The Last of Us PS4 vs PS3 Version Side by Side Comparison

Junkie Monkeys: Naughty Dog recently released a small teaser for The Last of Us Remastered for the PlayStation 4. Here’s how the remastered scene looks compared to the PlayStation 3 version.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Jedislayer1863d ago

I do want to play this again for ps4, but i don't know about shelling out another 59.99 for a game i bought over a year ago. at least there should be a $10.00 upgrade and I hope naughty Dog at least takes that into consideration.

Nitrowolf21863d ago

Yea I am hoping for an upgrade option for Digital buyers at least.

rodiabloalmeida1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

I own a PS3 and one of my games is The Last of Us. But if I happen to buy a PS4 like tomorrow or in a near future, I wouldn't buy TLoU Remaster for 60 bucks. An upgrade would be very welcome though. Or I would buy it when the price gets lower.

1863d ago
rodiabloalmeida1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

And when I say lower price, I really mean lower. PS3 version is already good enough. This remaster is good if you never played the original PS3 version. 60 bucks is too much if you already has the PS3 version.

Flutterby1863d ago

I really don't think this game is aimed at the people who already bought it, there are 10s of millions of people that haven't played it, I myself held off buying any new games for the ps3 as soon as the ps4 was announced, so to me and the other 70 or so million ps3 owners that didn't play it it's a good thing and it doesn't need to be reduced in price.

Baka-akaB1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

There are still some of those previous owners that knows that while a masterpiece , the game was developed in an ongoing struggle with an ageing hardware .

Those people dont mind double dipping for an enhanced and most all perfectly fluid and smooth experience of the game .

Not to mention those that ignored dlc and look forward to potential additions and small changes .

If anything , history shows the ones buying hd remaster and remakes are quite often those that already got the game .
Only this time around TLOUS is such a classic and prising title already , that people that went the 360 or other platforms route last gen , and happens to own a ps4 can and will use the opportunity to try it .

And of course a few ps3 owners that held themselves back in anticipation

trancefreak1863d ago

-And that is the exact reason I will be buying BAKA

I played this game most likely 5 play threw"s and was halfway threw survivor mode when the PS4 came out.

The game was awesome and i always imagined what it feel like on a next gen console. Sometimes the game chugged along pushing the PS3 to it's limits. Now I am ready for a much more fluid experience.

We will have to wait until Naughty releases more footage of different sections to really see how much more detail has been added.

Whom ever has played the game knows there are some beautiful settings threw the journey of TLOU.

alexkoepp1863d ago

Really showcases the extreme power of the ps4

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1863d ago
skyrim1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

Completely agree I want to play it on ps4 but I don't think i want to shell out 60 dollars as well.Would love to try it though see the improvements for myself.

trancefreak1863d ago

I agree and I will most likely wait for a price drop but I can't help to wonder if this intentional to produce a sequel. Not the pricing but the platform.

A lot of new gamers, Xbox converts, multiplat owners might see it differently coming from a different platform last gen.

AgentSmithPS41863d ago

I never got to play this and right now there are too many questionable games out there so I'm glad I don't have to worry about buying this.

T21863d ago

Me too, but for those who bought the original, either maybe there will be an upgrade or just wait 6 months and get it for 30 bucks, you did just play it so no big deal

SasukeX161863d ago

I get your point but it's only been 10 months

Prime1571863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

I get your point about time, but sometimes it's supply and demand.

Ausbo1863d ago

I would just wait. These remastered games drop in price very quickly

ABizzel11863d ago


Tomb Raider was $20 off on amazon 2 weeks later. However, I can see them being a bit more stingy with TLoU, considering everyone knows it's one of the best games last gen, and there are a bunch of former xbox gamers wanting to play it.

I couldn't support, Tomb Raider (had the digital version on PS3 anyway) or Ground Zeroes (Redbox $2) when they did it, and I won't support this either, but as soon as that price drop happens it's mine.

MatrixxGT1863d ago

Exactly, as soon as the sucker sales drop so will the price. You can get TR for $ 25-35 now yet there was people complaining about it being 60.

Price will go down quick, probably a month after release.

Geekman1863d ago

The only reason I'm not calling this game Fraud Edition is because it will let 360 fans who switched to PS4 play The Last Of Us. Of course, I still feel cheated, considering this wouldn't have had to happen had the PS4 been given Backwards Compatibility.

hkgamer1863d ago

backwards compatibility was never going to happen. not for ps3 games anyway.

its also a shame that tomb raider got attacked so much because of rleasing the definitive version and nothing is being said about tlou

Tempest3171863d ago

Would you feel cheated when backward compatibility added 150-200 (at least)dollars in price and increased the ps4 form facto by a considerable amount? They cant magically add in bc, not hardware based anyways, and software bc is a far cry (in most cases) from perfect, and is mediocre in most cases ive seen. Somy found out last gen that it wasnt viable, amd that a lot of gamers didnt want it or like it.

Geekman1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

@hkgamer. The Wii U and 3DS are the cheapest current gen hardwares on the market, (Aside from the Ouya.) and both have backwards compatibility. I doubt those features added on 150-200 dollars worth of money into development? I get what you're saying, but THAT much money?

Delsin_Rowe1863d ago

The first version of PS3 had back compability but look what happen no body wanted it since it with the backwards compality raised the PS3 price is if PS4 would have BC then it will cost more. Sony did suffer for it in couple of years with the first PS3 edition loosing money but now they learned there no need since people didn't bought it. Well there PlayStation Now it's a stream Backward Compatibility that add HD definition to PS1-3 games, with added new mission in every games that could be play on PC, PS3, PSVITA,TABLETS, PHONES, TV, PS4.

Tempest3171863d ago


It absolutely would have added that much. Think about it, theyre taking 90% of the hardware of the ps3 and shoving it into the same box. But they cant just pull pieces out of the ps3 and put them in, the have to redesign them to get the to fit with ps4 hardware and of course have to factor in the extra heat(possibly adding more cooling hardware) amd likely a bigger power supply than ps4 has currently.

The 3ds and wii u are bc with cheap and relatively simple (low power envelope/smaller die)hardware. Im sure the cell would require quite a bit more than either of those do

Baccra171862d ago (Edited 1862d ago )

@below - Why is it that everyone always spouts the same propaganda about backwards compatibility?

According to Jack Tretton himself in an interview in the early days of PS3, having backwards compatibility only added PENNIES to the price of the PS3 system. They got rid of backwards compatibility because PS3 couldn't compete with PS2! No one wanted to buy the crap that was offered to PS3 at the beginning of it's life for the outrageous price of $60 when you had great/better games on the PS2 that were priced $49.99, $39.99, and even less! That's why they REALLY got rid of backwards compatibility, and the reason why they made SURE it wasn't here now.

Listen to Cherny's interviews about PS4 again- developers did not want backwards compatibility. Why would that be? Oh, yeah- they would have to compete with PS3 games that would be cheaper and cost less- cutting into the sales of the "next-gen" titles they produced.

Tempest3171862d ago


It seems we must have read two completely different interviews then. Do you have a link to the source? If it only cost pennies, then why did the ps3 systems without the chip get a $100 price drop after they were removed?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1862d ago
hkgamer1863d ago

an upgrade would have been nice. but that doesnt really have to happen.

i do think that sony or publishers should start giving gamers a crossbuy option. i wouldnt mind payin an extra £10-15 for a vita version of a ps3/4 game. obviously i dont mean the last of us, but i am saying for multiplat games.

Prime1571863d ago

An upgrade option for $30 ish would be awesome.

Lightning Mr Bubbles1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

I hope the final version ends up looking better than that. From that little video it looks the same as the PS3 version.

Edit: Except the view does look a bit closer.

bromtown1863d ago

Over a year ago? It only came out in June 2013.

combatcash1863d ago

I think that's sony's call. I would have loved if they would have improved the textures actually reworked the game a bit more.

wannabe gamer1863d ago

you bought it over a year ago???? it hasnt even been out for a year yet.

Syntax-Error1863d ago

Ah hell yeah this is WORTH $60....NOT

Syntax-Error1863d ago

You guys are a bunch of hypocrites. 3 days ago this site was flooded with positive comments about buying again and getting it in 1080p at 60FPS w/ DLC. Now everyone is against it. GTFOH you frauds. One dude told me he was going to bubble me down because I WAS TROLLING by saying Sony should be ashamed of themselves by selling a rehashed PS3 game on PS4 for full price. Now everyone agrees all of a sudden after looking at the side by side comparison. Middle finger to all of you

DoubleM701862d ago

So far it doesn't look like a strong enough upgrade to play it again. My honest opinion is that they putting out this game because none of the 1st party games are not coming until Christmas.

Syntax-Error1862d ago (Edited 1862d ago )

DoubleM, I have been saying that for a while now. I am sure Sony has exclusives, but they are not ready and this game is nothing but filler. They are trying to recoup some money while they are in hiatus. The original game sold 4.4M, so if they sell 1M on rehashed bullshit, that's 60M for doing NOTHING. It's a win/win for them. Naughty Dog said the team has already started work on Uncharted 4, so they are not bringing anything out anytime soon, so this money funds those projects

Jonny5isalive1863d ago

yes, PS4 has closer Giraffes. I think its a little late for 10$ upgrade. Its not coming out a few weeks after ps3 version. Would be cool if it cost 40$, but its pretty new of a game.

I will buy it again when it goes on sale because I sold my ps3 and I really liked the multiplayer. I hope they add a harder mode than survivor too. That would be cool.

Canadianfubar1862d ago

Try 69.99 in Canada....holy hell. That is way to much for a remastered game. Remastered games should be sold for at least $10 bucks less mandatory than new IPS.
I will not being paying that much for a older gamer, sorry Sony!!

Dynasty20211862d ago (Edited 1862d ago )

£40-50 on TLOU? I frigging LOVED TLOU on PS3, easily in my top 5 games of all time, even as a PC player, but I wouldn't honestly pay more than around £20 for this.

It's great for those that have never played the game and have rightfully converted from Xbox to PS4, and easy money for ND and Sony from the morons that buy the game again at full price, but to those that have played it, it's kinda pointless.

I'll happily wait until at least the end of the year before picking this up 2nd hand.

_FantasmA_1862d ago

I don't think the $10 upgrade would fair because that mean you'd just pay $10 and get the remastered version plus all the extra content. If they do a $10 upgrade, you should only get the base game, otherwise all those people that bought the season pass or individual packs are going to be pissed.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 1862d ago
THC CELL1863d ago

worst side by side ever, also im going to give naughty dog my money as this game is worth it.

theEx1Le1863d ago

I agree, The new version is 1080p and the crappy youtube video wouldn't do it justice in normal circumstances but the fact it only goes to 720p is absurd in a comparison.

corvusmd1863d ago

Really not a huge difference according to this video.

Oner1863d ago

You are technically correct, as

a) Youtube only supports 30fps so you really can't "SEE" a difference
b) The video itself is not a native resolution direct capture of either game
c) And it has also been know because it's a Youtube video.

But something tells me you didn't mean it the way I explained it.


And according to the pics from other news, its not the video, its not youtube, theres almost NO difference so its not worth 60 bucks, just for the poeple who havent played it yet.

ScareFactor1863d ago

But is okay because it is a Playstation exclusive

Oner1862d ago (Edited 1862d ago )

So hold up IIZANGETSUII, let me get this straight...what you are trying to say is that you can somehow actually tell the difference between how frames per second look without actually having to see them correctly in motion?

Because still/static images of pics cannot in any way shape or form ~ depict MOTION. i.e. FPS (frames per second) thus they need to be viewed in their respective speed properly.

And the videos used in this article were captured & processed on Youtube which as I said has a 30fps cap as well as compresses/artifacts the displayed file.

So while I am not particularly surprised to have to basically re-iterate the same thing in my previous comment, I am amazed that you can somehow "see" motion (fps) in a still image/picture. When that in itself makes the game VISUALLY DIFFERENT.

Not too mention, how you can somehow manage to NOT see graphic fidelity in the comparison for some odd reason?


@Oner The "graphic fidelity" that youre talking about its not that great for a "remastered" edition that not even 1 yr old, plus the 60fps thing will not make the graphics better, its just make the game looks smoother, just that.

AND like i said its worth for the people who didnt play it before or just for the die hard fans.


@Oner, So your answer is a link that show exactly what im talking about even in the comments rofl, thanks man.

Oner1860d ago (Edited 1860d ago )

Yep it's confirmed, you are delusional. You see/believe what you want to see/believe and not the truth based on actual facts.

You just proved your bias and closed minded pov...either that or you're not that good of a gamer if you CAN'T see a difference ~ my guess all of the above (especially the latter).

Here I'll make it simple and just quote DigitalRaptor (I am sure you saw it but refuse to acknowledge it) from the same article that oddly enough you didn't even comment in ~

"Double the pixel density, higher resolution textures, better anti-aliasing, better lighting, better shadows, smoother frame rate."

If after that you STILL want to hold ever so desperately onto the "almost no difference" pov then you really need some deep introspective on why you so adamantly believe something that is not true.

But even then I highly doubt you have the capability or maturity to admit it.


@Oner Sure w/e makes you happy man, seem like u refuse to read the comments, im not the only one saying theres almost no difference but apparently you just can admit that most of the poeple see no big improvement just the Sony fanboys that are plague in this site, and by your history comment well your one of them, i shoulda looked for that before, shame on me for arguing with a fanboy, im out peace.

Oner1860d ago

LMFAO! You claim I'm a fanboy yet you swear there is "no difference" when the absolute fact there I said you are delusional. Only a true fanboy would vehemently deny facts under any circumstance as you have proven here (as well as looking over your previous posts as well).

But whatever you're the one that has to #dealwithit for this whole generation of being wrong at every turn.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1860d ago
HexxedAvenger1863d ago

I will get this. Seeing as I haven't played the ps3 version yet.

oODEADPOOLOo1863d ago (Edited 1863d ago )

Not the best comparison, but its still too early for one... and IDK if its just me but when I saw the giraffes move on the PS4 version they looked like they were on fast forward and the PS3 slide showed them moving slower, but more "majestically". I'll probably get this eventually since I never got to play it, comparison dosen't really turn me away even if graphics were to be similar.