We've already shared our thoughts on The Last of Us Part 1's PC port, but the frustration and disappointment crosses over into this week's DF Direct Weekly, beginning with our thoughts on how we would actually cover a game that is clearly some way off completion?
Digital Foundry has been trying to carve out a niche in the crowded, very high quality PC scene by concentrating on the games rather than the benchmarks, demystifying what graphics settings actually do and then offer optimised alternatives to the idea of whacking everything up to ultra and hoping for the best. The thing is, The Last of Us Part 1 not only has one of the most massively exhaustive settings menus we've ever seen, but it's equally clear that there are foundational issues that prevent an optimal experience in the first place, making our concept borderline pointless in this case. Clearly there are bigger fish to fry in assessing this game.
Our solution was to spend a couple of days looking at it in an attempt to get some idea of how it works and what the problems are, then to put together a 'live play' comparison with two PC rigs - one with issues, one (relatively) without - then to stack those up against the source PlayStation 5 code. It's an idea I originally came up with in adapting our Retro PC Time Capsule format - where we'd actually retain the live comparison angle, but for new games instead, stacking up the low, medium and high recommended specs actually recommended by developers to see what you actually get. This time though, we opted for the console, a console equivalent spec and an out-and-out monster rig.