PS4 Thief capped at 30fps, producer suggests - 60fps 'not a necessity'

The next-gen console versions of Thief will likely be capped at 30 frames per second, Eidos Montreal producer Stephane Roy has suggested, telling that he would "prefer to have better physics" in PS4 Thief than a smoother "60 frames per second frame rate".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Studio-YaMi1999d ago

Why ????

To HELL with your "not a necessity" bull ! :|

sengoku1999d ago

i have to agree with roy here, 60fps would have been nice but better physics is more important.

NewMonday1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

Stephane Roy :"I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity"

Studio-YaMi1999d ago

If you're ok with just that then that's fine,but I'm not ! they either mean that the PS4 isn't capable of that(which is not the case here) or that they are lazy.

This is just stupid !

decrypt1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

"Why ????

To HELL with your "not a necessity" bull ! :|"

So much for competing with High end PCs.

Just get a PC and be done with it lol. No more being locked down to what devs think is good enough for you.

Again console gamers expecting 1080p 60fps next gen just will be disappointed. Console hardware just is weak and the rumors are already pointing that way. Giving it a ton of RAM is no replacement for CPU/GPU being low to mid range.


In the long run it will sure be cheaper than getting a PS4.

A PC that can run these games at 1080p 60fps will most likely cost between 500-700usd. which isnt a lot more than the PS4. However The games for the PC cost a lot cheaper. Hence you save on every game bought. If you buy anywhere between 15-20 games a year, you would have covered the difference in the first year it self.

Also remember, PC is a long term investment. Next time you upgrade maybe 4-5 years later. You dont need to buy Casing, DVD, HD ETC. Hence its cheaper to upgrade.

A friend of mine bought a 1000usd PC back in 2009. It had a I5 750 and a 5870 GPU. He still enjoys 1080p 60fps on most games today. When the next consoles are out, all he will be doing is overclocking the CPU to 4ghz and getting a new GPU. The new GPU will probably cost him 300USD (thats cheaper than getting a console) and he will again be set to play games at 1080p 60fps.

Hence in the long run PC is cheaper, not only is it cheaper he gets to keep is gaming library that he must have spent thousands of usd on. Good luck trying to play PS3 games on a PS4.

AsimLeonheart1999d ago


It isnt PS4's fault. 60fps games were releasing even on the PS2 so console's power is not an issue. The issue is the developer's willingness to do it. Have you ever messed with graphics settings on the pc? You will see that when you decrease graphical detail and video resolution, the frame rate increases. Basically, it is a trade-off between graphics/resolution and frame rate. I have been saying this forever but it seems like many gamers still do not understand that. It is up to the developer to maintain 60 fps with decent graphics or 30 FPS with best possible graphics. If you improve graphics FPS drops and if you make the game native 1080p FPS drops. The developers just try to settle for 30 FPS and make the best possible graphics while maintaining that FPS. PCs have variable graphics and FPS so you can just use the latest card to run it at full graphics detail and 60 fps. Console game developers have to strike a balance between FPS and graphics because they have a fixed hardware and they want to push the graphics detail to maximum. Console gamers and developers just prefer better graphics over more FPS and we cannot have both.

Fishy Fingers1999d ago

Consoles not even out and we're already using the "lazy developers" excuse? Lol

AsimLeonheart1999d ago


And what will be the cost of such a PC that run games with max settings and 60 FPS?
Developers would not make 60 FPS games on PS4 even if it had a GTX Titan. They would choose to improve the graphics even more than what they could achieve on 60 FPS and settle for 30 FPS.
You are a PC gamer; you surely understand this by messing with graphics settings on your PC. When you increase graphics and video resolution, the FPS drops. That is how it goes. PC will always be the only platform where you can run games at 60 FPS because you can just buy a bigger/ better card unlike consoles. However, we all know the costs of having gaming PC capable of running latest games at maximum settings and 60 FPS.

Ezz20131999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

no one here seem to use logic

this game is using UE3 which is old as hell
and the Thief dev still can't make it run on 60fps ?!
sound lazy to me

Ps4 is damn beast
look at
KZSF/Deep down/knack/infamous SS etc of ps4 games
all of them are 1080p at 30fps and look far better than theif4
and also they are using Next gen engines
killzone SF can go toe to toe with BF4 on pc
and both are still alpha stage

it's the dev fault ....not the console

Stephane Roy : "On my side, the type of game I'm going to work on... I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity. If the players see nothing different, maybe I would prefer to have better physics and stuff like that and not this 60 frames per second frame rate."

they can do it but won't because they don't want the team to work hard on their first game on next gen consoles

yep they are lazy for sure
and i don't think any one here think this game is pushing ps4 or even using it final kit...well,maybe pc fanboys who want to down play consoles in every way possible
but someone with logic would know that not even close to truth at all for sure

RememberThe3571999d ago

@Ezz: LOL I read that in my head with a really whinny voice and it was hilarious. But I'm high so...

AsimLeonheart1999d ago


I agree with you that it may be cheaper in the long run BUT the second issue comes with games. What if the games I like are only available on a certain console? For example, I recently played MGR, Ni No Kuni and God of War on my PS3. I cannot get these games on the PC so I have to get a console. I will be getting a PS4 for the same reason. I need to play Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Uncharted and many other such console exclusives which I like. I understand PC games look better and it may also be cheaper in the long run but I have to be where my favourite games are; and that is on my Playstation.

I_am_Batman1999d ago

@decrypt: The thing is if you buy a PC for 500-700 $ it will run most games at 1080p 60 fps today. But in a year or two you won't be able to do that anymore. A friend bought a PC for 800€ in 2008 and he can't play Far Cry 3 with more than 20fps or Crysis 3 while I'm still able to do that on my PS3 from 2007. And those games aren't even optimized all that well on PS3. I don't want to dismiss PC gaming cause like you said you get the games cheaper most of the time but 15-20 games a year sounds a lot to me. I like to take my time with games and play them on different difficulties and unlock everything.

reynod1999d ago

This probably has to do with the Tablet CPU in the PS4.

Even on PCs, no matter how powerful a GPU. If the CPU isnt strong enough, the frame rate will be low.

The PS4 comes with a good GPU well its mid range. However the CPU is really low end. They probably gave it a Tablet CPU because their focus was 30fps game play. Since most people dont know the difference between 30 and 60fps. Hell most people dont even know what fps is.

Which is why they decided to go the cheaper CPU route. Ask any PC gamer nevermind a Tablet CPU even a Desktop CPU running at 1.8ghz isnt going to do any wonders.

LackTrue4K1999d ago

Is the next gen Xbox holding the Playstation back again?!?!

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

30fps just like killzone!

lol why do people say 60fps is not needed in stealth? So the animation doesn't need to be smooth? I will get pc version.

T9001999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

Sony should have given it more RAM lol /s

The gen hasnt even started and Devs already are declaring games to be 720p or 30fps.

Its a sad reality that people will need to live upto. Console makers no longer target high end specs like they used to. They just dont want to take a loss on the hardware any more.

Instead they want to build a system as cheaply as possible so they can profit asap.

Last gen when the Xbox 360 was released it was as fast as a high end PC of its time. PS3 was a bit behind but still very competitive. This gen well looks like both will be low to mid range PCs before they are even launched. They probably will be badly outdated by the time they launch.

PS4 probably just a victim of corporate greed.

Utalkin2me1999d ago

I just don't understand why the PC guys constantly tout spec and graphics. See alot of people do not care, most console gamers just care about games. And some of the best games these past 7 years could not be played on PC.

This reminds me of my neighbor that just bought a 40,000 camaro and everytime i go to my truck and see him outside he makes a comment about it, like "Man this thing will fly". But what he doesn't realize is i could care less. I could have bought 2 of my trucks for the price of his car and my truck gets me from a to b, just as fast as his camaro (referring to speed limit).

thechosenone1999d ago

and this is the problem with multiplats.

No FanS Land1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

60fps is overplayed seriouly like the game

"which pushes the console to its limits".

it's maybe even an artistic decision. Honestly playing a slow paced game at 60fps is a pain.
let's say they create a rock solid 30fps game with no single screen tearing and framedrop, I'd be satisifed.

I'd rather drive an Acura NSX which is reliable as hell compared to a Ferrari, while is faster, always needs servicing.

EDIT: Anyway, take it easy guys, games like this are about the experience. Heck every "memorable game" should be about the impression left on the player, not just : Look at Teh graphics! Crysis is beautiful, but is it that wonderful to play?

MysticStrummer1999d ago

@decrypt - "Just get a PC and be done with it lol. No more being locked down to what devs think is good enough for you."

Sure. Just get a PC, and resign yourself to missing out on one Game of the Year after another. I hate to break it to you, but unless you make a game yourself, you'll always be at the mercy of what devs think is good enough for you no matter what platform you're on. The bottom line is, it's clearly said that PS4 can do it. The best part is, their reason for not pushing 60fps on PS4 is the same reason it's ridiculous for PC gamers to claim consoles hold PC gaming back: "I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity".

Jobesy1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

@ Mr. High and Mighty Decrapt, how much does it cost to build a PC that can do local mp like consoles do? Oh wait, a PC can't do much power and you can't even play a local mp game with a buddy or relative...sad isn't it? Even the oldest of consoles outperform the latest and greatest PC on that front.

T9001999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )


Actually this gen many games have forgone splitscreen gaming. Even then if you insist PC can do split screen on:

Dirt 3
Left4dead series
Portal 2
Track Mania

For more games you can check this link out:

Not only does PC do splitscreen. In a gen where splitscreen even on consoles is ignored, PC can emulate old consoles and give you access to a multitude of splitscreen games from old consoles. The library would be so vast it would easily over shadow the current consoles.

JAMurida1999d ago


I know this doesn't apply to outside US, but Gamefly and Redbox save you a lot of money when it comes to games. You could Redbox the new GoW and beat it over the weekend for $2-$6, compared to full price. As with Gamefly, $20 for a month can get you up to 3-4 games.

wishingW3L1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )

can they even do 60 frames on UE3? Because even DmC was 30 frames... I think it's just hard for developers to achieve that frame-rate with that Engine in particular.

starchild1998d ago

That's what the PC is for. :-)

Seriously, though, I think this confirms what many of us have been saying: most next gen games on consoles will probably be 1080p and 30 fps. Some might be 720p and 60 fps. But very few will be 1080p/60fps.

This is why I love the PC. I can soar past the constraints of the consoles and play my games at super-fluid frame-rates and super high resolutions.

dcbronco1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )


This is the beginning of a lifecycle. Nobody take full advantage of a consoles ability in the first series of games. Just like this generation, developers will do more and more as they learn the equipment.

Also, let's talk about your friend. Your friend has a $1000 PC he bought in '09. It has a AMD GPU in it two generations older than the one in the PS4. He gets 1080p and 60fps. But you believe the PS4 can't. Based on the closed optimized console having twice the ability of a open PC theory. Explain why the PS4 couldn't do 1080p, 60fps. This is simply the new generation learning curve.

When the current generation started developers used one core of the CPU on some games. It took time to learn different architectures. x86 or not, these APUs are a little different and while easier than last generation will take time.

iNcRiMiNaTi1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )


I have these games on PC all running at 60fps max settings 1080p so it's definitely NOT the engine. There are more UE3 games but these are the ones with a console release as well

Unreal Tournament 3
Rainbor 6 Vegas 1/2
Bioshock Infinite
Spec Ops: The Line
Mass Effect 1/2/3
Borderlands 1/2
DmC: Devil May Cry
Brother's in Arms Hell's Highway
Batman Arkham Asylum
Batman Arkham City
Aliens: Colonial Marines
Alice: Madness Returns

It does require capable hardware but I would've thought that a ps4 would be able to tear through a UE3 game at least after seeing it's specs and UE4 running on it. But then again the samaritan demo required 3 GTX 580's and that was UE3 as well, maybe Thief 4 is more demanding than current UE3 games

SilentNegotiator1998d ago

How intensive do physics need to be for a game like this? Sounds like a bad excuse to me.

BlackKnight1998d ago

Everyone needs to realize that UE3 is not some static thing. UE3 in gears of war 1 is way older than the gears of war 3 engine. Even more so, the new consoles are DX11, so when they are using UE3, they are using the version that some PC games have, which is the DX11 version of UE3. Remember this tech demo?

THIS is the kind of UE3 that Thief 4 is using.

Hell, there is a free to play game called Warframe on PC that is in beta but anyone can play and it looks STUNNING and ONLY uses half of my card's horsepower (GTX 680) at max settings, 1080P.

It is pretty damn impressive and this is just done by a small free to play dev.

So remember, UE3 can mean all sorts of different things, it's up to the developer to use newer, better versions and optimize it correctly.

_-EDMIX-_1998d ago

Some of you guys are so slow its not even funny.

To say "well PS2 did 60fps" or "PS3 games like Wipeout did 60fps" thus EVERY PS4 game HAS to do

Do you guys not understand that the more information that is put into a game ie physics, textures, tessellation, etc mean its less and less that you've get to achieve this "60fps"? LOL!

Lets say I own a PC, and my build is competely the same for years. I play Crysis at 60fps, that doesn't mean Crysis 4 will play at 60fps...please stop thinking "the system makes 60fps" it has EVERYTHING to do with the actual game producing this 60fps, yes the hardware comes into play, but not as much as you guys might think.

PS4 will use less FPS for a lot of reasons, which have MORE to do with developers and publishers then anything else. ie Why should Activision sacrifice details, physics, graphic effects etc JUST to have 60fps? Why? And be out down by BF4? They will take a compromise.

More power doesn't mean everything "60fps" it just means you can make the "last gen" games 60fps ie If I owned this beast PC that maxed Crysis 1 at 60fps, it means all the games under Crysis 1 (or released before it) will clearly do over 60fps.

ie HL2, Oblivion etc will do 60fps or more on my system (HL2 does like over 100fps).

So, having a system that "ran" games at 60fps, doesn't mean new games will just automatically run 60fps JUST cause the last ones did. It doesn't work that way people.

W....well Wipeout did 60fps 1080p on PS3 THUS EVERYG AME CAN DO 1080p 60FPS ON PS3 AND PS4! ....da fuq? LOL!

ProjectVulcan1998d ago

The game was designed on PC for PC.

Be happy consoles are getting them game at all. PS4 is a lower midrange PC, why would you expect it to run a game created for hardware probably faster than PS4 to run so much better on it?

_-EDMIX-_1998d ago

LOL! PS4 in no way shape or form is a "mid range" PC.

I own a "mid range" PC. I own a HD5770, 4gigs ddr3 ram and a quad core CPU at 3.10. No damn way a PS4 is "mid range" LOL!

Mind you, my GPU maxes out pretty much every game this gen pretty damn well. I feel no need to upgrade JUST yet.

"Mid range" to me means, you able to play games on medium to low settings. I'm playing High to ultra settings on most games ie BF3 and Skyrim (even with mods)

My gpu is around 1.2 to 1.3TFLOPS (have to look it up LOL) but its NO WAY near a 1.85TFLOP gpu and 8gigs ddr5. Thats just a damn joke.

Mind you EVEN IF, I did have a GPU that was 1.85 and 8gigs of ram, it would STILL be weaker then a PS4.

Optimization. To reach PS4 levels, you actually need a little better tech, you have to take into consideration optimization. So a 2.5TFLOP gpu and 16gigs would better do the job of out doing a PS4....even then....good luck getting games that are even exclusive to the damn thing! LOL!

Now I'm still looking to upgrade my PC later in 2015, but as of right now, it makes sense for me to go PS4 and then wait and see for PC.

ProjectVulcan1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )

Obviously you need to have a look at current hardware _-EDMIX-_

PS4 is a midrange PC by 2012 standards. 7850 launched in March 2012 and was absolutely midrange. The 7970, 7950, GTX680 and GTX670 are much, much faster and were all launched by the end of May 2012- virtually a year ago now!

A 7850 sits precisely in the middle of the current Radeon 7 series range hierarchy. It has been something like 18 months since 7850 level performance was considered 'high end'.

But then this is ignoring the fact PS4 isn't actually out yet and by the time it is, PC hardware will have taken a further step.

If you don't accept that it is midrange, then you don't know much about current hardware.

Its CPU would sit below any full desktop quad core x86 processor you care to name from the past 4 years or so.

Console optimisation is always massively overestimated. 8800GTX is still well ahead of the existing consoles and it is less than 2.5x faster on paper and typically 2x as fast in practice on a reasonably well optimised game

e.g Bioshock Infinite

Secondly on this point, people seem to think that you just pull instant fixed console platform advantages out of a hat from day one.


Console optimisation takes time as well. Early console games are usually not very well optimised.....!

By the time they are, PC hardware has moved on so much it doesn't matter a lot anyway.

Gaming1011998d ago

Wow, people accusing the devs of being lazy when they're probably working 60-80 hours a week to put this out. The 60 FPS ordeal is nonsense, it's not needed for every single game. A slow paced stealth game like Thief would benefit more from more advanced AI and higher resolution textures, better texture filtering, better lighting and haze affects, all these things are infinitely more important than 60 vs 30 FPS on a slow paced stealth game. Use your brains people, it's not a twitch based FPS or racing game!

peowpeow1998d ago

The amount of agrees on some fully incorrect comments is baffling.

EeJLP-1998d ago


Check that math.

"$1000 in 2009" + at least "$300" in upgrades soon = $1300+

The PS3 dropped to $299 in 2009:

So unless the PS4 is over a grand (which it won't be) I don't see how "In the long run it will sure be cheaper than getting a PS4." since you're starting out ~$600 in the hole going by your friend's PC example.

And if you're buying "15-20" per year.. at full retail price.. you need to step your game up in patience and quality control. You can just as easily wait until games are cheap on PS3/4 as you can on PC.

Also, good luck playing much beyond multiplats, RTS', and MMOs on PC while PS gets games like Uncharted, God of War, Heavy Rain, Resistance, Killzone, Metal Gear Solid (likely to be PS exclusive or PS/XB), The Last of Us, etc. PC doesn't even get all multiplats, like 2010 GotY Red Dead Redemption for example.

EeJLP-1998d ago


And here we go with the this single $400-450+ part is better than what's in the PS4 argument again.

Yea, videocards that cost as much as the full console perform better than it. Amazing. And the rest of the parts necessary to run those games with that video card? You're no longer talking anywhere near $400. Your motherboard, hard drive, RAM, optical drive, inputs (HDMI, USBs, etc.), CPU, operating system, power supply, heatsink, case, controller, etc.

LocutusEstBorg1998d ago

Some developoers aren't even running 1080p.

EeJLP-1998d ago

Few will probably see this, but talking to decrypt in PMs, I brought up this point against the 'cheaper PC game / Steam sales'...

Resale Value.

How much resale value do you have on those digital copies?

$0, since it's against the terms of use? And Valve has and does crack down on this.

1/3rd of what you paid is probably like hitting the lottery, if you don't get caught or reported.

Meanwhile on console, if you wait past the initial quick price drop near launch of a game and buy at $20 or $30 or $40.. if you wanted to, you could turn right around a resell that physical copy for the same or similar price as you just paid.

Say you barely waited and paid $50 for a console game that you kept for a bit and resell for $40. What's your loss? $10; 20%.

If you buy when it's near $20 and by then very slowly dropping.. maybe you get your $20 back.. your loss? $0? $2? $3?; 0-15%.

And if you got some early PC digital download deal? Say $30. You have no resale, so if you're never going to replay that game.. your loss.. $30; 100% loss.

Or maybe you do sneak through a sale of your account. You don't get reported and get lucky at ~35% of what you paid.. your loss? 65%.

Go through any similar scenario you want, the math still doesn't come close to adding up. The 'cheaper PC games' argument actually increases the cost difference once you take resale value into account.

Unless you buy tons and tons and tons of games Day 1 at full retail and hang onto every mediocre game for the rest of your life, PC does not have a price advantage as far as games goes.

ProjectVulcan1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )


"And here we go with the this single $400-450+ part is better than what's in the PS4 argument again."

Please show me where I made this argument.

I mentioned absolutely nought of costs.

All I stated was that yes, in fact PS4 is a lower- midrange gaming PC best case as of May 2012. If you have a valid argument to dispute this then please go ahead but unfortunately all the evidence I have presented really precludes such an argument.

Cost is another matter. Can I personally justify the cost of better hardware on a PC?

Yes, I easily can considering the lower price of games (I keep them) the fact I won't pay for online, the fact I choose carefully and old hardware has resale value etc many variable factors make PC gaming not really significantly expensive in the long run for me, and the draw of a significantly superior multplat version of a top notch game totally worth it in my opinion.

Really, Biosock Infinite is one of the best games ever made and playing the best version (PC) that is head and shoulders above the console ones is totally worth it for me. I could mention dozens of others but plainly I feel any outlay is worth it- because I know the difference between the versions aethestically first hand is quite large!

Ever owned a brand new Ferrari? Then being forced to drive a 7 year old Toyota Camry or a Honda Accord instead? All perfectly acceptable forms of transport, but lets face it, when you have experienced the Ferrari and can own one and use it, it is not a difficult choice to want to drive it as much as possible and keep hold of it at every opportunity...

PC is that Ferrari.

Cost is greatly a personal argument and can be debated to a point.

The fact that PS4 is a midrange PC at best (by year old standards no less) is precisely that.

A fact. Mkays?

+ Show (35) more repliesLast reply 1998d ago
ninjahunter1999d ago

Thief is a really slow paced game, honestly it would be playable at 20 fps as far as responsiveness goes. Besides the game would probably be pretty stuttery and have screen tearing if they uncapped it.

TheRot1999d ago

Isn't thief a stealth game? 60fps isn't that important in a stealth game

yaz2881999d ago

"60fps isn't that important in a stealth game"

Nice now this shit depends on the genre? regardless of what game it is 60 fps will actually enhance the experience and enjoyment of any game ... try to jump from any 30 fps game to 60 in pc. you will be WOWed!

I don't see how they can't achieve both. Just knowing that the ps4 is stronger than my 3 years old pc which have played most of the games released today beautifully is enough for me.

Muerte24941999d ago

depend on the genre. Call of Duty was always doing 60fps on ps3 and Xbox360 but it wasn't as polygon heavy as Crysis, Killzone, Battlefield, or even Resistance. It all depends on what your trying to achieve with your game. I'm almost certain that BF4 will run at 30fps on consoles. They needed a 7990 (dual GPU)and 16gb DDR3 to run the trailer.

DigitalAnalog1999d ago

But the BF4 trailer ran at a 3K res on MAX settings. That is a ridiculously high benchmark to compare to. I don't see why the PS4 shouldn't be able to run it at LEAST 720p/60fps with med/high settings.

Donnieboi1999d ago

It's a stealth game. 30 fps wont do it any harm. Yeah 60 fps would be nice, but you wont feel any benefit in a slow stealth game. So they decided that more can be squeezed out of the system if they stuck to just 30 fps.

But if it's also 720p and not 1080p, then maybe it means that the lower framerate PLUS lower HD res could lead us to believe that the ps4 is not as powerful as we hoped.

Either way, it'll still be a lot more affordable than a $1000 PC, so i'm fine with the ps4.

DeadlyFire1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

A majority of games are going to aim for [email protected] fps I believe. Although even when they do. 720 resolutions could benefit from it and run more fluidly.

PS4 is in its early days. 60 fps days will come sooner than most think. Game engines have to work 100% on the new hardware before they can say hell yeah its at 60 fps. As the engine works on the hardware then people can see it running and then they can optimize the engine even further for the hardware so it moves faster.

Donnieboi1999d ago

What is everyone so bent out of shape about? Don't get mad at me, im not the one who put the fps cap at 30 fps. I was just trying to look at the cup half full.

Donnieboi1999d ago

Interview says:

"On my side, the type of game I'm going to work on... I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity. If the players see nothing different, maybe I would prefer to have better physics and stuff like that and not this 60 frames per second frame rate."

See what happens when u actually READ the articles before flipping out?

The game won't benefit from 60fps, but WILL if the stay at 30fps and free up more potential prowess from out of the ps4.

I trust that they know what they are doing.

Muerte24941999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

I can do 1080p @ 30fps, but I don't understand why they would even bother with 720p. I don't recall them saying it was going to be in 720p. I'm certain 1080p @ 30fps is the new standard. Otherwise, there wouldn't really be any justification for purchasing a next gen system. Does anyone know what MGSV FPS were?

Probably because you the threw out a baseless hypothetical when you mentioned Thief being in 720p. It wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article, only by a idiot's comment on the article.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1999d ago
meetajhu1999d ago (Edited 1999d ago )

Lol not a necessity or ps4 couldn't render at 60fps???

8Gb GDDR5 the next cell processor

MysticStrummer1999d ago

"I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity"

"just because we can do it"

Muerte24941999d ago

right there leads me to believe that it may actually be a case of "lazy developer". So you're not going to put your all into it, huh? Ok, guess i don't need to put all of my $60 into it either. Thank you MysticStrummer for bringing this to light. Sony went out of their way to make it easier for you can you're still choosing to be lazy.

"I don't want to put extra pressure on the team just because we can do it if it's not a necessity" -Thief DEV

LOL_WUT1999d ago

They stated that gamers wouldn't see anything different, thats why they wen't with better physics and not the 60 fps.

I think everyones jumping the gun I don't recall them saying it would be 720p all they said was it would be identical to the PC version. If it indeed turns out to be 720p then i guess we can call them lazy... ;)

specialguest1998d ago (Edited 1998d ago )

B-b-b-but da CE...i mean RAM??? Lol

Yeap, i think this will be another 30fps Gen. As pc graphics continue to push forward, consoles will do whatever it takes to keep up, and that usually means sacrificing that silky smooth 60fps.

The ps4 is not even out yet and devs are already doing it. Imagine 3 yrs down the line.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1998d ago
solar1999d ago

aka "we are limited by hardware and cannot achieve 60fps with what we want to do with the game. "

HeavenlySnipes1999d ago

They clearly said they COULD do it but its not of importance to them so they'd rather not waste resources and money trying to accomplish that. They don't want to delay the production og the game jst to make sure its running at 60FPS

Or maybe you can't read....

delboy1999d ago

Because next gen is weak, despite the 8gigs of ram.
RAM is nothing without computing power!
But fan boys won't admit it.
Not the first time that I will tell you this, don't expect a big jump for the next generation.

MysticStrummer1999d ago

"don't expect a big jump for the next generation."

We've already seen a big jump and nothing's been released.

Prcko1999d ago

did you know movies you watch are 30fps???
why would we need 60 fps??
try games with 30 and 60 fps,difference is so small

BlackKnight1998d ago

The visual aspect is just part of it. Controller response times are higher at 60fps, you see more information per second which makes fast paced games running at 60fps MUCH more enjoyable and less jerky looking with motion.

Thief doesn't need 60FPS though. I'd rather have 30FPS and better graphics with a slow paced stealth game than 60FPS and graphics turned down.

good example of FPS differences (less noticeable if you monitor or TV is LCD and not of good quality)

SonyNGP1998d ago

You've never played a game in 60fps.

M-M1998d ago

Most movies are actually 24FPS.

pete0071998d ago

in fact bluray is 24fps, but a movie gets frame by frame specific rework, and before release its been revised a thowsand times, rendering 3d universes are completely different things, we need the 60 fps or higher to an optimal and smooth visualization

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1998d ago
Objective1998d ago

Could be their way of saying they maxed out the PS4. Let's see if Sony comes out to say otherwise.

Corpser1998d ago

A lot of games will be 30 FPS on ps4, Carmack is right

MEsoJD1998d ago

I've been gaming on pc and consoles for years and I must say that 60fps should be the standard. You can actually really tell/feel the difference from 30 to 60.

zerocrossing1998d ago

When did games start getting made in line with "necessity"? O.o

KnightRobby1998d ago

This is insane. If I am going to shell out as much money as I know they are going to ask for, they better not have to be choosing between physics or frame-rate. They'd better be able to do both!