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

[JoeK]

18 hours ago, DualSense said:

I was thinking just cinematic dialogue, is it for all dialogue? That’s a lot of haptic feedback.  Anyway it sounds like a great addition and if it adds to anyones experience the im all for it.

 

The Dualsense controller battery will not be thanking anyone for this, mind. 

 

 

[Vemsie]

https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2022-the-last-of-us-part-1-the-digital-foundry-tech-review
 

Quote

Taking a look at pistol gunplay to start, the core shooting mechanics feel more in line with Part 2 - camera position, weapon animations and hit reactions are all far more polished. The motion blur, smoother, slower zoom and aiming position feel like the second game, while the animation of firing the weapon is unique to both prior versions but is closer to Part 2 than the PS4 remaster. The same is true when using the shotgun - a different reticle, different animation and stronger kickback all lend the game a very different feel. The basic moving and shooting action has been overhauled and Part 1 feels like a nice hybrid between the two games.

 

Quote

However, while the levels are quite similar, there have been changes to AI behavior - which is a good thing, given the many memable moments in the original release where your AI companion runs around bumping into enemies while you're hiding for your life. I tested this in the dam attack scene in the original game - it takes 30 awkward seconds for an AI companion to despatch an attacking enemy at close range, and after waiting motionless for two minutes, the enemy AI hasn't hit or even reached Joel once. The whole scene just looks goofy.

On PS5, things are much different. In the same scene, the enemy bursts through the door, killing a friendly on the way and engaging another before drawing first blood on Joel, just 13 seconds into the encounter. I'm forced to take him out or face death but, after doing so, I watch the rest of the scene and the AI manages to clear out the room entirely. The difference in behavior is significant here.

 

Quote

So, to sum up: playing and writing about The Last of Us Part 1 has been an interesting exercise. I can attest that if you've not played the original in a while, it feels familiar when you first pick up that controller - but the deeper you explore it, the more obvious it becomes that Naughty Dog put a ton of work into this game. It's as complete a remake as you could hope for, given the age of the original. I'm not here to award a review score or recommend everyone check it out, but I think what we've discussed today at least showcases what has changed. Even if The Last of Us Part 2 plays better overall, due to the more expansive level design and new moveset, this new PS5 release is certainly the best version of The Last of Us.

 

[Calashnikov]

‘Erra review from TLoU champion Huber. What’s he gonna make of it??

 

 

 

 

[Calashnikov]

Reviews seem good. 89 on Metacritic currently.

[teddymeow]

40fps fidelity mode on 120hz screens?!

 

Dreamy!!!

 

Mine has shipped from Base. Eeeeeeeek!!!

[Calashnikov]

A full hour of £70 TLOU remake reviews being in existence and nae discourse / frothing at the mouth? Place is deid 🪦💐🥃 🫡 😢 

[Festoon]

 

[p1nseeker]

 

[Calashnikov]

In summary:

 

 

[Kevvy Metal]

1 hour ago, Calashnikov said:

A full hour of £70 TLOU remake reviews being in existence and nae discourse / frothing at the mouth? Place is deid 🪦💐🥃 🫡 😢 

Mine has shipped, and I’m sure it’s going to be a splendid time. Like receiving a glorious remaster of one of your favourite ever films. And it didn’t cost £70, as it’s a little under £60 most places. 

[SuperFamiTom]

Not for the first time John Linneman and his friends at Digital Foundry have cost me money.

 

It looks amazingly good in that video. I've gone from fuck that...to maybe...to fuck that again over the last few months. But after watching the Digital Foundry video I've just stuck my digital 'pre-order' in on PSN. Roll on Friday!

[Benny]

21 minutes ago, Festoon said:

 

 

Basically, of you're asking for £60-70 again, then these small downgrades do in fact matter. You should be expecting this "feel" to still be in the game, as well as whatever other tweaks or improvements they have added.

 

I also agree with the point brought up there, that it's all very well talking up accessibility options, but if those options are only available on a more expensive game, which is only available on a console that barely anyone can actually find, for a price that has recently gone up, then exactly how accessible is that to reach a wide audience of gamers of varied abilities and income?

 

I genuinely hate the AAA game industry now I think. I'll be supporting Indies over anything else.

[Benny]

It reminds me of when they took out all of the varied environment destruction from the Gears of War games. Sure it looked nicer and cleaner visually, but it never actually felt as good to play in the latter games, and a large part of that was these small elements, the things that come together to make up the gestalt experience.

 

Film remasters are actually very different, as most of the time the intention is to clean up and get the picture as close to the original film stock as possible, not to change the original work.

 

I think considering what they've done with this I would hesitate to ever recommend it to anyone who's never played it to experience first time, as I would want their experience to be demonstrably similar and capture the same feelings to the one I enjoyed.

 

Accessibly options aside of course, but for my thoughts on that see above.

[K]

That door opening was my favourite bit in the original game. It was iconic. Changing it is like removing the village siege or the shopkeeper from Resident Evil 4.

 

Why isn’t this on the front page of every game website in the world? It’s like they’re deliberately trying to ruin their own game. 

[Stanley]

 (Sorry @Benny)

 

Besides the price it looks pretty awesome. 

[Kevvy Metal]

58 minutes ago, Benny said:

 

Basically, of you're asking for £60-70 again, then these small downgrades do in fact matter. You should be expecting this "feel" to still be in the game, as well as whatever other tweaks or improvements they have added.

 

I also agree with the point brought up there, that it's all very well talking up accessibility options, but if those options are only available on a more expensive game, which is only available on a console that barely anyone can actually find, for a price that has recently gone up, then exactly how accessible is that to reach a wide audience of gamers of varied abilities and income?

 

I genuinely hate the AAA game industry now I think. I'll be supporting Indies over anything else.

 

52 minutes ago, Benny said:

It reminds me of when they took out all of the varied environment destruction from the Gears of War games. Sure it looked nicer and cleaner visually, but it never actually felt as good to play in the latter games, and a large part of that was these small elements, the things that come together to make up the gestalt experience.

 

Film remasters are actually very different, as most of the time the intention is to clean up and get the picture as close to the original film stock as possible, not to change the original work.

 

I think considering what they've done with this I would hesitate to ever recommend it to anyone who's never played it to experience first time, as I would want their experience to be demonstrably similar and capture the same feelings to the one I enjoyed.

 

Accessibly options aside of course, but for my thoughts on that see above.

[Benny]

37 minutes ago, K said:

That door opening was my favourite bit in the original game. It was iconic. Changing it is like removing the village siege or the shopkeeper from Resident Evil 4.

 

Why isn’t this on the front page of every game website in the world? It’s like they’re deliberately trying to ruin their own game. 

 

I know you're making a little joke here, but the fact of the matter is that all of those little moments that make up a games design all have a subtle feedback effect on the experience the player gets out of something.

 

When you take a scene like say, the standoff in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, every single twitch and look in the eyes from Clint Eastwood et al add up to an incredibly tense overall feeling. Take away a single twitch and it doesn't have the same impact.

 

Now, if you want to argue that it's not as important in a game to have those small moments, then that actually does a disservice to the kind of experience that the creators of The Last of Us would have us believe they care about creating, because it's very much an interactive film experience they wanted to make players feel.

 

So in that sense, every single little part matters, just as much as Clint Eastwood's eyebrows or whatever. And I would argue the people who do care about this stuff really care because they care about how meaningful those small things are and can be, and they expect better, and to be wowed in the same ways again.

 

So sure, make little jokes at those people for caring about something so small, or I dunno, don't be another one of those people who just rips the piss and moves on when it could be an interesting discussion?

[PaB]

Just now, Benny said:

 

 

So sure, make little jokes at those people for caring about something so small, or I dunno, don't be another one of those people who just rips the piss and moves on when it could be an interesting discussion?

If the context is that door opening scene tweet then I think ripping the piss is the the only sensible response . 

[Mystacon]

5 minutes ago, Benny said:

 

I know you're making a little joke here, but the fact of the matter is that all of those little moments that make up a games design all have a subtle feedback effect on the experience the player gets out of something.

 

When you take a scene like say, the standoff in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, every single twitch and look in the eyes from Clint Eastwood et al add up to an incredibly tense overall feeling. Take away a single twitch and it doesn't have the same impact.

 

Now, if you want to argue that it's not as important in a game to have those small moments, then that actually does a disservice to the kind of experience that the creators of The Last of Us would have us believe they care about creating, because it's very much an interactive film experience they wanted to make players feel.

 

So in that sense, every single little part matters, just as much as Clint Eastwood's eyebrows or whatever. And I would argue the people who do care about this stuff really care because they care about how meaningful those small things are and can be, and they expect better, and to be wowed in the same ways again.

 

So sure, make little jokes at those people for caring about something so small, or I dunno, don't be another one of those people who just rips the piss and moves on when it could be an interesting discussion?

I’d be willing to bet good money that if you played it without having had that pointed out, you would be none the wiser. And I think you know I’m right.

[Benny]

16 minutes ago, PaB said:

If the context is that door opening scene tweet then I think ripping the piss is the the only sensible response . 

 

I don't quite understand why. There is a demonstrable difference in the impact of the movements in that scene. From just a film making perspective, both scenes would convey a different feeling in terms of their visual feedback, so I understand why it would be something someone might notice and comment on.

 

But if ripping the piss at deconstructing these kinds of artistic differences in something is genuinely the response that's expected in here, then I'll leave the discussion above, as clearly there's very little of substance to be gained in trying to discuss it with anyone in the way I enjoy here.

[Kevvy Metal]

Sharp Elbows 

[teddymeow]

1 hour ago, Kevvy Metal said:

Mine has shipped, and I’m sure it’s going to be a splendid time. Like receiving a glorious remaster of one of your favourite ever films. And it didn’t cost £70, as it’s a little under £60 most places. 

 

I pre-ordered as soon as I could after it was announced and managed to snag it for a few pennies under £54.

[Kevvy Metal]

1 hour ago, p1nseeker said:

 

Also yes, if actually interested… people should check out this extensive video, and perhaps it might give an insight and appreciation for all the hard work that’s been put into this.

 

Its a bit more of a glimpse into actual reality rather than having genuine concerns over a changed sound effect to a door. 

[Stanley]

23 minutes ago, Benny said:

 

I don't quite understand why. There is a demonstrable difference in the impact of the movements in that scene. From just a film making perspective, both scenes would convey a different feeling in terms of their visual feedback, so I understand why it would be something someone might notice and comment on.

 

But if ripping the piss at deconstructing these kinds of artistic differences in something is genuinely the response that's expected in here, then I'll leave the discussion above, as clearly there's very little of substance to be gained in trying to discuss it with anyone in the way I enjoy here.

From what I understand about this new version from having watched Digital Foundry amongst others, is that a lot of the changes are pretty subtle. There’s more context sensitive procedural animation on the fly, so maybe Joel opens doors differently depending on speed, weight, movement etc. adding to a more naturalistic look and feel. Perhaps they’ve also blended the original pre-rendered scenes, which are now all fully in game, to match the rest of it some more, lending it more fluid and organic presentation. 
 

The original kick is more staccato and videogame looking and the new one a lot smoother and more natural. 

[Benny]

And that's the kind of discussion I think is worth having: being a remake/remaster, it does invite such comparison just as much as people might discuss the Star Wars special editions or something, seeing as it's such a beloved property.

 

It's partly why K's post above has genuinely disappointed me, as it's the kind of piss taking that people have used on here or in discourse on games pretty much across the web in general, just as such comparisons or discussions have got started on something, that only serve to stifle it or discourage people from caring "too" much.

 

I don't like it, as I want to actually have those discussions. Not just see how much everyone paid for the pre-order. We don't take the piss out of that, so why do it when it's actually about the art itself.

[Benny]

6 minutes ago, K said:

It’s a door. 

 

And this is enormously reductive.

 

It's a whole host of animation and camera work going into something quite complex, in terms of both motion and feel, so clearly there is going to be a big difference between the original work and the new one in many many aspects, which is what I think can invite discussion.

 

If you really just want to boil it down to that, then you're doing a disservice to the actual dev work that has gone into it as well.

 

I would really like people to be able to treat game criticism on the same level as film criticism, but by making a statement like that you're basically saying they don't deserve it, which is nonsense.

[JoeK]

The DF review is good stuff.

 

It doesn't change my opinion that this is a remake that doesn't need to exist in any way. Sure, the differences in visual tech is clear to see, but the original game still holds up wonderfully well. In fact, the comparisons show up how good the original is. I'm happy with that.

 

However, if I hadn't ever have played the original, then sure as heck I'd buy this new version and have both part 1 and 2 on the go - but I played the original, so it doesn't really offer me enough to jump in right now. I'll no doubt pick it up when the price gets lower, mind.

 

What does bug me is that they've seemingly made Joel look older in Part 1 than he does in Part 2. That's annoying.

[PaB]

11 minutes ago, Benny said:

 

And this is enormously reductive.

 

It's a while host of animation and camera work going into something quite complex, in terms of birth motion and feel, so clearly there is going to be a big difference between the original work and the new one in many many aspects, which is what I think can invite discussion.

 

If you really just want to boil it down to that, then you're doing a disservice to the actual dev work that has gone into it as well.

 

I would really like people to be able to treat game criticism on the same level as film criticism, but by making a statement like that you're basically saying they don't deserve it, which is nonsense.

 Benny, it’s a 2 second clip of Joel opening a door. There is literally nothing there to criticise or praise. 
 

if in the 20 odd hours there is a collection of these moments that add up to a fundamental shift in tone, good or bad, then sure , there’s things for people to talk about, but this single clip, doesn’t really give much to go on.
 

Let me ask you this; what is the context of joel smashing through that door? What is the scene directly before that moment? Does it work better? Or does it detract? Do the haptics come into play?
 

I agree there is probably a discussion for people that are interested, in what the effect of modern remakes, which are a line for line copy of the original,  have on the overall feel and story telling, especially in narrative  heavy games like tlou.

 

But I would argue that this is best done taking the work as a whole and not framing the discussion around a tweet of Joel opening a door. That really is doing the dev work  a disservice 

[Popo]

Game looks pretty amazing. Hats off to Digital Foundry for such a detailed set of impressions. The lighting in particular makes the remaster look very dated indeed. 

[Festoon]

3 hours ago, Festoon said:

 

 

If it makes anyone feel better, I never liked TLOU in the first place. I liked the story, but not the mechanics of the game.