Being one of the first games to support the PlayStation 4 Pro at launch – and including a native 4K setting with HDR, I might add – I started playing through The Last of Us Remastered to get a feel for the new tech. I'd intended just to have a quick look and see what HDR gaming looked like, but it didn't take long before I was absorbed in the game once more with nary a thought of graphics in mind. The title looks stunning on the PS4 Pro, by the way, but that's hardly the point anymore.
I was struck by a moment not far in where Joel stumbles across a diary upstairs in what looks like a young boy's bedroom. There's a bunkbed in the corner and some cheesy science-fiction movie posters on the wall. The room is full of colour and the late evening sun beams through the window highlighting the dust particles that float and shift as Joel rummages through the room looking for supplies – anything that might help him on his journey.
The diary lies there on top of the young boy's bookshelf, itself full of colourful looking books. Dust is clearly apparent on the shelves; it's been a while since anyone was here. Having already witnessed the events of the outbreak from Joel's perspective, and what it has cost him, we already have a sense of scale to the events. But we haven't heard it from the innocent perspective of a child before.
As I read the most recent few pages of the diary, the tone quickly changes from the positive to the negative. From the child's point-of-view, the outbreak means one thing: no more school. But the tone quickly changes and the confusion of the outbreak and how it affects the young boy comes through in the text. I don't even need to know exactly what is happening in his life to understand his plight.
Reading through this small section of the diary, I can empathise with his point of view. He's confused, and he's noticed that his parents are fighting while whispering at the same time. They don't want to scare the children, after all. But the things we pick up on as adults are so different to what we pick up on as children, and often the things adults do to protect them serve to highlight the issues even more.
Having grown angry at his son for listening to the radio the day before, the October 7th diary entry states, "I think Dad felt bad about yesterday. Gadget was asleep in my bed and Dad didn't say anything about it. He came in, petted him, sighed, and walked out. I've never seen him like this." Clearly the dog, Gadget, is not usually allowed in the bed, but given the circumstances, his father's perspective on the whole thing has shifted significantly.
It's these very moments that bring The Last of Us home to me. In a world with very few survivors, as we rummage around other peoples' dilapidated homes, it could quite easily be a desolate and dull place. But every single "level" or section of the game, every single home, garage, or dog kennel I come across holds memories of the world as it was before. They're not just props for us to play around in, the presence of the people that lived in these buildings are keenly felt.
These moments are by no means standard. In fact, they're moments that very rarely show up in other games. But it's these small details that elevate The Last of Us to the next level among its brethren. It's an aspect of gaming that is often sorely missing: soul. The Last of Us has soul in abundance. The aptly named Naughty Dog has tapped into something that very few other developers can equal, but which I sincerely hope to see more of in the future.
So as we move into a new era of console gaming with the new more powerful mid-cycle hardware, here's hoping that graphics will not be the sole focus moving forward. We still want games that are fun to play, and we still want games with soul. If the game is good enough, there won't be a pixel in sight regardless of resolution; we'll be swallowed up no matter what.
Are you a fan of The Last of Us Remastered's world building like Jacob? Do you believe that technology can help to power more immersive experiences – or is it the core of the game where most care and attention needs to be invested? Add some clarity to this conversation in the comments section below.
Comments 19
I agree with you on the world building in The Last of Us. I rate that game higher than the Uncharted series because everything fuses together seamlessly. It makes sense for Joel to be poking through homes because resources would need to be gathered, and thus getting this almost voyeuristic-like peek into people's lives is fascinating.
Everything about The Last of Us felt so well thought out to me. You could tell the designers had put thought into each and every environment, so the interiors of college dorms felt different to family homes and so on. And that makes it all the more poignant.
While I agree that we need more of this in games, though, I would argue that better tech and higher production values will enable developers to more convincingly realise these kinds of worlds. The only problem is cost really — it must have cost an absolute fortune to build a game as densely populated as The Last of Us is. I know when you watch the credits there are literally dozens of outsourced studios who helped with the artwork. And that cost is only going to get higher as resolutions increase.
Instead of focusing so much on resolutions devs should worry more about stability, accessibility, and gameplay; a game should be fun, immersive, and functional. The Last of Us is a great example of this, and you can tell that a great deal of careful consideration, hard work, and passion went into it. Not on just the artistic side of the game, but on the technical side too. It tells a very human story not just in the game, but behind it as well.
Stuff like this is why I'm not really that interested in the PS4 Pro, Xbox Scorpio, or whatever superpowered system everyone's coming up with these days. I know graphical fidelity and console power is important to a lot of gamers and developers these days, but in the end I just can't bring myself to care about it much unless it actually hinders my ability to play. I'm not interested in Horizon because it looks great (even though it does), I'm interested in it because the world looks amazing to explore and uncover. I don't enjoy Uncharted because of the 1080p resolution, I enjoy it because of the characters and setpieces. I certainly don't enjoy Metal Gear for running at 60fps. I enjoy it for the tactical stealth gameplay and admittedly insane story.
I'm not saying skimp out on the graphics, definitely not. I just don't think all of the hubbub over 4K is really that big a deal, at least at this time. What good is having a game run at the best possible resolution, the smoothest frame rate, and the most jaw-dropping, mouth-watering graphics if you can't get into the experience? I still get sucked into the games of yesteryears because of pure enjoyment. I still get sucked into Metal Gear Solid even though the cast barely have faces. The frame rate doesn't bug me in Red Dead Redemption. I've played PS2 games on a HD TV, where the graphics are at their ugliest and yet I still enjoy them. I know not everyone is like that, and that's perfectly fine. I'm not saying the tech is irrelevant, it is important. But I can't help but feel people put too much stock into the technical aspects when it comes to enjoying a game. As far as I'm concerned, it's only a big deal if a game is busted enough to be unplayable. I know that's been an issue this generation, but is it really so bad if a game is locked at 30fps?
@DerMeister Last gen Resolution and FPS was more of a PC thing. This gen it has been used as ammo in fanboy wars by little kids that have no idea what any of it means. The only time FPS bothers me on console or PC is when it's choppy, or stuttering, or freezing, or jittery. That makes my head hurt...
This obsessive focus on visual fidelity lately has been bumming me out. It's like console gamers have been infected with the same snobbishness and boorish fixation on specs that made me keep a lot of PC gaming communities at arm's length.
I play games to have fun and go on adventures, and it seems like people can lose sight of that.
So, while I'm no fan of TLOU, I can certainly appreciate the sentiment being expressed in this article.
I feel like moments like this were achieved two generations ago in Resident Evil 4. Sure Naughty Dog has refined the formula, but it's not like they've rewritten the book on game design. Graphical fidelity helps all games because it's primarily a visual medium.
I feel like this fairly succinctly sums up my feelings towards Pro, Scorpio, whatever. Yeah, new tech, lovely, I'm sure it all looks very pretty. But is it making the games play any better? No.
The industry is seemingly obsessed with teraflops and resolutions and HDR and other things I have no interest in whatsoever. All I want is games that build interesting worlds and give me fleshed out characters and that are fun to play. Mike Bithell made me care about squares and rectangles in Thomas Was Alone with nothing more than a voice over. 4K doesn't make one iota of difference to me.
Of course resolution means very little. The Last of Us is still the same game as it always was and even at 4k with pin-sharp visuals, it still has the sane lighting, textures etc. It still looks like a last gen game given resolution bump.BUT how much more atmospheric could it be with modern day lighting etc.
The attention to detail is something we have come to know, expect and admire with Naughty Dog. In Uncharted 4, that goes above and beyond the Last of Us. The fact that levels are much wider, more expansive means that ND have had to put a lot of detail in things many people won't even see as they take the shortest route from A to B. Take the Car chase sequence (a sequence every one must have seen) where every one of the multiple routes has been wonderfully crafted - where if you crash into something it reacts as it should. The attention to detail us incredible and something that many won't notice as they fly by in their jeep in a sequence less than 5 mins.
Games like BioShock, Batman: Arkham City, Dead Space etc all had soul and atmosphere too but none of these had 1080p+ resolutions.
Resolution etc isn't the 'important' aspect. We all know that! But you can't tell me that the Last of Us (or any of these games) would have the same impact if they had 'Minecraft' style visuals either. NO way would walking into that child's bedroom have the same feel, reading the diary have the same impact etc. The relationship between characters wouldn't feel the same either if we didn't get to see their facial expression, hear their delivery and read their words instead as we used to have to do in games.
The Pro bumps up the resolution but its still the same game for the most part. You could argue that some feel different at higher frame rate in those options. The Last of Us though is no different on PS3 to PS4 to PS4 Pro in its story or delivery but given the choice, which version would you most want to play? I bet its not the PS3 version! I can understand why some may pick PS4 as that delivers a smooth 60fps but if the 1800p version delivered 60fps, would that be the best? Why did so many leave the Xbox to jump on the PS4 - its NOT because of E3 2013 as in less than a year EVERYTHING that was an issue had been eliminated - inc having to buy Kinect. A lot of it was because the XB1 had lower resolution than the PS4.
Skyrim has more ambience and atmosphere in the remastered version. Not because of the 1080p but because of the lighting. However when things don't 'work' as expected, that pulls you out of that immersion - things like pop-in (inc textures), screen tear, weird/unusual physics, shimmer etc etc Having more power, more memory bandwidth etc can help developers create atmosphere and eliminate issues.
The Pro alone is nothing more than a device - no different from any of the other consoles ever, no different from PC's. Its down to the developers to craft these experiences that run on these devices.
You can't tell me that games play the same on the Pro either. Games like Tomb Raider, Infamous and the upcoming FFxv all run at higher frame rates - double in some places. A game like BF1 is much smoother with upto a 50% increase in frame rate as well as offering a higher resolution and in some areas higher visual effects too. Of the console versions, which is the 'best' version to play?
I wonder how many here opt to watch SD channels if they have HD channels? The content is exactly the same, the story is the same etc. Point is we all probably watch HD whenever possible. If we had 4k channels and 4k TV's we would all watch these instead of HD. I have watched films in 4k and notice things I never noticed before and whilst these may be trivial to the overall experience, they can add a little extra to it.
Resolution itself isn't important but it can add to an experience but its up to developers if they want to just bump the resolution, increase visuals and/or increase the frame rate and each of these has its merits.
@BAMozzy This article wasn't intended as a critique on the PS4 Pro at all, it was just an observational post based on my experiences playing through The Last of Us again in 4K. I'm not saying that graphics aren't important – I mean, I bought a PS4 Pro and a 4K HDR TV for a reason. I'm just hoping that graphics won't be the only improvements or focus at the expense of gameplay, depth, "soul", etc., moving forward. Hence in the final paragraph, "here's hoping that graphics will not be the sole focus moving forward".
Ratchet & Clank looks incredible on PS Pro. It's certainly not realistic looking, but it does enhance the gameplay making it more fun for me.
It's not necessarily the developers that are the problem. Look at any comment section on a major gaming website and it's littered with the toxic, spec-obsessed ramblings of an audience that takes joy in its own misery. Look at The Last Guardian, where journalists and gamers alike are split, with many declaring that it 'looks like a PS3 game'. Who cares!? I want to know if a game is fun. I want to know if its strengths are its storyline, its characters, its art direction, its soundtrack, its core concept, or - yes, sometimes - whether it's technical wizardry just makes you feel in awe of it. There is incredible variety in gaming today - better than any generation that has come before. Some of it is technically astounding, and some of it is a little wonky around the edges. But there are gems to be had in both of those situations.
@Jake3103 I wasn't saying you were critiquing the Pro but trying to put some perspective on the whole debate too. A lot of games from last generation had soul, had depth etc yet not one of these had more than 720p resolution. Skyrim hasn't changed its content with the remaster but the changes to lighting have created a much better ambience and atmosphere. The extra foliage also helps bring the world to life more instead of appearing more barren. Those are more important than the resolution.
Another good example would be the Digital Foundry Drive Club video comparing VR to standard on the same track. The resolution difference between the two is obvious but its all the other compromises they had to make to get the game to run at 60fps. Gone are the real time lighting, the trackside crowds and many of the trackside elements. Poles now pop-in too which breaks immersion. I could go on and on about the differences but no doubt that if the base PS4 had a suitable HDMI out, we could see similar compromises to reach a 4k presentation with many games.
Whether someone would buy these games that looked that 'ugly' with so much missing just because its 4k, I very much doubt it but I bet if we would prefer to play at 4k with all the effects, textures and peripheral details turned up to high/max than at 1080p or 720p with the same visual settings.
The developers rarely make meaningful sacrifices. Shadows are often the lowest setting because we pay little attention to them but certainly would notice if they weren't there or if they were wrong (angles, shape etc).Lighting can change the mood, the ambience the atmosphere of a game and so is relatively important. Particle effects can add something but not as much as lighting so can be dialled back a bit. I bet though that a developer would rather drop down in resolution than cut out shadows and/or lighting effects.
Whilst Tomb Raider does offer us the opportunity to play at 1080p with the effects on Max, on a 4k TV, the 4k mode is definitely the better option. The game is the same and plays the same - both locked at 30fps so it shows that in this case a higher resolution is better than higher visual effects.
We know visual presentation is important - look at Watchdogs, the division etc and how the 'downgrade' from E3 was received. But we all know this is just one aspect. In an ideal world we would probably all want native 4k, visual settings on Max and a solid 60fps but only if the game is 'worth' playing. If that isn't achievable (which it isn't on consoles in the majority of games) then we accept certain compromises to certain areas. Titanfall 2 and CoD both want 60fps and compromise on resolution to achieve this with Dynamic Scaling. CoD has never competed with BF visually but its also been unwilling to compromise on frame rate - certainly not in its MP. The last 3 though are not 'ugly' games by any stretch of the imagination.
The 'soul' you talk about though is in essence what the developers put in. Naughty Dog are master craftsmen at this. Maybe you prefer the darker tone of the Last of Us but that attention to detail, that back story of the characters, the worlds they create are full of soul and character. They understand that whether you are walking into a long deserted boys bedroom, walking through a deserted pirate village, exploring a museum/house etc the detail is as important as the 'story' itself. Everything 'fits' the setting, the mood, the story and the characters. I have never felt that they hadn't considered every blade of grass, the placement of every article in a room - whether long deserted or currently lived in. I know they may have had to sacrifice on some of their ultimate vision - like U4's 30fps for campaign or 900p MP on its MP but you don't feel they scaled back too much or cut elements to push for increased resolution. I am sure they could have done something to hit 1080p in MP - maybe remove mysticals, made smaller or less detailed maps.
I think that developers have this vision and then try their best (in most cases) to make it run at a 'reasonable' standard on limited hardware. Trying to get their games to run on these consoles is all about compromising their initial concept. If that means scaling back a bit on 'minor' visual settings to keep a 1080p resolution, then we have seen that throughout this generation. No doubt these games could have higher frame rates and/or visuals if they opted for 900p or even 720p. Would people have been happier if Bloodbourne was 720p but 60fps? Maybe, we won't know of course but I bet they would prefer 1080/60 to 720/60 and (assuming all the visual settings remained consistent) a 4k HDR 60fps version would be the best. The game would still be identical, still play the same, still have the same 'feel' in general but the 4k HDR would bring something more to the game.
Remastering a game, particularly those that do more than just bump the resolution, can bring something extra to the game. Look at Modern Warfare Remastered, that is still the same game in essence yet the look and 'feel' of the game is somewhat more than the original offered. Just on the first level, the training, when you walk outside and see all the extra characters, the tanks and aircraft overhead, that brings something the original didn't have. When you are in the Helicopter and Price reacts to the water splash, that adds something the original didn't have too. Yes the resolution adds a bit, but all these things you are talking about though is the developers and what they put in. I bet if any of last gen games were 'remastered' in the same way, we would prefer that to just a bump in resolution. As I said, even Skyrim's remastered adds something more than just the resolution increase alone would have. I am sure developers are not going to sacrifice their story, their depth and soul etc for a 4k resolution. As I said, even the PS4 could (in theory) run some games at upto 4k with some major compromises to the world they created, the draw distances, the lighting etc.
Enjoyed the article - I loved all those little moments from TLOU. It made the game - same with the chronicle of Ish you find further on.
Graphics, resolutions etc. are tools in a developers toolbox to be used to aid the game. The big studios can afford the best tools sure, but I agree with the point of the article that the tools are not selling points.
I feel that all the extra graphical fidelity that the pro brings to games like TLOU help enhance it but those moments needed to be designed and coded first. So I think if a developer can bring new tools to help tell a story or elicit an emotion and make you feel part of the game then great. The thing is that the game itself has to do that first.
@JoeBlogs and then you play Everybodies tennis on ps2 and realise that game is the best tennis game ever. No matter how good the pixel count, you cant beat perfection.
@neolit Agreed, fantastic game. Luckily I played both tlou and GTA v side by side for the first time on buying the ps4, those 2 games gave me a real gaming hangover after completion - nothings touched them since.
@get2sammyb It also costs an absolute fortune to get the pixels and colours that come with a bloody 30ms response time!
The pro isn't powerful enough to deliver more than "slightly better".
I'm concerned that how hard you're pushing it will reflect poorly on you as it becomes increasingly apparent that it offers little to gamers.
@Neolit It's a great game, but some parts of it are annoying and towards the end the combat gets old. I wouldn't say it's peerless.
@Wesker I watched a full playthrough, and at no point was I interested in playing it. Annoying crafting, pretentious poe faced story, ending that made me hate the protagonist...
The only reason I'm glad I even watched it at all is that I knew not to buy it.
@TheGZeus the crafting, water puzzles and stealth mechanics are tedious. A pet peeve for me is that I don't like games that make it clear that they want you to take each enemy out silently when it's more fun to fight them head on. I had the same problem with Uncharted 4. The high watermark for Naughty Dog is still Uncharted 2 IMO.
Without the graphics games like The Last of Us wouldn't hold up very well at all, little do you know it when looking at a character on screen your seeing these without you even thinking about. Emotion on a characters face through motion capture, every little detail your picking up on thanks to graphics.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...