There are so many reasons I don't want a Last of Us Remake

If you pay attention to gaming news you're aware of Jason Shreier's article about Sony and that a Last of Us remake is in the works.

A lot of virtual ink has been spilled about how it's too soon for a Last of Us remake because the old game has aged well and isn't that old to begin with, and that if Sony is going to cut back its number of games drastically people would rather see new projects, especially from a team like Naughty Dog, than old ones.

I agree with all that, but I think that beyond the fact that it's new (about the same age as Grand Theft Auto V, a game that is going to see re-release on the newest platforms rather than be remade) there are other issues with the idea of a The Last of Us Remake.

Chief among these issues is the fact that the meaning and impact of The Last of Us has changed dramatically after The Last of Us Part 2. I'm not someone who hated that game, or even the story of that game. I loved the first game and didn't love the second, but a lot of my issues with the second relate more to pacing and what felt like self-indulgence in the way the game is structured and, again, paced, than the actual content of the game. I thought it played pretty well, looked fantastic, had some decent performances, and I didn't think the story was inherently bad even if I didn't think it was as good as the first one.

But I think the second game really changes how the first one feels, and not necessarily in a good way. The second game intentionally undermines a lot of what happens in the first. That's a legitimate artistic choice, but it means that themes of the first game are blunted in certain ways. The journey means somewhat less given the actual destination. If I replayed the first game now it probably wouldn't feel that different because I already have that initial experience and I have the nostalgic attachment to that journey, but a true remake would feel very different. There are certain genies you can't put back in the bottle, and if they were going to go the direction they did in the second game, which again I think was a valid choice, they should just let what they made stand on its own.

Of course that could also mean that the remake would not be 1 to 1 and they would change certain things. I'm not just talking about mechanics, which I'm sure would be somewhat different (and I think the second game is mechanically better than the first so that would be a plus) but some of the story beats and probably some of the voice work. I think that would probably be for the worse. The Last of Us is arguably the apogee of Naughty Dog cinematic story telling. It's not a perfect story, but it's excellent, and none of their subsequent games have been as good. People's artistic visions change over time, and I don't think remakes have to be slavishly committed to the source material to be good or valid, but I don't really want to see Naughty Dog of 2021 or 2023 or whatever retake this story because I think it would be worse. I especially worry that they'll feel the need to expand it and mess with the pacing and end up with something as bloated as the second game felt to me. Give someone else a crack at it in 5 to 10 years? Maybe. I can't imagine Naughty Dog telling a better version right now.

Combine all these things and while I'm sure the game would be successful, and I'm not even saying I wouldn't play it (again, I love The Last of Us and a version with amazing PS5 graphics and DualSense integration and those incredible rope physics does sound appealing) it just seems like the wrong project for a studio that has made so many spectacular games, at the wrong time. It seems unlikely to live up to the original game, which is already available on PS5 right now and still looks and plays good, and it seems like it will play out very differently in the shadow of the second game. That's in addition to the fact that I'd rather see a new Naughty Dog project (whether that's Uncharted or The Last of Us 3 or something totally new I don't really care. Bring back Jak & Daxter you cowards!) and that I don't like Sony's new direction of focusing on only AAA massive sellers, which a remake of one of their most popular games clearly leans all the way into.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a good game or I wouldn't give it a chance, I'm just disappointed to hear about this direction, and not very excited about the prospect of this being the next project. The games industry gives us so few linear single player games with big budgets these days it's a shame to just get a repeat one from of the industry's best studios at that structure so soon after the original. Especially when that repeat is undermined by the sequel, and may contain some of the structural problems that game introduced.

Also this:

It sounds like a lot of people at Sony are going through some stuff and I hope that things get better soon.

Remaking this game sounds like the most cynical cash grab imaginable. As you point out here, it is also artistically questionable.

It’s such a weird idea to remake this game now. I guess maybe the HBO series gives them an extra incentive? But seems misguided and does bum me out thinking of Sony’s direction for this gen.

I also agree with your point, I think the remake decision might be looking more at possible numbers and less thinking about people’s reception to Last of Us 1 now that 2 has come out.

Are we in an era of gaming now where we only play the same 3 or 4 games every time a new console comes out. Is the Last of Us 2 remake going to be a Playstation 6 launch title?

The real baller move would be to remake the first Uncharted. That game aged pretty quickly and given there's a movie coming out in the near future, they could still get their media tie-in cash grab out of it.

@topcyclist: Full remakes require almost as many resources as a brand new game.

And the story itself says that one of the reasons that the game was moved to Naughty Dog is that the scope was spiraling out of control.

Also I think from the timeline of the story that this project started before the pandemic.

So I don't actually think that the pandemic has much to do with any of this. There are lots of lower effort and safe projects that they could do if they wanted to. @vaiz suggested an Uncharted remake and I think that would be more interesting because it's a much older and clunkier game. Or they could do something like the Uncharted spin off game for either Uncharted or Last of Us.

But the issue is not so much that it's lazy, because game development is hard, but that it just isn't a project that seems like it has a lot of artistic upside, even if I'm sure it would sell like gangbusters.

I hope they make the gameplay good, if they do

I'm taking this as yet another indication that the Jim Ryan era of PlayStation is going to be so fucking bland.

The issue is that they have painted themselves into a corner with the Last of Us 2 premise. Now If they could somehow allow for multiple endings but some of the story beats have to stay put. Remakes and remasters are the safest bet during COVID churn. You can’t take risks and have all your eggs in one basket (employee) for them to just up and quit on you. So you’ve got a game blueprint and you can maybe even do some ff7 remake bs and release this in chapters to coincide with the Tv show. Who knows? It’s honestly a waste and joke and makes me wonder if backwards compatibility for PS4 is not in hardware like XBOX for this specific reason.

A reminder that top level management in these companies don't care about art, or the individual happiness of the hundreds of people working for them, or even the consumer as long as they're getting your money out of whatever it is they do, no matter how much they might say otherwise. They care about making money, and being number one. The only time they play the "hearts and minds" game is when they're behind, and once they get back on top, it's right back to cold, robotic, money grab, business as usual to try and stay on top. Business men don't care about video games. They'd all be just as happy to work at any other corporation on the planet if it meant they got to make as much, or more, money than they make now.

hmm- while i very much agree with the general sentiment of 'i don't need or want this'- and i say that as a very big fan of both TLOU1 and TLOU2- i'm finding it a bit difficult to soothsay my way into a prophecy of doom for the franchise, the future of ND as dev and sony as a platform this gen. don't get me wrong- the concept is cynical, unnecessary, and certainly business-centric (i find remakes and remasters artistically bankrupt, generally); but it won't alter my perception/experience of the first game, nor do i anticipate it coloring my interpretation of what's undoubtedly the inevitable TLOU3. much like the OG Star Wars for me- the original work stands, no matter how many times they try to sell new versions to me.

but let me repeat: i think all remakes and remasters are kinda dumb. yes that includes the pending mass effect one and FF7. i'm all for compatibility/QoL/UI updates- get games running on everything. lose the needless tedium. but beyond that- i can tolerate work and stories being products of the past. and yet remakes/remasters also appear to sell very well, so they're not going away.

i've made my peace with these products because i understand the business reasons for why they happen. if this TLOU1 version happens (which appears to be a pretty big IF based on the hot-potato state of development)- i get why sony green-lights it...it's what they have in the face of microsoft making it rain seemingly everywhere. sony has proven, original IP with a built-in fanbase- so their business-leaders are going to lean into those safe investments as much as possible. sure- the patron of the arts in me cringes deeply- but i don't really buy into the line-of-reasoning of 'because a TLOU1 remake/remaster gets made it means an indie darling, new IP or other unproven project gets shot down.' the impulse to remaster an 8 year old game from one of your biggest IPs doesn't come from the same place of wanting to take a business risk on new things. it's still sony, they're still risk adverse, and big blockbusters is what they do.

so i suppose my personal tl;dr is- yeah i kinda hate it, but it doesn't surprise me and i'm able to ignore it. we'll see if it actually happens- but ultimately i'm only interested in TLOU3 and where the franchise is going- not so much where it's been.

It just feels like the entire Sony strategy as of late has been to constantly remind everyone how amazing their deep and engaging story-focused games are, as if keeping the discourse going is more important than surprising us with something. Yes, I thought God of War was fun. Yes, The Last of Us was good 8 years ago, well done there. Yes, we do all love Spider-Man, we all agree that the swinging was excellent. Yes, we're all very happy that you didn't just crank out service games for the last decade.

Like my initial feeling was that big ego Sony is back, but I think the reality is that they figured out something that works, but it's a slow and expensive process and they don't really have a strong incentive change it up. But it does make me less interested in picking up a PS5 down the road.

Gimme new shit.

Really, that's all I got to say on the matter. Remakes of PS1 or PS2 games are still worthwhile because early 3D games were kinda clunky as they figured things out. They're old, but remakes can feel new again.

PS3 and onwards, you'll be fine just doing a 4k 60 port and leaving it alone.

This isn't necessarily true. This developer is responding to this in the context of much older and much bigger games. Last of Us was already remastered on PS4. Similar assets, tools, and an engine already exists from the extremely recent Last of Us Part 2. The gap is so much smaller between a Last of Us (1) remake in 2021 than it is a Lost Odyssey or Blue Dragon remake in 2021 that it's not even comparable.

Ultimately something new is better, but I get why they'd want to cross a footbridge instead of build a suspension bridge right now.

Bluepoint Games have 90 people and spent 2 years remaking Demon Souls. Given The Last of Us is nowhere near as old and Schreier's article had the team originally at 30 people, I can't imagine a remake being prohibitively expensive.

A remake along side the TV show would be easy money.

While Naughty Dog is working on Factions atm its unlikely taking up the whole studio to make, the remake could easily be a side project while they brainstorm a new ip or as they improve their tools for a next gen game.

ND could also have people spare as Factions winds down and their new IP scales up, but we have no context for the story.

It wouldn't be hard seeing Factions releasing along with the remake to justify a $70 price tag.

Until I know anything about it other than it may or may not happen, all I can say is it's somewhat cynical but that I would also love to play that game with Abby's combat system grafted onto Joel. It'd be a waste of time to say anything else because it doesn't sound guaranteed to begin with, and even if it happens I can't pretend to know whether or not they'd change anything beyond the gameplay.

Maybe it's secretly a tech test to prevent another Peter Parker situation ("we can't use the same face model, it doesn't translate to our new code")

Resident Evil Remake is good. FFVII remake is good. If they have a good idea let them do it.

I don't judge movies on core concepts and pre-condemn them before even the first screen shot is shown like so much of the internet dose. I don't pre-condemn movie franchise movie reboots because it's "too soon" like so much of the internet does.

I judge them for what they are, and we won't know what this is until after it's out. Pre-judging it is seems beyond foolish.

I'm just bummed that it seems Bend studio has lost some talent as a result of the whole shuffle.

Days Gone was my second fav game of the last Generation and its a bummer that Franchise will probably die off.

@anominal: I could spoil the game in 8 words. A remake might add a word. There are other angles to view the first game. Police presence. Government management sim. Joel and Ellie is just lazy. Now I’ll watch the show because real actors can bring me to tears.

These things are not unusual in game develpment.

Stig Asmussen left Santa Monica Studio after his game was cancelled and the studio was almost closed entirely, but then Santa Monica went on to reimagine God of War.

Sucker Punch before seeing success with Ghost of Tsushima had Prophecy cancelled they even had a working demo.

Jade Raymond had games cancelled at EA & Stadia, games get cancelled all the time and will often lose people in the process even key figures.

Sony can do whatever the hell they want. I'll play God of War but naughty dog can I couldnt care less about until they make a new IP. Everything else I'll see what they come up with. Don't have a pa5 right now and don't plan on getting one anytime soon. Couldn't even if I wanted to anyway.

The Last of Us is such a weird property because of the way people venerate it. When the sequel was announced we got introduced to a whole barrage of articles asking if it should even exist or more absurdly, does the existence of the sequel invalidate the first game. Now that there is word out of a potential remaster a lot of these same arguments are being dredged up again concerning the sanctity of the original. As brought up above, we have seen some amazing remasters come out the last few years and Naughty Dog is known to deliver extremely polished games - to a fault really. I would be interested to see a current gen remaster of the first game and I would definitely want them to tinker with it or even change some things outright. As for the studio reshuffling well I didn’t really see much out of the ordinary there. Days Gone was a middling game riddled with bugs and a largely forgettable story so it’s no surprise that Sony doesn’t want to throw a bunch more cash in hopes that maybe a sequel does better. Getting a chance at a brand new triple A first party funded IP is already more than other studios get.

I first played this game on the PS4 so....they're making the game again, less than 10 years later so that it looks a little bit better?

To be clear I understand the upgrade to PS5 but let's be real, as opposed to the Final Fantasy 7 Remake which has an over 20 year gap, this is a waste.

Never a good look for a company constantly looking over its shoulder at it's competition. Yes, they've had success with remakes, but Sony really should be thinking about new IP.

As someone who has not played a Last of Us game, it does seem too soon for this. Games that launched early in the 360/PS3 era definitely feel somewhat dated now so I understand the desire to remake fan favorites from that period (personally, I would dig an Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion remaster). But Last of Us was essentially one of the last major releases of that generation, and was released on PS4 in June 2014 -- less than seven years ago. As a result, this does feel like a cynical cash grab.

After playing Demon's Souls Remake I have to disagree just watch a side by side comparison of the original and remake and you really think increased frame rate is all that needed.

I don’t think a remake of The Last of Us is really required at this point, it’s not like the original game is that old. That said, it’s probably an easy cash grab to get people to buy the game on PS5 with a new look and refined systems from The Last of Us Part II, along with the release of the TV series on HBO.

That said, I feel like a lot of the stories from Jason’s article are hyperbolic.

Days Gone 2 likely wasn’t green lit because the first game didn’t really do that well critically, the development time was quite long and Bend had to patch the game a lot to get it to where it is now. Sony’s definitely more risk averse than Microsoft is right now, especially when development of big AAA blockbusters is costly.

It’s also not like Sony isn’t helping with publishing/funding new titles. Games like Returnal exist, where it’s a brand new IP published by Sony with a mostly second party studio in Housemarque.

@zoofame: I agree that if the remaster came out now it would be way too early. Knowing Naughty Dog though this potential remaster is at least 2-3 years away at which point it will get bundled in with the sequel that itself will probably get a PS5 performance patch. At that point people will be happy to revisit both games in 4K 60.

@djredbat: As someone who played Demon’s Souls this year for the first time on PS3, honestly a framerate and resolution spit polish would have done that game just fine (aside from online being down, but that’s an artificial problem IMO). Heck, even Bluepoint tacitly admits this by leaving everything but the visuals and sound untouched.

I subsequently playing Dark Souls 1 & 2 on Series X, and I was really impressed by the baked in hardware improvements on their own. No reason that Sony, given the proper prioritization of resources, couldn’t have done the same on PS5. But that’s less sexy than a new $90 CAD product to sell with the new console.

I know this article is about Sony, but I feel like this is something that every studio/publisher is practicing. Like unless it's something that can be attached to one of their brands I doubt that WB will allow NetherRealm to make a game that isn't Mortal Kombat or Injustice for example.

Is this Druckmann trying to retcon the first game so it's a better fit for the second? That's my conspira-take.

Or y'know, they need something to do that is relatively less resource intensive than making something from scratch during a pandemic.

@shindig: Or maybe a better fit for a trilogy.

As for the time difference between FFII and its remake and this. Just like with movies, why does that matter?

They could reboot or remaster something a year after release, and if it was based on a good idea, then it's a good idea.

I haven't played any of the Devil May Cry games, but that seemed to get rebooted year after year for the most recent games and that seemed to work out okay. People were up in arms about a sequel to Left 4 Dead so soon after release after the first because not enough time had passed and that seemed to work out just fine.

In movie franchise examples, we have the three Spider-Man eras that were released close to each other. Good or bad, it wasn't the timing of the reboots that determined how good the movies were, it was the quality of the movies.

An existing good idea shouldn't be a bar from keeping a future good idea from being made.

Will the end product of this remake prove to be a good idea? I don't know. But no one here does. There isn't enough information out there to make any kind of judgement on its quality.

A lot of the comments in this thread are about positions I never took, like that this will somehow spell the end of Naughty Dog, or that the game won't sell well, or that it can't possibly be good, all of which is in fact directly contradicted by things I said in my original post, so I'm not really going to respond to any of that. None of that is the point.

@hatking: I think your point is more directly responsive to what's being said, but I don't really agree with your position. For one thing, this is being pitched as a remake, not a remaster. While some assets might be reused (The voice work would be usable if they don't want to change the story; maybe some of the performance capture, though a lot of that is showing its age at this point) they would presumably remake the majority of the material from scratch. To the extent that tools and assets created for The Last of Us 2 could be repurposed for the remake, they could also be repurposed for a spin off or sequel or other project. There's definitely something of a time saving in terms of not having to work on encounter/level design or story (if they aren't going to change those things) so you save on preproduction and iteration (if, again, you're not reworking the story and encounters) but full remakes are still expensive in many ways. Lost Odyssey and Last of Us are from the same generation, and while Last of Us did get a PS4 remaster, that didn't create a lot of high poly/high def assets you'd want in a full remake. There would be a lot of work to do.

Which is a lot of my point. @Gerorne raised a comparison to the Spider Man reboots, but in addition to those being distinct takes on a broad canon and more reboots than remakes, they were all done by different teams, which brought different things to the table. Nobody would have wanted to see Sam Raimi and Toby McGuire remake their Spider Man 1 movie a decade after they first made it. It would have seemed insane to even suggest. So the idea of another team at Sony doing a Last of Us remake seems okay to me (I said so in my initial post) but for Naughty Dog to tell the same story so soon, after they just made the sequel, just doesn't seem to be the best use of their time. Could it be good? Sure, they're talented, and any project can be good, but it's unlikely to be surprising. That's also why the comparison with Demon's Souls doesn't really work. Demon's Souls is very gameplay focused, but The Last of Us is at least as much about its story as its gameplay. Either the story won't have any surprises (because it will be a true remake) or it will be trying to retell the story to fit better with the second game, which...I just don't see that as likely going well.

Of course there will be an audience for this game if it gets made. That's why Sony would greenlight the project. But it absolutely will absorb a lot of Naughty Dog's resources and slow down other stuff they're doing if they take the lead on it, and I just don't find the idea exciting. Maybe they can thread the needle and make magic, but I'm dubious. And I don't like the idea of the remake window getting even slimmer, because that doesn't appeal to me personally.

@bigsocrates: Capcom did the RE Remake. Squaresoft did the FFVII remake.

If Raimi had a good idea for Spider-man remake with Tobey McGuire, then let them do it. I don't see what the problem is with that idea in a broad sense. If they have a good idea (in hands capable of executing the idea, with enough money to make it practically feasible, etc,e tc.) then it's a good idea.

I don't see a point in creating artificial, self-constructed walls meant to prevent good ideas from being executed, to signal out to the world why it should never be.

And again, I'm not saying I know what the idea is and if it's good or not. But that's why I'm not pre-judging, and will judge only when there is substance out there to be judged and not ideas in the wind.

I agree that it's a low-hanging fruit, that regardless from a business point of view makes too much sense to not do. Having said that, I still think there is a thin line between remake and a port, all they have to do is touch up some assets to qualify for the definition of a remake, and given that nothing has been officially announced it is very possible that somebody was using that term very loosely. So I doubt that it's going to be a multi-year project, and I can't say that I wouldn't take a look at this game running at 4K/60 (or even 4K/120).

Another piece of the puzzle here is TLOU2. That game is almost certainly getting a re-release on the PS5, so Naughty Dog are locked into the franchise regardless. But since the PS4 version is also playable, they are maybe worried about the value proposition there (and gamers insisting that it should be a free update) and have decided to solve it by packing both games in one bundle.

Naughty Dog have been doing this "cinematic" type of game since the first Uncharted, maybe they're feeling a little burnt out on that type of game, I know that I am and I want to believe that the industry is moving on from that. So if they want to take a year or two on some less intensive work while they figure out their next project, maybe it will work out for them better than immediately rushing into Uncharted 5 or whatever.

@apewins: Based on the article it doesn't sound like a simple touch up job, both because of how it was conceived (a support studio wanting to make and control their own project) and the fact that Naughty Dog slowly took it over. It would be a very strange and dysfunctional process for a slightly enhanced port like we got from PS3 to PS4.

If Sony literally tries to resell Last of Us Part II on PS5 (as opposed to a free upgrade like Forza Horizon 4 and a bunch of other games got) it's going to get a lot of blowback regardless. Considering that Sony basically pioneered cross buy that would signal a real change in strategy. I realize that they basically did that with The Last of Us 1 from PS3 to PS4, but the difference there is that free upgrades and digital purchases were much less common there, and there were basically no examples of free upgrades and cross buys for retail games. Now there are a lot more cross gen bundles and free or cheap upgrades, though it's still not universal.

I've heard The Last Of Us Part II ruined this IP, due to a terribly written plot which caused the players to be unsatisfied with it and I didn't even expect the developer wanted to remake the first game.

Wait.. isn't there already sort of a remake, with the PS4 version knocking up framerates and resolution?

That was technically a remaster. The OP is talking about the recent rumors of a remake.

There is simply no need for a Last of Us remake. The original game still holds up well today. The game was ahead of its time on the PS3, and looked almost like a PS4 exclusive when it was remastered. What they could be doing is making DLC for TLOU2, or get started on TLOU3. It seems like a lot of wield things are happening with Sony and their first party developers lately.

@wardcleaver: my question is Is there no automatic performance boost from PS5 hardware-side to the PS4 version, natively? Because if there is we are talking about multiple versions of the same game PS3->PS4->PS4 uprezzed via PS5->PS5 version. Can’t wait for digital foundry to talk about that one even with pollen in Boston somewheres. Dust particles make or break games for me. $70? Sign me up.

I just heard we're not getting Days Gone 2 because of this nonsense. What a bunch of horseshit.

@shiftygism: I don't think it's 'because' of this nonsense, I think that this is what we're getting instead (sort of, though not really because Bend is off it now) but we were never getting Days Gone 2 because despite being profitable it reviewed poorly.

For what it's worth I liked that game when I played it last year. It's not a masterpiece but it's a pretty fun open world game.

I think in general there's some confusion on the timeline. This seems to have played out over the course of at least many months if not a few years, and it doesn't really seem like a reaction to the pandemic or anything like that. The timeline is a bit fuzzy in the article, but it's not like this all took place in 2021.

If they're going to "remake it" but won't even confirm that it's going to have the same stars...then why not just have an expansion game??? Why not anthologize the name "Last of Us" and tell more stories in that universe than just the Joel/Ellie ones?? You still get the name recognition, but you're not bound to what is REALLY not that old of a game on REALLY not that old of hardware.

"The Walking Dead" has about 20 spin-offs, and while I can't speak to the quality, I think it's done quite well for them, so WHY would you remake instead of spinning off???

@undeadpool: Maybe because they have a good idea for it?

There is basically zero information about it besides that it is in production, and you and so many others are condemning it as a bad idea without even knowing what it is, convinced there is no possible reason to go forward with the project yet not knowing why they came up with the idea for the project in the first place. Why remake instead of a spin-off you ask? I ask why are you so against it when you don't even have enough details to even know what it is.

@anominal: I can list MANY reasons why I'm against "a remake of 'The Last of Us'" as can, and have, many of the listed people above. One of the biggest being: if there's less information, the AAA games industry has trained me to assume the worst.

So lacking information besides "A remake of 'The Last of Us,'" I can presume it will be a retelling of a game that JUST had an HD release on new console hardware because the videogames industry is becoming as riskaverse as the film industry."

Quid pro quo: what has Naughty Dog done to engender the kind of blind faith in their next project that would make you hostile toward people who are skeptical of what sounds like a terrible idea?