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

Thief dev would prefer better physics to higher frame-rate on next-gen.

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

"For a shooter it's a no-brainer. The higher the frame rate is, the better it is." Roy told us, when asked if his team would be striving to achieve a high frame rate on next-gen consoles.

"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."

Roy's comments reflect those made by id programmer John Carmack last year, who predicted that "a lot of next gen games will still target 30 fps".

Other PS4 games, including Guerrilla's first-person shooter Killzone: Shadow Fall, also appear to be targeting 30fps.

However, there is at least one developer who is pushing to achieve a higher frame rate on next-generation consoles than it managed on Xbox 360 and PS3.

Back in September, F1 producer Steve Hood told VideoGamer.com that his team would "absolutely" target a 60fps frame rate on next-gen consoles.

Besides potential differences in frame-rate, though, Roy told VideoGamer.com that the next-gen versions of Thief would look "really, really close" to the PC version.

Thief launches on PC, PlayStation 4 and "other next-generation consoles" next year.

Source: VideoGamer.com Interview

11 Comments

To add your comment, please login or register

User Comments

martiz

my super *****y pc can run at higher fps wtf?

Posted 13:46 on 10 March 2014

theBezerKing @ innuendo1231

The gifs don't show the difference well because they often don't show the full setting. Different animations respond differently to the FPS variable, and without a proper background it doesn't display well.

The thing about fps in games is that while 60 fps isn't necessary, it makes the game as a whole feel better responsively, visually and mentally in general.

Posted 18:30 on 25 May 2013

innuendo1231

I've seen the ominous comparison gifs for 30 and 60 fps here and there, Those gifs are really bad examples. It's nothing but falsifying propaganda. I can tell confidently because I'm a gamer of multiple platforms, PC and PS3 (earlier ps1 ps2). I often get both ps3 and pc versions of the same game just to see the differences. I can see a HUGE obvious difference between 30 and 60 fps, in fact 30 fps is realy choppy for my eyes, not fluid at all. Yet when looking at these gifs, I can see no obvious difference. Truly, this is falsification. Of course, why would they emphasize the difference? It would be bad for business for sony and microsoft.

There is a really sad side of this story. PC games have been running at 60fps for more than a decade. Yes, back in the time of the ps2, all mutli-platform games were running at 60fps on pc and 30 fps on the ps2 (or even worse, 25 fps in europe, PAL versions). It was sad. Then came the ps3 and games were still running at 30 fps. Now comes the ps4 and they still do not target 60fps? It is simply absolutely unbeleivably RIDICULOUS that it's been so many generations of consoles, and it's the same old bullsh*t all over again. Of course the new consoles have countless lame features comlpetely irrevelant to gaming, they will do your laundry for you, they can do anything and everything EXCEPT what their main purpose should be. Gaming quality at least rivaling that of the PC. (Before anyone mentions WASD+mouse, you can use gamepads wih the PC too. Both x360 and ps3 gamepad, though the latter requires some extra doing.)

Posted 18:17 on 25 May 2013

HVkratos @ Woffls

thanks for correcting i was confused with cell processors and core processors at that time any way thx and i have edited my comment. And what u have replyed about ps4 is correct and i know it because i saw the conference live. And i am gonna buy PS4 hope u will. And i think every PC games will be available in PS4. And why r u laughing out loud for these confused mistakes i think u have to see some comedy shows and movies, u r from UK then why u didn't watch Mr.bean shows if u have saw it then u wouldn't laughed out loud for this. I am now laughing out loud at your comment.lol...

Posted 16:10 on 30 April 2013

matthargett

I agree with the producer -- I'd rather have 1080p with better physics, shaders, models, etc at 30fps than 60fps. The reality is that most people still don't have HDTVs that can do 1080p of motion resolution in the first place. That'll change in the next 5 years, but for now 60fps only makes sense for high-end PCs where that market's install base is likely to have monitors with the needed quality for anyone to tell the difference.

Posted 23:07 on 09 April 2013

junitono1 @ ShooPooMagoo

Except it won't take a $2000 PC to run it at a stable 60fps. A 3570k + HD7950 will do the job perfectly, and a setup like that goes for about $800 total.

Posted 21:07 on 07 April 2013

ShooPooMagoo

In fairness, you'll probably find the frame rate won't be much better on most PC's. You'll probably encounter the slow-down in certain sections of the game, well not unless you spent stupid amounts of money on a PC. And let's face it, you'd have to be a complete idiot to spend $2000+ on a PC.

Posted 18:57 on 06 April 2013

Woffls @ HVkratos

lol nope it's an 8 core AMD Jaguar and Cell has been abandoned.

Getting used to the architecture is going to be less of a factor this time, but it's still a big deal.

I still don't think PC will be lead platform for much this generation, even if it is easy to scale down to consoles. The reason for this is that the platform just won't be in development scope because there's not much money in it, so it will get no attention at all.

It would be far wiser for developers to target Xbox/PS4 at the same time because that's the majority market and they also happen to be similarly specced.

Posted 12:55 on 06 April 2013

HVkratos @ billybobby

cell processors are difficult for game developers for developing games in that console so only PS3 didn't have a strong game releases during its releases and cell processors are costlier so they changed to PC like architecture see its specs and it also have a background processors which PC doesn't have.

Posted 12:07 on 06 April 2013

billybobby @ Surfing_Gamer

I hate to break it to you, but you wont be relying on the old "when they get use to the hardware excuse." The PS4 is nothing more than a midrange PC. It has no special parts like the cell, or anything that is not found in a midrange low budget PC. There is nothing to get use to, they develop games on PC. Many devs have already stated they will be making for PC first and then porting down to the toy boxes. I know it must suck, but get use to it.

Posted 00:35 on 06 April 2013