PS4 Could Get Close to Running Games Like inFAMOUS: Second Son at 1080p, 60 FPS - Sucker Punch Boss

Yesterday DualShockers had a chance to chat with Sucker Punch Studio Head and Co-founder Brian Fleming, during an inFAMOUS: Second Son preview event in Rome, and he was asked if he feels that the PS4 has enough juice to be able to run, in future years, a game like inFAMOUS: Second Son (that currently runs at 1080p, 30 frames per second) at the same resolution but pushed to 60 frames per second.

[DeadRabbits]

PS4 should give a choice of locking at 30fps while aiming for 60fps if a gamer wants as the hardware is capable!

Being incapable or unwilling to is just plan laziness or impossible on other systems!

[Qrphe]

That would mean you would have to design your game around that option meaning that it would limit what you can do with the game right from the start. Not only that but the vast majority ofbplayers would not even ise it. It's jot worth it.

[neoandrew]

I don't think so, on pc it is very easy to change resolution or fps lock, why not on console.

One will choose 720p 60 fps, one 1080p 30 fps, every one happy, right?

No additional developing cost, c'mon don't tell me that it is hard to do...

[mewhy32]

The comment from the dev is a testament to the power offered by the mighty PS4. Lesser consoles wouldn't have a chance of running the game at 1080p/30fps.Luckily Sucker Punch doesn't have to worry about parity for lesser consoles and can push the PS4. Looks to be really great game.

[curtis92]

@neoandrew it's not that easy. at all. PC devs don't really target a framerate because PC hardware is infinite. So basically they make a game and then add the option to throw on a 30fps lock on top of it.

A developer on console, in order to get their game running at 1080/60 has to make a lot of visual sacrifices because they ARE targeting a certain framerate. So if the game CAN run at 1080/60, why on earth would they allow the player to play at 30? What need would there be for that? On pc you might see a framerate lock to eliminate screen tearing if your pc isn't up to speed.

[n1kki6]

"That would mean you would have to design your game around that option meaning that it would limit what you can do with the game right from the start. Not only that but the vast majority ofbplayers would not even ise it. It's jot worth it. "

Thats not true at all. If they know they can hit 30 fps locked, they can give an option to unlock the frame rate allowing the hardware to scale with load. That said, on pc, nothing is more annoying than bouncing between 30 and 60 fps on certain games if your hardware can't push 60 fps consistantly.

[Eyesoftheraven]

Say that to Crysis 1

[bjmartynhak]

Capping the framerate at 30fps should be an option for games that try 60fps but can't really sustain it.

I'm not talking about trading resolution for fps, just the option to put a lower limit to fps to avoid dips.

The judder on Tomb Raider is horrible for me. I have no problem with 30fps, but the dips annoy me as hell. Glad that Killzone put this option.

[MajorKusanagi]

IMO they should put as many particle affects, physics etc as possible without worrying about frames and resolution. 30fps and 1080p is more than enough and a fair trade off!

[Omni-Tool]

There is already a feature that allows you to lock your FPS. It's called vsync or Vetical Sync. It locks your FPS to the vertical refresh rate of your tv/Monitor to reduce tearing and wasting resources to push for a frame rate that your tv/monitor can't even produce. The major difference between what everybody else here is talking about is you can't control the lock level to the level of frames that you want. It's locked to the vertical refresh rate, whatever that may be.

Yeah, I said it. If your tv can only do 30 refresh rate then it doesn't matter if the game is running at 60fps, you will still only see it at 30fps with a lot of tearing.

[Abriael]

And that's how you waste your single bubble.

Calling developers "lazy" is probably the most silly thing one could say, considering development workflows. It's one of the environments where if you're lazy, you don't last three weeks.

[solar]

Agreed. You can't call a developer lazy if the proprietary hardware lacks the horsepower.

[n1kki6]

Lazy probably isn't the correct term. I am sure it's a quality control measure so they know that every game going out the door is equal so they don't have some consumers unknowing bitching about a frame rate drop when realy they are just dropping from 60 to 30.

[Sly-Lupin]

Lazy can refer to the quality of work, not just its presence or absence.

Not bothering with a proper set of options is one of the most common results of lazy game development.

[n1kki6]

If you want graphics options game on PC. The console is an experience controlled by the publishers, investors and big box brands like sony and microsoft.

I don't think the quality of work can be put into question because sucker punch chose to lock the frame rate to deliver a uniform experience to all users on a hardware platform, that much like the XB1 still has limitations that PC users do not experience if they choose to upgrade.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

So where are your credentials?

[imtheman2013]

Hopefully, it's just a matter of optimization and understanding the system to produce these results. These things should come over time, like they did with the last generation of consoles.

Anyway, as long as games hold a consistent framerate of anything equal to or greater than 30, I'm fine with that. I just can't handle when games dive from 30 to 15, or 60 to 40 etc. That's when it's really noticeable and jarring.

[PersonMan]

Funny thing is.. when they get to the point where they can have Second Son graphics at 60fps, they'll probably want to go even further by having more dynamic lights and more detail and that will force them to drop back down to 30 again.

Why have pretty good graphics at 60fps instead of mind blowing graphics at 30fps?

[hollabox]

I would rather roll with 60 FPS than 30 FPS, the smoother the better. With that said, the only difference I see is tone mapping, and lower resolution shadows. But still its not bad looking at all, probably one of the best looking game on both XB1 and PS4.

[Hawkinst540]

I personally am much more interested in lots of effects in a game (eg particles/lighting) than framerate or resolution. So long as it doesn't start getting all jumpy and dipping to 5FPS I'm a happy camper

[Qrphe]

60fps has rarely ever been a priority for developers.

[dcj0524]

So DICE didn't drop resolution to gain 60FPS, COD was never 60FPS and TITANFALL didn't drop the resolution to obtain 60FPS? Right...... of course.

[SilentNegotiator]

An occasional 60fps game only proves the rule when MOST console games are ~30fps. Sure, 60fps has increased this generation, but that's only because it's infinitely easier to do without a sub-HD resolution thanks to stronger systems.

It gives them something to brag about despite the fact that they can't get their game to 1080p in playable fashion. "Dude, our games is totally above 720p [what they WON'T specifically say is that it's 792p - they claim they will up the resolution, but they can't even get perfect 60fps at the current resolution] and it runs at almost 60fps!"

[I_am_Batman]

That's probably why he said rarely and not never.

[Ghoul]

everything you mentioned are competitive online shooters

almost every competitive multiplayer title to date aimed for 60 fps, period!

the list goes back to the supernintendo (mariokart was 60fps for example)

infamous is a singleplayer experience and doesnt have the same need for a high fps target.
therefore its only logical that the devs aim for more fidelity and overall effects since these provide a benefit to your singleplayer focused entertainment produkt

games like killzone for example never aimed to be a competitive mp it was allways a game focusing on warfare sp and a fun but rewarding mp

[Qrphe]

All those are shooters. It seems they're trying to make 60fps into a standard in shooters. This may be part of the reason why Guerilla did what they did with the multiplayer framebuffer to keep a higher fps.

[GUTZnPAPERCUTZ]

Yeah... Right, You must not Play FPS's?

[PickAShoe]

/facepalm

[akaFullMetal]

In a year or two, I can't wait to see how games look and run. Remember guys these are still launch/ first year games.

[C-H-E-F]

Agreed, even-though we see ready at dawn, sucker punch, and naughty dog etc. going at it now, these games are the ps3 equivalent to Lair, Stranglehold etc. I'm def. looking forward to 3 years out when the sequels come out and other new projects from devs that have 1 game on the platform and has a feel for the hardware/software. That's when we will see our GOW 3, Heavy Rain etc. games and for that I am truly excited for... it only gets better with Playstation. :D

[T2]

haha in a way you are right you know... Lair was terrible and everyone hyped how good it would be... It was fun and all but man that sixaxis control was horrible. gotta enjoy em while you can though!!

[parentoftheyear]

I agree let's wait for the last of us 2 and new halo game. We should really see some beauty then

[C-H-E-F]

For the fact that I have a PS Vita, I will say visuals with the exceptions of fps and other twitch games. Maybe because I'm not a "mouse" gamer I actually could careless about 60fps I think it's good if it's achievable without sacrificing other components of your game to achieve it.

edit:
(for those who don't know the vita streams at 30fps when you use remote play, so a game that's 60fps will make you "lag 30fps" if you're playing offline/online). I use remote play alot especially at night when i'm in bed and the gf is watching that reality crap

[madpuppy]

@miDnIghtEr20C_SfF,

I think it is definitely retaliation for how smugly important resolution was to 360 owners last generation, and now that the Xbone barely holds a candle to the PS4 in that department Xbone owners now consider resolution not so big a deal.

To sum up, PS4 owners have no real problem with the resolution of current games, but, they are more just pointing out the hypocrisy of Xbone owners when they do.

which is hilarious, I love to hear all you Xbox fanboys trying to sound like "true gamers" touting gameplay over resolution because the tables have turned. Xbone fanboys are sounding a lot like Wii fanboys nowadays. :P

= Sorry C-h-e-f I was responding to below you.

[mediate-this]

No madpuppy, fanboys and their fanboy arguements, not 360 gamers who dont care about needless crap.

[madpuppy]

well, I meant fanboys, I should have proofread myself.

Sorry to all the 360 gamers that don't care about graphic fidelity.

[KrisButtar]

I would choose fps over res every time even if it didn't hit the 1080p mark that has been the standard for years.

I bought a PS4 and I feel we should have started this gen with 1080p and 60fps, then pushed higher like 1440p and 60fps. I am still having fun with my PS4 but I was let down a bit after I bought it because of that. If I liked PC gaming, yes I would've went there but I don't so I choose the more powerful console.

[GW212]

Same. Gimme 900p/60fps all day over 1080p/30fps. That goes for all game genres.

[CEOSteveBallmer]

I don't care too much about the 30fps or 60fps. why? all of us console gamers both on xbox 360 and PS3 almost played all games running on 30fps only. and for met it still looks smooth and never affected my immersion and enjoyment. for me this gen, i think resolution is more important than 60fps. because 30fps is not a bad thing. its just a refresh rate. while resolution has more impact on the "sharpness and detail" of a game. if you want crisp graphics with good textures, then 1080p is best. but it also a winner if both can be achieved framerate and resolution

[Bordel_1900]

That's why I can't stand console games running at 30FPS anymore, I've grown accustomed to 1080P 60FPS on the PC, after many years of console only gaming. 30FPS feels like stuttering, like something is wrong with the game, like it's lagging or something. Hard to explain, but it's very annoying. That said, I now prefer lower res and 60FPS every day of the week.

[ltachiUchiha]

For an open world game like this with the crazy powers & mayhem u will be doing in this game, 1080p 30fps is all i ask for & happy with it. Cant wait to play this badboy.

[Destrania]

He says in the interview that Infamous already runs close to 60fps and even hits that mark at times. Obviously though they want consistency for a better/smoother experience which is why it's LOCKED at 30fps. Jeeze, do you guys even read the articles anymore? That's really impressive btw because Infamous is the best looking open-world game created to date hands-down. I can't wait to see what devs will bring to PS4 over the next decade. Great times ahead.

[pyramidshead]

lol dat miDnIghtEr20C_SfF marked for trolling, and rightly so. Grade A nonsense.

OT: I'm amazed at the turn around this gen and to think this is still Sucker Punch's first wave true next gen game. I imagine that it's more than acceptable to expect 1080p60fps on their sequel(depending on if they don't do a new IP mind). Looking back to Resistance and InFamous at the start of last gen and looking at Infamous: SS and Killzone: SF at the start of this gen makes me drool at what's going to be happening on PS4 in 2 years.

[sAVAge_bEaST]

They will need to run all VR games @ 1080p/60fps . Can't wait till it drops.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

[AnEwGuY]

This just makes my anticipation for GTAV on PC even greater. I was playing GTA4...with mods...at 1080p/74fps. That's why I only completed about 10% of GTAV on console...it just felt so sluggish, and looked so ugly.

[Hicken]

Why 74fps?

Anyway, 60fps is nice, and is more important to some genres than others. It's not NECESSARY in every game, though I don't think anybody(aside from a few fanboys in denial) would turn it down.

If inFamous ran at 60fps, I'm sure it'd look and feel great. But if they drop the framerate and lock it at 30 to make the game look and perform better, I have no problems with that.

Problems arise(with 30fps, in particular) when the game falls rather short of its framerate target. A lot of people don't seem to understand: if there was a complaint about 30fps on an XB1 game, it was that it was SUPPOSED to run at 30, but dropped into the low 20s or even teens, which is FAR more noticeable and jarring than a drop from 60 down to, say, 50 or even 45.

Outside of that(and I'm saying all this because there will still be people screaming about hypocrisy and such), the framerate debate has been about multiplats running at different rates on different consoles.

[AnEwGuY]

Why 74 fps? Because that was the sweet spot for my particular hardware config (at the time). Apparently you only game on console, since you had to ask that question.

[elhebbo16]

because his rig was capable of hitting 74 frames. I play BF4 at 120fps, anything lower would give me a headache. the great thing about PC gaming is that if I cant run future games with a good framerate, all i have to do is sacrifice some visuals and its A ok.

[Tempest317]

Except its not really possible for most people (or anyone?)to see more than 60fps, and most locks are 30/60 fps, so you saying 74fps is totally random, and doesnt really fit. Im glad your system plays it at 74 fps, but specifying a random number Greater than 60 really just adds confusion...i doubt his question had anything to do with being a console gamer.

[GW212]

I'm a console gamer but 74fps isn't random. As he said, it's what his hardware could hit. You're used to console games locking fps. Doesn't necessarily work that way on PC.

Also, that's total BS about not being able to see above 60fps. Of course your eyes can see above 60fps.

http://us.battle.net/wow/en...

[Tempest317]

How is 74 fps not random? The only game I can recall that allows a vsync other than 30/60 is Borderlands 2, with its 72...74 fps is the max his machine can hit, doesn't make it any less random. And I'm not used to consoles locking fps, seeing that I've been a pc gamer for over a decade. I'm just not used to people using the arbitrary max fps their system can hit when stating 1080p/xx, especially when stating it like that heavily implies a locked framerate. And btw, just because you linked an article that states the maximum limitation for the human, doesn't make my statement any less true. If most people can't tell the difference between 720p/1080p (as evident on EVERY comparison article) then it should stand that most people won't be able to tell you the difference between 60fps and 100, regardless of what monitor/hardware in use. That was my point, not that on paper the human eye can see up to 1000 fps (or whatever it was).

[MysticStrummer]

"This just makes my anticipation for GTAV on PC even greater. I was playing GTA4...with mods...at 1080p/74fps. That's why I only completed about 10% of GTAV on console...it just felt so sluggish, and looked so ugly."

"Why 74 fps? Because that was the sweet spot for my particular hardware config (at the time). Apparently you only game on console, since you had to ask that question."

*looks at the subject of the article and wonders why PC gamers are so insecure*

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I honestly don't care what resolution or frame rate it runs at...just make a good game. That is all I ask for any dev to be honest.

[Flames76]

Infamous cant do 60fps its only 30fps which is weird since the game dont look that good i mean it looks ok but nothing havnt seen before.So get the game at 60fps first before you do an article like this next time ok

[Saithraphim]

Do you game on a Tron like system?

[GW212]

You've never seen anything remotely close to it on a console.

[DigitalRaptor]

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/25...

Just a suggestion.

[BrianG]

You're speaking as if the developer wrote this article, he was answering an interview question.

Also the title refers to games "like" infamous "could" run at that resolution/speed, it's not saying the game runs 1080p/60fps.

[JAMurida]

I will say that I kinda prefer having 1080p/30fps with extra power going into graphics/AI over just extra going into 'trying' to reach 60fps. We still haven't seen a game on PS4 that can run a *solid* 60fps locked that's an actual $60 title, nor am I a fan of games constantly going dropping from 60fps (Tomb Raider: DE, FFXIV beta, BF4 (during Conquest), Warframe, etc...

Unless they can have a guaranteed 60-50fps lock, they should only lock at 30fps and use the extra power into graphics/AI pretty much how Second Son is doing, IMO.

[AnotherGamer117]

These are new consoles and they will get better/more streamlined code allowing for better resolutions and frame rates. There is no way to know if any console will get to 1080p/60fps for all games at this stage of the console.

The games on the Ps3/360 definitely got a lot better as the console aged. I can only believe the same will happen for the PS4/Xbox One.

[starchild]

True, but they will likely push for better visuals rather than better performance. In general framerates and resolution tended to get worse over the course of last generation. For example, The Last of Us had a worse framerate and worse aliasing than Uncharted 2, but it also had superior graphics overall.

[AnotherGamer117]

I am an older gamer and my ability to see the differences between 30 fps versus 60 fps is well not there. One does seem smoother I guess but it isn't a major issue for me. So better visuals over 60fps is fine for me.

[lemoncake]

No big shocker here, if what we have now is what we will have in the next few years this gen would be a massive fail. In all previous consoles the games at the start of the cycle were no where near as good as towards the end.

Infamous and co might look good now but in 5+ years people will look back at it and shudder when compared to what they currently have, it is the way of things.

[kryteris]

30 is plenty, 25-45 is enough for multiplayer. This 60 crap is so lame.

[PygmelionHunter]

It's because of stupid comments like this one that PC gamers bash console gamers all the time, and I'm a well proud console gamer but I know when to give up on fruitless arguments.

[PersonMan]

With a controller, 30fps feels fine to me.

However, with a mouse, 30fps feels very sluggish.

Since controllers aren't as speedy as a mouse, 30fps is useable and it's preferred over CoD-type visuals at the cost of running 60fps.

[kryteris]

both pc and console, the obsession about 60fps is as stupid as your comment. The drastic sustained drops in fps is the issue.

[No_Limit]

I'll believe it when I see it. They said KZ MP was 1080p and 60fps on multiplayer when it is far away from it and the The Order: 1886 was said to maxed out the PS4 and it is only 30fps and with black borders.

Hopefully it is true because it will be great for future games on my PS4 but I take anything that developers said (both PS4 and XB1) with a grain of salt until I see them.

[Holeran]

No one has said that The Order 1886 has maxed out PS4. An independent developer working on a download only title has said that he thinks The Order 1886 comes close to maxing out the PS4. Yet he has seen no more than you or I in terms of what The Order 1886 is. He isn't working on it nor does he know any of its tech. He has seen trailers, that is all.

[TBONEJF]

What's the big DEAL on frames per second. shouldn't it be about FULL REALISM graphics?

[Holeran]

I always thought if I could have the level graphics of Killzone 2 or 3 ,or Uncharted 2 or 3 , or The Last Of Us in 1080p at 60fps I would be a happy man. I still stick to that.

[PersonMan]

60fps isn't much of an upgrade. So you're basically saying, you're fine with PS3 graphics then... what's the point in buying a new console if your only concern is making last-gen-looking games run at 60fps?

[Holeran]

Sorry to tell you but 60 fps on a Television that utilizes it correctly is a huge difference.

[coolcal]

The more i come to this site, the more i start to hate games in general!!!
Buy the system u like. Who really cares people?? 5-8 years from now it's all gonna look like low res on 4K televisions. If it means that much to anybody go by a Damn PC. the fact is PS4 and XBOX one are both under powered in comparison to the PC market. Titain fall is Fun, I'm sure Infamous is going to be fun as well. These games are made by top developers that almost guarantee a solid experience no matter what system you have.1080p-720, 60fps-30fps…this sells better than that"sheehh" Maybe I'm just getting old but this shit doesn't matter if it's a great game!! Minecraft has none of that crap and people really enjoy that title. The people on this site are no better than the people in politics. the only difference is…instead of ruining our country you guys are ruining "GAMING" play the games not the specs!! or just STFU!!

[DrJones]

I know. This site's main focus isn't on games anymore. Try Eurogamer or IGN.

[The_Sneauxman]

IGN has been known to accept money to not discuss flaws and other hinderances from M$. I for one take what they say with a grain of salt.

[LKHGFDSA]

doesn't matter if it "could", it only matters if it does.
alot of people thought the PS3 would do 1080p and it never did.

[PersonMan]

Why should they stop there. They could increase the graphic fidelity even more and keep the 30fps in my opinion.

If this is the best we're gonna get, but the frame rate gets turned up, that's pretty disappointing.

I want some graphics like the Sorcerer demo.

[Azzanation]

Yeah ok, any console can run any game in 1080p and 60 frames, even the WiiU. There are a lot of effects used in next gen games that eat up so much power. Turn them off and there's your 60 frames or 1080p. Honestly you want to play games with linear gameplay or no effects? Id rather play games at 30 frames or even 720p if it was to increase the fun in a game like Dead Rising 3 where they added 20,000 Zombies in the screen.

[Warghoul71]

3rd person games like Tomb Raider, Splinter Cell, Assasins Creed are fine @ 1080p 30. First Person Shooters should be 1080p 60 even if it means somewhat lower textures.

[Kaiou]

1+1=2
think of it like this : 60FPS = Worse graphics PERIOD , it's a trade off between speed and eye candy.I personally prefer a great looking 30 FPS game(The Last Of us , Uncharted) over a fast but decent looking game.30 fps is also great for games with a PC version or an inevitable HD version because then the speed won't be a problem (GTA 5 and Dark Souls 2)

[ironmonkey]

I can live with the 1080p/30 fps for a single player game.

[glennco]

It doesn't need to be 60fps, it is not that sort of game where it would benefit much.

[CorporateBullshit]

Even back in the day the pc always offered extra fidelity over a console..did we care playing goldeneye via s video compared too quake in high resolution on a pc monitor,no,because we were having to much fun.

Hd isn't anything new,it's been around for 20 years,nor is super ultra hd the ipso factor in gaming.

It's funny,all these folks who drum on and on about resolution and graphical effects are the same people who never used a descent tv cable with there old sd tv.

I hope infamous is a great game with great gameplay,I couldn't care less about what resolution it runs out.

[Mister_Dawg]

Will I win the lottery?

Maybe. However, its highly unlikely.

[CorporateBullshit]

Developers should be using the extra cc of the new consoles to push ai and the areas that benefit gameplay,not graphical effects..

I just hope we don't end up with another generation where the only real advancements are poly counts,res,lighting and framerates.

Havent developers realised what we have now is enough,focus on he gameplay.

Already most seem convinced that frame rate and resolution is more important this gen.'

I remember spending more time playing bioshock infinite more over Christmas on my ps3 then killzone shadowfall on my ps4..one was 720p with a frame rate that barely stayed above 20 frames but the desire to play was greater then the performance of my ps3.

It's always about gameplay,graphics just cement a great game.

[sgtGanGreen]

Close? This gen in 5 years suppose to have 4k 30fps

[The_devils_chum]

It may even do more than that because during the ps4 tear down they found 2 gb of GDDR3 ram. it may be for direct x 12 or another open gl upgrade or something that used in tandom with the VR head set.

[Tei777]

This is a given. Since when has a launch window title set the ceiling for whats possible on a system? By the end of the gen I'm sure we'll have games which look much better then second son running at 60fps/1080p and games that look even better then that running 1080p/30fps.

[dja1nhb]

i remember when the ps3 came out and sonys promise of 1080p and 120 fps what a load of bullshit and the cant do that 7-8 years later who cares so long as the game is smooth enough and looks good and is fun to play

[PS4FEVER]

No developer is trying to max out the ps4 , they want to always leave room for improvement so in the sequels/future games etc they can boast about improvement in graphics. Consumers love hearing about improved graphics.