Why didn't they just port the PS3 version?

[Steel, my beloved]

I feel like potentially a lot of issues could have been avoided, lower spec requirements, potentially easier to optimize, etc. Or at least the PS4 remaster of the Last of Us. But again, I'm not a technical expert when it comes to this stuff so I'm kind of talking out of my ass tbh.

[Valeriya]

Because it wouldn't have made sense to bring the original version with the Remake on PS5. Many problems have been fixed and more updates will come.

[Steel, my beloved]

Maybe its just me but I feel like the ps3 version looked fine and didn't warrant a remake a first place is what I meant. Just could have brough the ps4 remaster to ps5 and pc tbh.

[episoder]

the ps3 version does not have the fidelity and graphics of a current gen game. let's be honest. you would not wanna play that on a pc in 4k these days. you gotta thank them they took the time and huge effort to upgrade the whole game graphcis to get it where part 2 is.

[MooP]

Because the PS3 version would be harder to port & likely run worse on PC.
You don't understand how difficult it was for devs to program on the PS3 back in the day...

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34maij/eli5_what_exactly_makes_the_playstation_3_so_hard/

Also once this version is patched up on PC the Part 2 release should be better because both titles are on the same engine...

[mhmtkfz]

The remake version of the game looks much better than the ps3 and remastered version. Apart from improving the game visually, some important changes also allow this game, which was released in 2013, to be experienced in the best way by the players in 2023 as a new generation. Even the animations of the NPCs have changed.

[episoder]

Originally posted by MooP:

PS3 version would be harder to port...
You don't understand how difficult it was for devs to program on the PS3 back in the day...

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34maij/eli5_what_exactly_makes_the_playstation_3_so_hard/

ps3 porting isn't that hard, in theory. you recompile the c++ code for pc and there you have it. you have 2 cores. for sure need to take a deep dive in assembly to recode the 7/8 simd vector coprocessors. which 1 is reserved for os and function decryption and 1 shut down for production yield. basicly you need a 8 core cpu to run a native port at 3.something Ghz. and deliver 200 gigaflops. or you recode all the spu code for compute shaders. the average pc does that. the graphics is just a 7800 gtx. we got way more power then that now.

[Steel, my beloved]

Originally posted by MooP:

Because the PS3 version would be harder to port & likely run worse on PC.
You don't understand how difficult it was for devs to program on the PS3 back in the day...

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34maij/eli5_what_exactly_makes_the_playstation_3_so_hard/

Also once this version is patched up on PC the Part 2 release should be better because both titles are on the same engine...

The people behind The Unfinished Swan and Journey Steam ports seemed to do it fine.

[Cloudwalk]

Originally posted by episoder:

Originally posted by MooP:

PS3 version would be harder to port...
You don't understand how difficult it was for devs to program on the PS3 back in the day...

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34maij/eli5_what_exactly_makes_the_playstation_3_so_hard/

ps3 porting isn't that hard, in theory. you recompile the c++ code for pc and there you have it. you have 2 cores. for sure need to take a deep dive in assembly to recode the 7/8 simd vector coprocessors. which 1 is reserved for os and function decryption and 1 shut down for production yield. basicly you need a 8 core cpu to run a native port at 3.something Ghz. and deliver 200 gigaflops. or you recode all the spu code for compute shaders. the average pc does that. the graphics is just a 7800 gtx. we got way more power then that now.

The PS3 version was one of the games that was built with the PS3 architecture in mind. Ignoring the fact that all of the shader code would have to be ported, the game's internal data structures and pipelines are likely deliberately arranged to take advantage of the massive cachelines and SIMD capabilities. There's no direct parallel on x86 PC for a 1:1 port. It would run like crap. The PC architecture is layers of 25+ year old ducttape and always had shortcomings with latency, which is the real issue in this context, rather than raw performance. Cache misses are one of the biggest bottlenecks in game engines. Having to fetch from RAM to get needed data across the already slower PCIe bus for the GPU can waste precious milliseconds of frametime. Those 7 cores had a specialized architecture that simply doesn't map to PC as-is.

Besides, it was already ported to x86 for the PS4.

[SpielSatzFail]

I want the best version even if this means having to wait six more months until it's finally playable.
Remember that for PC only players (like me) this is the first time ever, so why would I want to play it with ten year old grafics? I don't have that PS3 nostalgia.

[Jedimindtrickonyou]

Originally posted by Cloudwalk:

Originally posted by episoder:

ps3 porting isn't that hard, in theory. you recompile the c++ code for pc and there you have it. you have 2 cores. for sure need to take a deep dive in assembly to recode the 7/8 simd vector coprocessors. which 1 is reserved for os and function decryption and 1 shut down for production yield. basicly you need a 8 core cpu to run a native port at 3.something Ghz. and deliver 200 gigaflops. or you recode all the spu code for compute shaders. the average pc does that. the graphics is just a 7800 gtx. we got way more power then that now.

The PS3 version was one of the games that was built with the PS3 architecture in mind. Ignoring the fact that all of the shader code would have to be ported, the game's internal data structures and pipelines are likely deliberately arranged to take advantage of the massive cachelines and SIMD capabilities. There's no direct parallel on x86 PC for a 1:1 port. It would run like crap. The PC architecture is layers of 25+ year old ducttape and always had shortcomings with latency, which is the real issue in this context, rather than raw performance. Cache misses are one of the biggest bottlenecks in game engines. Having to fetch from RAM to get needed data across the already slower PCIe bus for the GPU can waste precious milliseconds of frametime. Those 7 cores had a specialized architecture that simply doesn't map to PC as-is.

Besides, it was already ported to x86 for the PS4.

Good read, I wish there were more people writing informative statements like this in the various discussion forums.

[CallMeBronko]

Because it has been remade entirely with their heavly improved engine out of tlou 2

[groover]

The only thing I miss from the old version is the colour saturation. Some scenes, namely outdoor shots, are more colourful on the PS3/4. By contrast, Part 1 seems to be using the typical moody desaturation filters that are rampant in modern film. You can notice this in a few comparison shots. It's probably relatively easy to mod it though.

[KneeKo]

The trickiest part in porting is the hardware architecture. This is why the newer AAA games like Jedi Survivor runs like crap. The developers try to save money and time by making a gun that runs on a single hardware architecture, i.e. the PS5. Porting it to PC is trickier, much more time-consuming, and much more expensive.

Don't believe the nerds who thinks just because they know the hardware of the PS5 or they can build a PC means they also know how to port games.

The problem here is even two PCs with very identical configuration can run into different problems. For example, if a game is unoptimized, even if it's a benchmark scene, the game may crash at a different point in the other PC, but again a different point in the benchmark on the other. The inherent problem lies with the architecture of each individual piece of hardware, e.g. the GPU.

This is the same problem overclocking has. One GPU may overclock better over the other, even if they are an identical model and make.

Not to say the developers are such egotistical maniacs deciding to hire a cheap porting team to make as much money as possible, because somehow they think the greedy income of mobile/gacha trash games is what they should be making.

[Leshariant]

PS4 ver. is best ver.

[Jedimindtrickonyou]

Originally posted by Havoc:

The trickiest part in porting is the hardware architecture. This is why the newer AAA games like Jedi Survivor runs like crap. The developers try to save money and time by making a gun that runs on a single hardware architecture, i.e. the PS5. Porting it to PC is trickier, much more time-consuming, and much more expensive.

Don't believe the nerds who thinks just because they know the hardware of the PS5 or they can build a PC means they also know how to port games.

The problem here is even two PCs with very identical configuration can run into different problems. For example, if a game is unoptimized, even if it's a benchmark scene, the game may crash at a different point in the other PC, but again a different point in the benchmark on the other. The inherent problem lies with the architecture of each individual piece of hardware, e.g. the GPU.

This is the same problem overclocking has. One GPU may overclock better over the other, even if they are an identical model and make.

Not to say the developers are such egotistical maniacs deciding to hire a cheap porting team to make as much money as possible, because somehow they think the greedy income of mobile/gacha trash games is what they should be making.

Do you (or anyone else here) know if there any developers making games on the same scale as Jedi Survivor that target PC first instead of console? Presumably ones like Asobo, Remedy, 4A games, etc are in a better position in this regard since they are building games using their own in-house engines, instead of relying on epic like so many others developers are nowadays. I get that porting to PC is hard (and not saying I know much about it at all just because I can build a PC) but wouldn’t the PC install base be larger than just PS5/Xbox Series S + X? Supposedly Sony has sold around 40 million PS5s and Xbox around 20 million. Why not target PC first with the types of games that will run on current gen consoles but not last gen (like Jedi Survivor for example)?