The Last of US Part 1 coming to PC

[Frag Maniac]

Just saw this, the 9/2/22 date shown at the end is being taken by some as the PC release date as well, but it DOES say coming to PS5 on that date, then it says Also in development for PC. So I can't assume the PC version will be available same date. Some are upset about the $70 price, but I'm just glad to hear it's finally officially coming to PC. As far as the price goes, what ISN'T over priced these days? I think I can handle a $10 upcharge.

 

[Johnway]

Another decent playtstation exclusive coming to the pc. I'm all for it. Will wait and see what the port is like before i cast judgement.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Played the original in 2012 or whatever on PS3, liked it a lot but not excited to pay 70 for a remaster that I've played before. Probably a sale game for me whenever it comes along, of course I reserve the right to be sucked into the hype if theres not much else interesting around when its released.

Still good to see more Playstation games coming to PC, the God of War port was really good so if its the same standard shouldn't be anything to worry about on a technical front.

 

[Ryzengang]

Played the original in 2012 or whatever on PS3, liked it a lot but not excited to pay 70 for a remaster that I've played before. Probably a sale game for me whenever it comes along, of course I reserve the right to be sucked into the hype if theres not much else interesting around when its released.

Still good to see more Playstation games coming to PC, the God of War port was really good so if its the same standard shouldn't be anything to worry about on a technical front.

Yea, I think I'll pick it up eventually, but I'm not gonna pay full price for it. I've never played the game in any form, but I did watch the story on YouTube. Even if I hadn't, though, it's fairly uncommon for me to immediately buy a full price game directly on release regardless (especially if $70 becomes the new norm).

 

[WoodenSaucer]

No, $70 for a remaster is ridiculous. I'm sure that's going to start becoming normal. If the game companies see someone can get away with it, they'll all do it. I rarely buy games when they're new, anyway. Plus, right now, I'm on a kick of only playing what I can get on Game Pass.

 

[DXCHASE]

No, $70 for a remaster is ridiculous.

This.

I loved TLOU and also played it to death when it first came out. I was pretty good at the pvp side of the game and thought it was a great concept. I really enjoyed the game and its easily in my top 10.

I find it understandable for games to be charged 70 bucks USD nowadays (even though i wont pay that personally), but 70 for a remaster is straight robbery considering most of the game has already been done, but developers know that gamers will pay it. Heck they could charge 80 for games and youd still have gamers paying that.

 

[Brian Boru]

I can't assume the PC version will be available same date

Wiki says "later for Microsoft Windows"

Some are upset about the $70 price

I was agreeing with you until…

$70 for a remaster is ridiculous

…which, well, is just so true. I mean, C&C Remaster from 2020, excellently done and very well received, has 2 main games plus 3 major expansions—all for $20 on release!

So then I peek at Wiki. It's a 2013 PS3 game, but… it was remastered in 2014 for PS4. Huh?

not excited to pay 70 for a remaster

Apparently it's a remake, not a remaster—assuming Wiki is accurate.

That should be good news, when added to the later PC release date assertion—indicates the PC version may not be console-crippled.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Apparently it's a remake, not a remaster—assuming Wiki is accurate.
That should be good news, when added to the later PC release date assertion—indicates the PC version may not be console-crippled.

Yeah I also get the feeling this is going to be as much a dedicated PC production as a port too, so that is partly why an extra $10 doesn't bother me. Truth be told though I also have limited preference in what kind of games I play, and there's not been as many of those made these days. I also have excess funds due to being so inactive since COVID, as many do.

I kind of agree though that $70 becoming the new norm is not cool, but how many things have we said are getting permanently hiked in price lately? Gas prices, food prices, PC part prices, pretty much everything has gone through the roof. I also don't think once the dust settles from COVID, the chip shortage and the Ukraine invasion, that things will just magically go back to normal either.

I mean I'm also getting to the age where I don't honestly know how much longer I'll even be able to play games to the skill standard I've always held myself to, so I can't necessarily afford to wait for bargain discounts. I don't buy nearly as many games a I used to, but I've also always been a quality over quantity sort of player.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Apparently it's a remake, not a remaster—assuming Wiki is accurate.

Important difference, thanks.

Makes it more interesting if the game changed a lot other than being prettied up. Still not excited about the new $70 world though, even if it'll be on sale soon enough

 

[Colif]

$70 prices and every game is like Diablo Immortal - the future of gaming

full price just to pay more for every useful item in game, the ultimate dream.
actually, ultimate dream is to get people to pay for a launcher and they have to buy the rest of the game (though dlc quest may have taken that too far) in chunks as they get to it. So you might get Tutorial free, if you lucky.

 

[Ryzengang]

I'm actually not all that against $70 games, honestly. Obviously as a consumer I'd rather not pay more for a product, but I don't think the price hike is unreasonable. Game development costs have consistently risen and if we consider inflation, then games staying at $60 for so long is actually pretty impressive. Plus, I don't think this is majorly consequential to a lot of us PC gamers because most of us are waiting for sales regardless. I rarely buy full price games, and $60 vs $70 wouldn't be a deal breaker if I really wanted a game that bad. If I want to play a game on release it means it's extremely anticipated for me.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I'm actually not all that against $70 games, honestly. Obviously as a consumer I'd rather not pay more for a product, but I don't think the price hike is unreasonable. Game development costs have consistently risen and if we consider inflation, then games staying at $60 for so long is actually pretty impressive. Plus, I don't think this is majorly consequential to a lot of us PC gamers because most of us are waiting for sales regardless. I rarely buy full price games, and $60 vs $70 wouldn't be a deal breaker if I really wanted a game that bad. If I want to play a game on release it means it's extremely anticipated for me.

Plus there's the fact that a roughly 17% increase, which is how $70 compares to $60, is paltry compared to how much the basic cost of essential goods has gone up. It's really just that this hits hard for some because it's one more thing that happens to invade on our precious leisure activities. Nothing is sacred anymore people, inflation eventually attacks everything.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Where does the 80% *citation needed reduction in the cost of shipping and production factor into that now that physical media is entirely dead on PC?

I dont think its anything to do with inflation. Its not like all the actual creative employees are getting a 17% pay rise or that money will go towards extra development really. Most will go to shareholders and to the Cayman Islands via executives while revenues continue to rise regardless of the price rise.

I know its old man yelling at cloud at this point, but it doesnt make that part any less annoying.

Not losing any sleep over it though, and on the rare occasion I'm really excited about a AAA game I'll probably pay it anyway if I dont just wait for a sale, but I'm under no illusions its necessary for the survival of any of the big companies at all.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Where does the 80% *citation needed reduction in the cost of shipping and production factor into that now that physical media is entirely dead on PC?

I dont think its anything to do with inflation. Its not like all the actual creative employees are getting a 17% pay rise or that money will go towards extra development really. Most will go to shareholders and to the Cayman Islands via executives while revenues continue to rise regardless of the price rise.

I know its old man yelling at cloud at this point, but it doesnt make that part any less annoying.

Not losing any sleep over it though, and on the rare occasion I'm really excited about a AAA game I'll probably pay it anyway if I dont just wait for a sale, but I'm under no illusions its necessary for the survival of any of the big companies at all.

LOL, the argument about why digitally released media isn't cheaper has been done to death, and doesn't really apply here. I also don't think you're factoring in the cost of building and maintaining a digital distribution platform either, which is why it took even juggernauts like EPIC so long to compete with Steam.

You also need to realize that pretty much everything costing more now does in fact affect game production prices. We've also yet to even see how much in this game is being remade. A hike of 17% though isn't much compared to how much food, gas, and the cost of other essentials has gone up.

It's also completely up to you whether you want to wait for a sale, no one is forcing you to pay that $70. I don't know man, it is what it is, but as far as I'm concerned, what it is, is not nearly as big a deal as prices on essential things that we really CAN'T do anything about.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Eh, youre right its been done to death, but I dont see how it doesn't apply here. It all affects the bottom line.

Revenues for EA etc.

Electronic Arts Revenue 2010-2024 | EA

Electronic Arts annual/quarterly revenue history and growth rate from 2010 to 2024. Revenue can be defined as the amount of money a company receives from its customers in exchange for the sales of goods or services. Revenue is the top line item on an income statement from which all costs and...

www.macrotrends.net

Activision Blizzard annual revenue 2022 | Statista

In 2022, Activision Blizzard's annual revenue amounted to 7.53 billion U.S.

www.statista.com

Ubisoft annual sales 2024 | Statista

In the fiscal year 2023-24, which ended in March 2024, Ubisoft generated 2.3 billion euros in sales.

www.statista.com

Revenues rising massively, as surely are profits and share prices, while game prices have remained the same. Its just greed, profits aren't going up enough. The bad inflation also started after the war in eastern Ukraine began, this price increase was coming either way.

Stuff like Fifa and Madden are almost the same every year apart from the player names, but they are the biggest makers through in game purchases, and now they'll make people pony up an extra 10 just to access ultimate team so they can spend another thousand in a year through microtransactions.

I agree @Frag Maniac that we dont have to pay it, and I mostly wont. Still mildly annoying though.

 

[Colif]

They care more about profits than if game is good. Yes, they were always businesses and so profit was important, but they got more money by making good games, not by cutting what few games they have down into smaller and smaller chunks to sell to the people who still buy them.

they so big now that the people making decisions never played a game in their lives. Whereas when they all started, 2 of those 3 were small and made games cause they had a passion for it.

I am sure there are people out there making games because they love it, but they don't control AAA companies. Its funny of the 3 mentioned above only one of them isn't begging to be bought.

I want another games crash like we had in the 80's

 

[WoodenSaucer]

So then I peek at Wiki. It's a 2013 PS3 game, but… it was remastered in 2014 for PS4. Huh?

Yeah, when the PS4/XB1 came out there were several of those remasters of 1 year old games. They did it with Tomb Raider 2013, too. They made her hair look nicer. Lol.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Eh, youre right its been done to death, but I dont see how it doesn't apply here. It all affects the bottom line.

I mean it's very unlikely the reason this specific game is $70 instead of $60 has anything to do with the way it's distributed, or a valid argument for why it shouldn't have an upcharge. From what I've heard, the next CoD will be $70 too. Expect it to be the new norm for AAA titles. After all, games have been going for $60 for some time now. I just don't see bringing up digital vs physical every time a game sells for $70 instead of $60 makes any sense.

 

[DXCHASE]

Ok TLOU is a remake but, for me, to be worth the 70 price tag it better be leaps and bounds better looking than the original. Obviously youre gonna see lighting, texture, and facial improvements but, for me, that doesnt make a remake worth that much. The original looked pretty good to begin with.

Maybe the game should also include a 30 day trial for HBO Max since TLOU show is coming soon.

 

[WoodenSaucer]

I'm not sure if I would pay $70 for Breath of the Wild 2, and Zelda is my favorite franchise. I probably would, but I'd be very disgruntled about it.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

I mean it's very unlikely the reason this specific game is $70 instead of $60 has anything to do with the way it's distributed, or a valid argument for why it shouldn't have an upcharge. From what I've heard, the next CoD will be $70 too. Expect it to be the new norm for AAA titles. After all, games have been going for $60 for some time now. I just don't see bringing up digital vs physical every time a game sells for $70 instead of $60 makes any sense.

That's why its annoying, because its the new normal and we never got a discount for all they saved. They can argue they never increased the price with inflation, but the reality is that profits were increasing with the money they saved from not producing boxes manuals and shipping, market growth, DLC milking and micro transactions, they didnt have to increase base game before to sustain profit growth, and take the direct PR hit.

Corporation bad, grumble grumble.

 

[Frag Maniac]

That's why its annoying, because its the new normal and we never got a discount for all they saved. They can argue they never increased the price with inflation, but the reality is that profits were increasing with the money they saved from not producing boxes manuals and shipping, market growth, DLC milking and micro transactions, they didnt have to increase base game before to sustain profit growth, and take the direct PR hit.

Corporation bad, grumble grumble.

Again, you're not seeing the cost of creating and maintaining a digital distribution platform, and how those costs ae passed on to the publishers of these games. It's not as simple as greedy companies do greedy things like you make it sound. The fact is, if it were due to exorbitant profit margins vs volume sales, those whom are now competing with services like Steam would have been around MUCH longer.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

I dont believe the Rockstar, EA, and UBI platforms would exist if they were running at a net loss, thats not how it works. They probably make the money there from in game microtransactions that run through the store.

Epic does it with the Fortnite money because theres so damn much of it and they have a vain hope of profit in 5 years time.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I dont believe the Rockstar, EA, and UBI platforms would exist if they were running at a net loss, thats not how it works. They probably make the money there from in game microtransactions that run through the store.

Epic does it with the Fortnite money because theres so damn much of it and they have a vain hope of profit in 5 years time.

Why is everything to one extreme or another with you regarding profits? Where did anyone say or even imply publishers are operating at a net loss. That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Raven1221]

If I understand well, it is like the engine of UC4 with a male protagonist like in the first last of us. I could play that for sure. We will see.