The Last of Us just cant escape controversy, it seems.
However, the bones are the same.
Just how far does a remake have to go to justify its own existence these days?
A remaster doesnt need to have gameplay improvements, but they would be very welcome.
It’s also one of the best horror games you could play today.
How did Resident Evil 2 get away with it, when The Last of Us Part 1 didnt?
Resident Evil 2s remake avoids this by giving players an almost entirely new game to play.
Time is obviously a factor too.
Take Demons Souls - the very first entry in FromSoftwares now-thriving Souls franchise.
It didnt help that the trilogy ended up launching as a buggy, glitchy mess.
That never goes over well.
This remake has guts, with timey-wimey twists that set it apart from its peers entirely.
This direction will always be controversial, but it also gives an old game something new to say.
Videogame remakes are always going to be an incredibly subjective thing.
Who wouldn’t jump at the chance to approach something they love with fresh eyes?
Thats an unfair expectation to be sure, but some remakes reach for those heights anyway.
Neither approach is wrong, but one is definitely more interesting than the other.
