Every article tag can be clicked to get a list of all articles in that category. Every article tag also has an RSS feed! You can customize an RSS feed too!
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.

The Last of Us has more Steam Deck improvements and lots of other fixes

By - | Views: 32,176

Fires continue to be put out by Naughty Dog and Iron Galaxy as they fix up The Last of Us, with a new patch landing with lots of fixes.

Available in v1.0.3 are these changes just for the Steam Deck:

  • Fixed an issue where the native UI overlapped the ‘Look’ prompt.
  • Fixed an issue where the DualSense™ motion sensor function may not register the player shaking the camera to fix the flashlight when prompted.
  • [Left Behind] Increased the size of the Arcade’s mini-game button user interface.

Performance hasn't really been fixed up yet for Steam Deck, with it still pretty messy in lots of places and it's currently rated as Unsupported by Valve through Deck Verified. As Naughty Dog's Neil Druckmann said previously "Getting VERIFIED isn’t a priority. Optimization & stability (on the Steam Deck & other pc platforms) is!".

So eventually, once it's had more optimizations and fixes across the whole game, it might eventually be a reasonable experience on Steam Deck. At least on desktop Linux last I checked it worked reasonably well and this patch does include numerous crash bug fixes, texture problems and lots of other fixes.

You can buy it on Humble Store and Steam.

If you're playing it or attempting to, how has your experience been?

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
13 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
14 comments
Page: 1/2»
  Go to:

My guess is that Naughty Dog will lose or have already lost the window of zeitgeist to convert tv series fans to game fans. What tiny portion that may be will probably not wait to play this and move on to whatever the hip new thing may be. Most people I’ve discussed the topic with really don’t play games and only watched the show, another small portion have only played the game 10 years ago (and most have no incentive to return) and the rest have never played or watched the show.

The more you fumble a release the odds are that no one cares about the game that’s known for enticing cutscenes and okay game play. Those who will pick it up are going to be die hards (honestly never met anyone jazzed about the series) or casually interested who manage a back log.

> As Naughty Dog's Neil Druckmann said previously "Getting VERIFIED isn’t a priority. Optimization & stability (on the Steam Deck & other pc platforms) is!".

Sorry Druckmann but that’s pretty much the same thing.


Last edited by itscalledreality on 15 April 2023 at 6:40 pm UTC
rustigsmed Apr 16
Don't give these fools your money. How many years did they have to get the launch right?
pete910 Apr 16
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: itscalledreality> As Naughty Dog's Neil Druckmann said previously "Getting VERIFIED isn’t a priority. Optimization & stability (on the Steam Deck & other pc platforms) is!".

Food for thought Naughty Dog!

Do the optimisations and stability testing before release
FireGate_13 Apr 16
Man, please stop suggesting that they improved this game. 5 patches and counting, and still constant 100% cpu usage, huge vram and ram numbers, crashes and stutters.. this port is still the worst..
Eike Apr 16
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: FireGate_13Man, please stop suggesting that they improved this game. 5 patches and counting, and still constant 100% cpu usage, huge vram and ram numbers, crashes and stutters.. this port is still the worst..

100% CPU usage is not necessarily a bad thing, though.

I always compare it to workers: If you hired some workers, you do want them to work if there's still work to do. (Of course, it's not useful if they're just running in circles.)


Last edited by Eike on 16 April 2023 at 6:38 pm UTC
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: FireGate_13Man, please stop suggesting that they improved this game. 5 patches and counting, and still constant 100% cpu usage, huge vram and ram numbers, crashes and stutters.. this port is still the worst..

100% CPU usage is not necessarily a bad thing, though.

I always compare it to workers: If you hired some workers, you do want them to work if there's still work to do. (Of course, it's not useful if they're just running in circles.)

It’s bad because there leaves no room for any process to use the CPU, not even itself. Your comparison would be closer to RAM usage.
Just announce a Bloodbourne port already! No one wants midgrade Naughty Dog games.
Eike Apr 16
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: itscalledreality
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: FireGate_13Man, please stop suggesting that they improved this game. 5 patches and counting, and still constant 100% cpu usage, huge vram and ram numbers, crashes and stutters.. this port is still the worst..

100% CPU usage is not necessarily a bad thing, though.

I always compare it to workers: If you hired some workers, you do want them to work if there's still work to do. (Of course, it's not useful if they're just running in circles.)

It’s bad because there leaves no room for any process to use the CPU, not even itself. Your comparison would be closer to RAM usage.

If there's enough useful stuff to compute, it should take 100% CPU. The alternative would be leaving CPU unused despite having calculations to do, and thus needlessly running too slow. If you don't agree, imagine a dual or even single core: The game must make full use of it. And if it's for enough to do for say 12 cores - still use what you need.

A bad thing would be using all resources just to run at 1000 fps. (Yes, I did see that, on a point and click.)


Last edited by Eike on 16 April 2023 at 7:37 pm UTC
Klaas Apr 16
Quoting: EikeIf there's enough useful stuff to compute, it should take 100% CPU.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My take is: If the frame rate is locked, there is a high probability that it should be < 100% load.
Eike Apr 16
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: Klaas
Quoting: EikeIf there's enough useful stuff to compute, it should take 100% CPU.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My take is: If the frame rate is locked, there is a high probability that it should be < 100% load.
If the frame rate is locked to a value that your CPU can do without stress, yes, your right.

Modern games are usually GPU or CPU limited on a given system - or the system is strong enough on both ends to cope with what's asked for. But if it's CPU limited, CPU should be used 100%, if it's GPU limited the GPU. (Ideally. Especially for GPUs, 100% usage of all those different parts is probably hard to reach.)
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone with no article paywalls. We also don't have tons of adverts, there's also no tracking and we respect your privacy. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.