racing lines, and the precision required to break and turn and control a car. Golf is the definition of just mastery over hitting your ball. I just don't feel this way about TLOU. I have no interest in mastering TLOU combat, it's not engaging to me in that way. And when I look at people who have mastered TLOU combat, ie speed runners, I actually see them avoiding combat largely though there are some brief moments of brilliance, but I would say, I see a lot more combat brilliance in TLOU 2 than I do in 1.

TLDR: the remake offering modern combat will make the remake a better game than the original. It's the number 1 reason why someone should consider buying this, the graphics are, even in the remaster more than sufficient at telling it's strongest point, which is the story.
 
Caveat - that's what PS has traditionally been. Companies change, values change - maybe we're starting to see a new Sony that prefers to double-down on IPs? Don't know, but we can't take prior behaviour as inherently indicative of future behaviour, especially when we're seeing othwe changes such as bringing their IP to PC. A few years ago we'd be saying, "Sony are a company that keeps its content to its own platform to drive their value," only to find they are moving on from that mentality.
This is true, and we know a third Last of Us game already has the bones of a story, but we also know that Naughty Dog are working on a new fantasy IP. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to trot out more Uncharted games much like how Tomb Raider has existed since the 1990s.
 
If we are talking about 'combat and gameplay design' here. I'm not talking about game design - mixed in with emotional story, narrative, pacing, characters etc. If I'm strictly looking at what players can do during the game play moments here.
If so, I am defining game play as decision making whether it’s a board game or a video game. As you get better at a game your accuracy at making the correct decisions should go up therefore the speed of trivial decisions should be made faster. Mastery of the mechanics of any game should reveal the different and faster ways to solving the problem because as you understand mechanics your brain should interpret the mechanics as different ways to solve a problem, the method of least resistance.

There is nothing wrong with cheesing monsters and boxing off corridors, just like there is nothing wrong with finishing God of War using just the basic light, light, heavy combo. It's certainly a SLOWER, less exciting and more grindy repetitive way of finishing the game, but if that is what the player likes than so be it. Most of us are looking for something a little deeper than the basic combo. All I'm saying is that if people want to tell me that combat is this amazing thing in TLOU 1, then people should be replaying the gameplay repeatedly because there is nothing else like it. I disagree with the assessment that the TLOU is ground breaking gameplay, and IMO, it is largely, for most players, an incredible rollercoaster experience that is largely driven by the environment, characters, story and narrative, I don't think people are actually engrossed by it's gameplay loop to want to play it repeatedly. I get that a few people love it enough to go back and play it again, but I don't think that's the majority of players.

Back to my TLDR; I think the fact that they are improving and modernizing combat for the REMAKE is a great idea, because I don't think it aged well and is by far the _weakest_ element of the TLOU. It's certainly not the driving force as to why I play the game (and others echo this as well). And for players like me coming to the game for the first time in 2022, I do feel that ND made the right decision here to give their combat a one over.

As noted, you play CON because you enjoy the gameplay. If the main driver for you to play a game is for it's gameplay then I agree it's a game with good gameplay at the heart of it, the debate for me is not the speed, speed is just a result of getting better at making choices. Creativity in combat is a result of getting better at understanding choices. Fighting style is just a result of getting better at understanding choices. Video games do have a hand eye coordination component that doesn't exist in board games, but this mastery of this opens up additional options not available to those who haven't mastered it, and for some games entirely, is the main gameplay loop - see racing games.

That's how I see good gameplay. I look at titles like Hades, like Ori, like Slay the Spire, like RTS genres, like shooters, etc. but I just don't feel this way about TLOU. In TLOU, I don't come out of a battle thinking, man that was great, let's do play that again; I definitely don't come out of a clicker stealth moment thinking I want to run through that again after dying several times. I mean, can Halo, Gears etc be a slog? Sure, it definitely can be if you decide to never leave cover, never realizing that health is a resource that replenishes after a few seconds of not getting hit. Can racing games be a slog? Sure, for people that don't want to understand racing lines, and the precision required to break and turn and control a car. Golf is the definition of just mastery over hitting your ball. I just don't feel this way about TLOU. I have no interest in mastering TLOU combat, it's not engaging to me in that way. And when I look at people who have mastered TLOU combat, ie speed runners, I actually see them avoiding combat largely though there are some brief moments of brilliance, but I would say, I see a lot more combat brilliance in TLOU 2 than I do in 1.

TLDR: the remake offering modern combat will make the remake a better game than the original. It's the number 1 reason why someone should consider buying this, the graphics are, even in the remaster more than sufficient at telling it's strongest point, which is the story.
The thIng is, that about TLOU, Doom, DMC, God of War, Halo, Batman Arkham Knight (I know different Games) the gameplay can really feel deep by default because there is a lot of gameplay "meat" and the gameplay context makes you instinctively to try a variety of gameplay to progress, but with Gears of War you hit the ceiling pretty fast because there isnt as much meat in the gameplay. It is pretty basic by nature.
 
The thIng is, that about TLOU, Doom, DMC, God of War, Halo, Batman Arkham Knight (I know different Games) the gameplay can really feel deep by default because there is a lot of gameplay "meat" and the gameplay context makes you instinctively to try a variety of gameplay to progress, but with Gears of War you hit the ceiling pretty fast because there isnt as much meat in the gameplay. It is pretty basic by nature.
I don't see how this can be true given the most played modes for Gears are Horde mode, additional forms of co-op mode, and PVP. I have high doubts all players hit the ceiling of Gears of War considering there is an esport league out there that most people never get close to in skill level. The single player campaign is the least played mode for returning players and horde mode is the most dominant mode for the franchise since it was introduced.

It's not my cup of tea, and not yours either, but I can't debate with the fact that horde mode is the most played Gears Mode.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how this can be true given the most played modes for Gears are Horde mode, additional forms of co-op mode, and PVP. I have high doubts all players hit the ceiling of Gears of War considering there is an esport league out there that most people never get close to in skill level. The single player campaign is the least played mode for returning players.
Oh you are talking about online multiplayer modes. Thats a different subject. The human element is something that we are bringing to each other which always makes things interesting. The campaign is as flat as it gets on the other hand.
 
Oh you are talking about online multiplayer modes. Thats a different subject. The human element is something that we are bringing to each other which always makes things interesting. The campaign is as flat as it gets on the other hand.
Horde mode is still the basic gameplay repeated though. In a way that is significantly more repetitive over single player.
I'm also not a fan of the campaign, but I'm just being clear that people like the shooting, cover, gameplay loop whether it's single player or multiplayer, that loop is the same loop. And as they get better at it, they handle harder and harder waves of it.

Not for me, but I'm just putting it out there, that the game design behind Gears, is not so flat.
 
Horde mode is still the basic gameplay repeated though. In a way that is significantly more repetitive over single player.
I'm also not a fan of the campaign, but I'm just being clear that people like the shooting, cover, gameplay loop whether it's single player or multiplayer, that loop is the same loop. And as they get better at it, they handle harder and harder waves of it.

Not for me, but I'm just putting it out there, that the game design behind Gears, is not so flat.
Its the basic mechanics but you still gather with friends, collaborate and aim for the highest score. The aim changes and you still have the human factor and human competition into the picture. Earlier you werent pointing to the multiplayer experience. The gameplay is super flat, but its the human ingenuity and touch that makes the multiplayer interesting which is what the developers take into consideration for the stage layout and weapon placement in multiplayer. The single player campaign is an impressive visual feast and people are attracted to the lore and gore of the game. But there it is basic gameplay compared to other examples of games. I d say even to the point of primitive gameplay
 
I enjoyed my playthrough of TLOU R. Graphically the game still holds up incredibly well, the experience was still very good, and got so much better once the shotgun arrived.
So I'm not in the camp that this needed a remake, but if they added the 'dodge' button from TLOU 2, yea that would make this game a lot better.
 
Two new comparisons released by Naughty Dog. Looks great, if not a bit underwhelming. I was hoping for something less conservative. Maybe a tlou 2 gameplay upgrade. Game looks to be the same with nice but superficial improvements.

Nice differences
 
I knew this was going to happen. It woll end up being a bit better looking and playing than the PS4 remaster, but will still will underwhelm compared to modern games, and will probably have rushed areas that are not even on par with Part II in production value.

The part where Joel is upgrading his weapon on the work bench (which did not exist in the original) looks very awkwardly animated. They'd better not try to do it at all rather than half ass it.

In one hand, they wanna polish it, but in the other, this was never meant to be a high investment project... Some parts will be more polished than other, making it inconsistent, which in my opinion is more distracting than something a bit aged but highly consistent quality-wise all around.
 
I knew this was going to happen. It woll end up being a bit better looking and playing than the PS4 remaster, but will still will underwhelm compared to modern games, and will probably have rushed areas that are not even on par with Part II in production value.
Not even is not good wording imo as realy hard to find game that has production value as lou2. Also disagree will look underwhelming compared to modern games, most games are still crossgens and beside of this year Forbiden West it will be hard to find anything better looking (tough for sure its not nextgen looking or pushing any boundries).
 
You can likely watch all of the cinematics of the game on YouTube to figure out if it's "just a zombie game". The setting does include zombies.

The premise may be similar to zombie apocalypse media in that a virus or pathogen has ravaged the planet, but they're called Infected. So it's not really that they're classic zombies.
 
It will end up being a bit better looking and playing than the PS4 remaster...

A bit better looking??? Err...what???

FU1-NGMXWUAAv4dr.jpg
 
Back
Top