No more 60FPS games from Insomniac.


irc60

Insomniac Games conducted some interesting research into the correlation of Game’s graphics/frame rate and review scores/sales and came up with these two interesting results;

• A higher framerate does not significantly affect the reviews of a game.

• A higher framerate does not significantly affect sales of a game.

You can look at Uncharted 2 (and even Halo 3) as a good example of a great game well recieved with a frame frate of 30FPS. The difference between the frame rates affects how smooth the gameplay is and more importantly how responsive the controls are. Insomniac have decided after this research that gamers/critics are not needing games to be at 60FPS and have decided that in the future they are willing to make the sacrifice in frame rate to make a game look better. Its a shame as I always thought the Resistence games could have been improved greatly with 60 FPS rate like the Call of Duty series.

You can read the full research with all the answers over at the Insomniac Blog.


Written by: Trev - Contributing Editor


  1. #1 by Darrin on October 30th, 2009 [ 17143 Points ]

    They are right: reviews and the gaming community generally ignore FPS. It generally can’t be measured by users, you can’t see it in screenshots or video footage (unless it drops really low).

    And 60 vs 30 FPS requires a lot more hardware horsepower that can be used for other things.

  2. #2 by Paranoimia on October 30th, 2009

    The human eye can’t really detect much above 24-25fps anyway, so a rock-solid 30fps is fine by me. Use the power elsewhere to improve other things – like maybe true 1080p games.

    The whole fps argument is only generally used by die-hard hardware geeks anyway, and came about largely through PC-based FPS games and arguments over who had the better graphics cards.

    A highly detailed 30fps game will always be more preferable to me than a 60fps game with lower detail.

  3. #3 by Ceidz on October 30th, 2009 [ 40120 Points ]

    I do not totally agree with you Paranoimia. 24 fps is the lower bound that the eye can see without seeing choppiness. The human eye does see a difference between 30 and 60fps.
    When I first played Ratchet & Clank, I DID notice the 60fps ! It’s so much smoother than other games !
    Of course, I do agree with you too about the rock-solid 30fps with higher detail.

  4. #4 by Emrah on October 30th, 2009 [ 7319 Points ]

    I prefer 60 fps smoothness over extra polygons most time of the day. I can differentiate between 30 and 60 fps very easily. So this is sad news for me. I want to do a side by side comparison of 30 and 60 fps in a 60 fps video to be viewed on 60hz monitor someday, and people who don’t get it will realize they get it.

    One reason COD looks so awesome in motion is because it runs at 60fps. It simply rewards your eyes with more motion information.

  5. #5 by Emrah on October 30th, 2009 [ 7319 Points ]

    Btw, people do not realize making a game run at 60fps adds to its appeal, even if some/most can’t fully understand of put a finger on it. I applaud Nintendo’s commitment to 60fps gaming.

  6. #6 by Legion213 on November 1st, 2009

    If i had a choice between 30fps and a crisp looking game. Or, 60fps with a fuzzy almost out of focus looking game. I would pick the 30fps every time.

    I played the Rachet and Clank demo and if that is running at 60fps then I am sorry but the fuzzy visuals was a bad trade. If you can find a happy medium then great. But make the game look its best first. Then worry about the FPS.

  7. #7 by iLLersz1 on November 7th, 2009

    ((…the sacrifice in frame rate to make a game look better))

    How is this possible !?


You must be logged in to post a comment.

Like trophies? Like giveaways? Want to speak your mind? Register here!