The Last of Us Exceeds 3.4 Million Units In Sales Worldwide

Sony confirmed today that the global sales for the PlayStation 3-exclusive game from Naughty Dog, The Last of Us, has exceeded 3.4 million units in sales as of July 3. The sales figure was met in less than three weeks since its global launch on June 14, 2013.

The PS3-exclusive title met both critical and popular acclaim upon its release, seeing near-perfect scores across the board and “surpassed all sales expectations to become the fastest-selling PS3 title of 2013,” according to a press release sent out today by the publisher.

In The Last of Us, players take on the role of Joel, a man tasked with the protection of a young girl named Ellie as they venture across a post-apocalyptic United States that’s been rendered inhospitable to human life by a strange disease taking the form of the cordyceps fungus, which turns humans into mindless husks—zombies, in other words.

Not so much a zombie shooter as it is an interactive drama, The Last of Us centers upon the trials and tribulations of Joel and Ellie as they explore the depths of humanity through emotionally charged moments centering on themes of survival, loyalty, love, and redemption.

“These sales figures are a testament to the blockbuster quality of The Last of Us,” said Shuhei Yoshida, President of Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios. “The teams at Naughty Dog are true visionaries and their storytelling capabilities are second to none, this title is an undisputed demonstration of that. SCE continues to be committed to delivering unique gameplay experiences that redefine the interactive entertainment industry and The Last of Us is a perfect example.”

The game is currently available on sale on Blu-Ray as well as digital through the PlayStation Network.

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

21 Comments on The Last of Us Exceeds 3.4 Million Units In Sales Worldwide


On July 9, 2013 at 11:53 am

Well, I guess the game industry found a way to sell a game by paying for good reviews and decrease marketing to save money.

I have been playing games for over 30 years and no game I have played deserves a 10, a 5 or whatever the score is. There is always a flaw. Whether it be controls, gameplay, games AI, game difficulty, games ending, game bugs, games length, loading time, cutscenes, same enemy models, lack of weapons, challenges, rewards, replay value, unlocks etc.

This game will be the most overrated game of all time. Just like the Dark Knight is in movies. I just don’t get it. It’s mind boggling.


On July 9, 2013 at 12:08 pm

Unfortunately, I will probably not be playing this one just for the fact that I don’t own a PS3 so I really can’t argue towards or against why it got the scores it did.

It’s the fact the it was produced by naughty dog is what gets me. If naughty dog has done other projects here that weren’t big name sellers, I’ve not heard of them. And I really doubt people will say this game is BAD but the reviews could still be a bit high.

Also, unless I’m really unaware of they’re short comings,, naughty dog has been known to make some pretty outstanding titles. Hell crash bandicoot could have become the mario or sonic of sony if they had pushed it. And Jak and Daxter was (at the time) arguably said to be the greatest video game made.


On July 9, 2013 at 7:05 pm

I can only speak to my personal experience with the game. But even if you go in with the expectation that it’s overrated, I can promise you you’ll think it’s special. There’s no way in hell reviews were “bought.”

For some, myself included, special was all it takes in the twilight of the AA game market. Plus when cranked up on the higher difficulty the game play really shines and stings.

The REAL knock down drag out fight will be between this game and telltale’s the walking dead. That’s gonna be messy.

Ron Whitaker

On July 10, 2013 at 9:31 am

@Michael – Really? Paying for good reviews? Please don’t insult the intelligence of the folks around here by dragging out that tired old song. No one in the games industry gets paid for a review, except by the outlet they write for. Period. I’ve been working this side of the business for a decade, and despite what commenters might think, there’s no shady guy in a silk suit passing out checks to game journalists.

It’s a fun fantasy, but it couldn’t be further from reality.

Les Hurst

On July 10, 2013 at 9:39 am

@Ron Whitaker: Confirmation bias, I’m afraid. You haven’t encountered it, so therefore you assume it doesn’t happen. Obviously you need to get educated on the case of Jeff Gerstmann, among others.

The industry is absolutely littered with journalists willing to sell themselves and their true beliefs out for a modest price. And this is no different from any other form of journalism, so what you’re trying to make us believe is that somehow games journalism is different.

Integrity in journalism is the real myth, sadly. It’s nice that you still believe in it, but it doesn’t align with the facts.


On July 10, 2013 at 10:31 am

Two words, Ron – Jeff Gertsmann.

Enough said.


On July 10, 2013 at 10:52 am

@Ron Whitaker Hate to disagree with you but that is pure cra_. I’ve seen writers get fired for writing a bad review on a high budget game. Gee why could that be? I’ve seen review that were so fanboyish that it was sickening. Yeah, and there are cops that are paid to look the other way, or refs paid to mess with games, or players paid to throw games. Gee, must be nice to live in your world. I wish I could go there, but unfortunately I live in the real world.
While I cant say that I totally area with Michael, I can say I totally cant agree with your statement. Like Michael, I’ve been a gamer since green screen apples with no graphics, and I’ve seen a lot, and your statement actually made me gag slightly in disbelief. Sorry but your profession is not exempt from greed and stupidity, no matter how hard you try to make it so.
I cant speak for the game as I am a pc user and as such will never touch that game, but your comment insults our intelligence.

Humble Pi

On July 10, 2013 at 11:09 am

@thedog: Too right. I’m actually embarrassed for Gamefront that Ron would write such a blatantly dishonest comment that is far more insulting to the intelligence of every reader here than Michael’s original remark. What he’s essentially saying is that because he hasn’t encountered it personally, therefore it doesn’t take place. It’s confirmation bias at its most ridiculous extreme.

I can say without mistake, from my own first-hand experience of writing editorially for various websites – including a games site – that this sort of thing is RAMPANT in games journalism, just as it is in any form of journalism. That doesn’t mean you can’t trust anyone or that every positive review is the result of corruption, but it does mean you should take everything you read with a massive pinch of salt and do your own research before making a decision. I’ve been burned too damn many times to take anything written by a reviewer at face value, especially in the last couple of years with Final Fantasy, Heavy Rain, Mass Effect 3 and so forth.

For a more intelligent view on the subject, check out MrBTongue’s video at He actually defends gaming journalism but he doesn’t shy away from the problems it has, unlike some.

Ron Whitaker

On July 10, 2013 at 11:44 am

For those of you referencing the Gerstmann thing – That’s the only time in ten years in this business I can remember a company pressuring a site in that way, and they STILL didn’t pay him to write a good review, they just pressured the site in question to remove the negative review.

Now I have heard of ad departments at sites trying to pressure editorial departments at the same site to go easy on reviews because of ads. But that’s not companies buying reviews – that’s ad departments trying to keep companies from getting angry at them. And that’s not remotely the same thing. Do you think that Sony / Naughty Dog was mad at us for giving Last of Us an 80? Did they pull ads from our site? Nope.

It’s very easy to see a review that you don’t personally agree with and say “That guy was paid off.” It’s much more difficult to realize that people like different things, and just because you think something is bad, it doesn’t mean that it’s bad to everyone.

For example, I was not a fan of GTA 4. Had I reviewed it, it would have been a game that scored in the low 70′s. Plenty of people reviewed it and scored it in the 90′s. That doesn’t make them or me wrong. It just means we have different tastes.

I’m not saying that it has NEVER happened. I’m saying that it doesn’t happen on major sites that millions of people are reading. If you guys can find any actual cases where that has happened, I’d love to see them, but I’ve been around gaming for a long, long time, and the Gerstmann incident is the only one I can remember. Look how that turned out for GameSpot. Not well.

@thedog – Those were the days, the green screen Apples. I still remember when I went from my Apple IIe to the Apple IIc – King’s Quest was a whole new world of gaming.

@Humble Pi – It’s rampant, you say? Provide examples to back this up.

Ron Whitaker

On July 10, 2013 at 12:50 pm

Let’s remember how “Trying to manage review scores” worked out for Eidos with Tomb Raider Underworld.

Humble Pi

On July 10, 2013 at 4:12 pm

@Ron Whitaker – I provided three, if you’d bothered to read the comment properly. Heavy Rain, Final Fantasy XIII, and especially Mass Effect 3 were shown to have incredible amounts of publisher-driven influence on the review scores that didn’t match the consensus reached by customers.

But honestly, I don’t need to justify myself at all, because it’s still your remark that is PROVEN to be untrue, and you’ve even stated as much in your more recent comments although you haven’t yet accepted the contradiction.

The fact is, you said this sort of thing doesn’t exist within the games industry, and three consecutive comments stated otherwise, two of which actually gave examples. What the extent of the corruption is is actually irrelevant – the point is that you said it doesn’t exist at all, when it clearly does.

If you can’t accept that you’re in the wrong for your original statement then you shouldn’t be in journalism. You dealt an absolute, one that was immediately and irrefutably contradicted with evidence. You have since retroactively tried to change your words so that you conveniently admit it has happened before, but these do not match what you said – “No one in the games industry gets paid for a review” and that the idea that anyone does get paid for a review “couldn’t be further from reality.” ANYONE who deals in absolutes like this has no right to expect shades of grey when they’re challenged.

I’m not even contesting the scores for The Likes of Us – I’ve never played the game, so I’m not going to pass judgement on it. But it’s pretty obvious that you’re on the defensive, and as a result you’ve completely failed to accept any middle ground. Nobody is saying ALL reviews are based on being bought. In fact, it is you and ONLY you that has resorted in any sort of absolute truth, that being that it simply never happens. You can try and change your story as much as you want, it’s all in print on this very page.

If you have even a shred of the same journalistic integrity that you’re claiming exists within the majority of the industry, just accept you messed up with your original comment on the matter because at the moment you’re embarrassing yourself and the site as a whole with your refusal to admit to your errors.


On July 10, 2013 at 5:19 pm

@Michael. What’re you some type of severely retarded being of some sort? Or wait, after re-reading your post you’ve been playing games for over 30 years and no game you’ve played deserves a 10 or a 5? You’ve obviously never played a single game in your life. Go to gamespots website, read all their user reviews. See how many normal everyday people gave that game a 10. Then come back to us.

Dan Banks

On July 11, 2013 at 3:02 am

Sorry Ron, but I believe that there’s no industry pressure or bias in games journalism about as much as I believe that Jessica Chobot was cast in ME3 for her acting ability. I completely agree with everyone else for challenging you on this.


On July 11, 2013 at 5:22 am

Yeah, and I guess Jessica Chobot was cast as Diana Allers because of her stellar acting credentials. Naïve tripe.

Ron Whitaker

On July 11, 2013 at 8:20 am

@Humble Pi – Actually, you might want to rethink that. You provided the Gerstmann example, which I conceded to you. The other three fall squarely into the “People liked a game I didn’t like” area that I discussed earlier. Personally, I didn’t like any of the three games that you bring up there. However, I can easily concede that there are people who did. Despite the ending controversy that surrounded ME3, even the folks here at GameFront agreed that it was a good game up until the end. Just because you read a good review of a game that you subsequently didn’t like, it doesn’t make the review wrong, or bought and paid for.

I’m happy to admit when I make a mistake, and forgetting the Gerstmann example was a mistake, even though it’s still not an example where someone got paid to give a game a good review, which is what the whole discussion was about in the first place. However, you said “that this sort of thing is RAMPANT in games journalism, just as it is in any form of journalism.” That’s just laughably false. In this world you describe, journalists everywhere are getting paid under the table for reviews of games, movies, and products of all stripes. We’re all getting checks to give coverage to things that we wouldn’t normally cover. It just isn’t happening.

The best policy for reviews is simple. Find someone who likes the same sort of games you like, and read their stuff. If you love strategy games, and I despise them, we’re not going to agree on reviews. It’s that simple. I’m going to reiterate one last time the most important takeaway from this for you. Just because someone gives a game (or a movie, or a product) a good score that you don’t agree with, doesn’t mean they’re bought. It just means you like different things.


On July 11, 2013 at 9:48 am

Ron, Ron, Ron. Your defending your peers with nothing more than dreams and wishes. Is every journalist crooked? No. Are there some that are? Yes. You used Mass Effect 3 as an example. It wasn’t worthy of a 10 even before we got to the end. Was it a bad game? no, but it sure as heck wasn’t worthy of a 10.
You used the frays “laughably false”, well that’s how most of us feel about your statement.
ME3 is a good example of that, as is Diablo 3, and several other big named games. With all the corruption going on in politics, sports, the boy scouts, you must think quite highly of yourself and your profession to think that journalists aren’t susceptible to corruption and that every review is simply difference of opinion. Wow, and you talk about insulting peoples intelligence. Like I said before, I wish I could live in your world. You should keep living there. You wouldn’t like the real world.

Mark Burnham

On July 11, 2013 at 10:51 am

Here’s some required reading on the subject. Jim Sterling weighed in on it a while back in a column:


On July 11, 2013 at 11:04 am

@Mark Burnham Gee, good reading. Another journalist defending his job with words as true as the gospel. What a surprise. I suppose because Jim wrote this that it must be true. Yeah, and Brett Farve was telling the truth when he said he didn’t send the female those photos and OJ is as honest as the Pope. Good one. I get a good laugh every time people try to convince others of the honesty that prevails in there profession let alone the world. Just ask the politicians, they’ll tell you how honest they are. Just ask the journalists, they’ll tell you how honest they are. Just ask the lawyers, they’ll tell you how honest they are. Yep, a real good laugh.
Oh and in regards to Jims article. Has nothing to do with spy novels or anything of the like. Just good old fashion greed. Nothing new about that one.

Phil Hornshaw

On July 11, 2013 at 12:10 pm

Man, you guys are hilarious. I’m not sure where all these journalists are that you think are getting rich off writing reviews.

Just saying “Jeff Gerstmann” is not presenting evidence. In addition, you’re getting the Gerstmann case all wrong — that was more like extortion than bribery. Threatening to pull ads (and therefore threatening the financial viability of the site) is more like holding a gun to someone’s head for a good review than it is like buying it.

That pressure exists. Real journalists resist it, usually by exposing it. Real journalists whose editors fight them on exposing it quit their jobs. That’s what happened to Gerstmann. That’s an example of journalists NOT being corrupt, guys. That’s what’s SUPPOSED to happen. But that doesn’t at all mean that that’s typical. It isn’t. A lot more journalists would be quitting their jobs in protest all the time. You’d definitely know about it, and it wouldn’t be worth it to developers and publishers to put themselves at that risk. And that’s why they (by and large) don’t do it. It’s cheaper to just market your game; cheaper still to actually make a good game.

Anyway. Nothing anybody says here is going to convince you guys, so I suggest you 1. start your own sites (do a better job than all those corrupt journalists — better journalism is the answer, and I absolutely encourage it [not sarcastically, I really do mean it]; the desire to expose, to do better, to tell truth is what makes journalism thrive), or 2. find some actual evidence. I’d love to publish it.


On July 11, 2013 at 1:24 pm

wouldn’t take much. What’s funny is you try to portray journalists as the last bastion of integrity and no other journalist other than Gerstmann would ever do such a thing. We didn’t say all or even most are not on the up and up, but come on, to think that what we say is total fiction is, well idealist to put it kindly. I’m sure the referees union would like us to believe that as well. I think this site has it’s integrity, which is one reason I’ve quite other sites and frequent this one. Don’t always agree, but I believe the writers to be truthful to themselves.
As for not convincing anyone, well that’s probably the truest thing said here. I’ve seen too much in my years to believe in fairy tales and fiction. But I believe in truth, honesty and OJ is innocent. Amen.

Phil Hornshaw

On July 11, 2013 at 4:33 pm


You’re right, of course shady stuff happens. There are a lot of sites out there. Some of them have questionable ethics. Some don’t. By way of example, if you look at mobile app reviews, a lot of those sites ask developers to pay them for their review. I’d argue that’s just as corrupt as the idea that publishers might pay for (or more aptly, try to pressure through pulling ad funding) their reviews, expecting good scores. Bad folks exist, and I totally agree with you there.

But I think there’s a bit of hyperbole in this thread, and I think that many people assume there’s a lot more corruption than is true in this field. I’ve never encountered it in my 12 or so years in various sorts of journalism, from high school to today. I don’t know anyone who has ever encountered it. Does that mean it doesn’t happen? No, definitely not. But I don’t think it’s happening, like, all the time. It just doesn’t make economic sense — you get caught getting paid off one time and no one trusts you; you get caught doing the paying one time and no one trusts you. It’s too risky for all involved.

But anyway. Gonna keep doing what we do. I appreciate that you enjoy reading our work, and I hope you’ll continue to let us know when you disagree. One of my favorite things about working at GF is that the community here is, by and large, smart, engaged, and willing to have real discussions instead of just calling each other names. Disagreements are fun and can make everyone smarter.