• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

inFAMOUS: Second Son runs at 1080p and 30FPS

Judging by Dr. Kitty Muffins' post right after yours, apparently not everyone knows exactly what you're talking about though.
Feel free to hate on the game for being 30fps, I have no issue with that. It's fine with me but I can understand some people really prefer 60fps.

That is unfortunate, but I will keep using the term because both 24fps and 30fps share the same effect to my eyes. When my car engine "judders" it is the same feeling my eyes get when I view 30fps material on a 60hz television. It's jumping across the screen in a manner that is far from smooth. I apologize for being rash sometimes.

I am simply very passionate about developers making games match the refresh rates that have been set in stone for decades and am getting tired of subpar performance being accepted and becoming more widespread. NES/SNES days 60hz games were the norm and it was a time of great virtue and tranquility seeing all my games move at a smoothness that made me giggle like a schoolchild inside. The past few generations have seen a huge decline in the smoothness of games for virtually no visual benefit and great disservice to the eyes of millions of gamers.
 
Locked 30FPS in an inFamous game is pretty good for Sucker Punch on a new system. The first two games got pretty choppy in big battles.
 
A locked 30 is much more preferable than a framerate that tries to be 60 just to have a box quote but ends up bouncing everywhere between 30 and 60 because it can't actually handle 60. That shit drives me nuts on PC games that my PC can't handle well.
 
kIZqnGV.png


lawl.

lol

Hopefully this game is 30fps and not "30fps" like DR3.
 
When I played the older titles with a variable framerate I was always excited when the fps jumped to 45-60.

I was always giddy at the prospect of playing these games at 45-60fps. Imagining the silky smooth movements and how awesome it would be. I convinced myself that next-gen will make it real! I was wrong. But it is part of the first batch of games I can accept it.

I likw that it is locked versus the variable rate though. It will be consistent.

Still a day one for me.
 
A locked 30 is much more preferable than a framerate that tries to be 60 just to have a box quote but ends up bouncing everywhere between 30 and 60 because it can't actually handle 60. That shit drives me nuts on PC games that my PC can't handle well.
Save us G-Sync!
 
When I played the older titles with a variable framerate I was always excited when the fps jumped to 45-60.

I was always giddy at the prospect of playing these games at 45-60fps. Imagining the silky smooth movements and how awesome it would be. I convinced myself that next-gen will make it real! I was wrong. But it is part of the first batch of games I can accept it.

I likw that it is locked versus the variable rate though. It will be consistent.

Still a day one for me.
The thing is, Infamous is mostly 30 fps with dips. It only goes up to 60 when it is hardly rendering anything.

Locked 30 is the best option for Infamous at the moment. It dips a lot.

Thank you Y2kev.
 
A locked 30 is much more preferable than a framerate that tries to be 60 just to have a box quote but ends up bouncing everywhere between 30 and 60 because it can't actually handle 60. That shit drives me nuts on PC games that my PC can't handle well.

I disagree, I can handle a few temporary drops as long as I get a high frame rate most of the times. Besides, locked 30 is very rarely locked, as it often dips below that threshold. Are people honestly saying that they'd prefer it if Battlefield 4 operated at 30 fps on PS4 instead of the current situation of mostly 50 to 60 with rare drops? I can't believe that.
 
A locked 30 is much more preferable than a framerate that tries to be 60 just to have a box quote but ends up bouncing everywhere between 30 and 60 because it can't actually handle 60. That shit drives me nuts on PC games that my PC can't handle well.

This is very true. 60 fps is so superior to 30 fps that - once you are aware of the difference - it can really affect your gaming experience significantly (at least for me). But the most important thing - above just raw fps, average fps, etc - is having a stable framerate. You're eyes/brain will adjust if it's consistent.

A game that runs 60fps most of the time but with frequent dips to 40 or 45 fps is much more distracting and noticeable then a stable, consistent framerate at a lower fps (e.g. 30 fps)

I wasn't really expecting this game to run at both 1080p and 60fps, but it would have been really, really nice if it did. I'll still play the hell out of it anyway. Action-games aren't as badly affected by lower framerates as something like a racing game or a FPS. Still 30 fps is really the bare minimum. For example, one thread posted here claimed that Dead Rising 3 ran at 20-30 fps. I immediately cancelled my pre-order as that is just borderline unplayable for me.
 
I disagree, I can handle a few temporary drops as long as I get a high frame rate most of the times. Besides, locked 30 is very rarely locked, as it often dips below that threshold. Are people honestly saying that they'd prefer it if Battlefield 4 operated at 30 fps on PS4 instead of the current situation of mostly 50 to 60 with rare drops? I can't believe that.

FPS vs open world, both make sense for each game.
 
Bit of a shame since Infamous's gameplay would be incredibly sharp at 60fps. Maybe we'll start getting both as devs work out how to get the most of the console.

Were people expecting more than 30fps?
 
I'm just happy this is 1080p! But 30 fps is pretty standard for open world shenanigans IMO. This game looks amazing, and if it's a solid performance with no screen tearing and the likes, they've done well.
 
That is unfortunate, but I will keep using the term because both 24fps and 30fps share the same effect to my eyes. When my car engine "judders" it is the same feeling my eyes get when I view 30fps material on a 60hz television. It's jumping across the screen in a manner that is far from smooth. I apologize for being rash sometimes.
Your car engine does not "judder". I think you're confusing "shudder" with "judder". Am I right?
Too bad you are really sensitive to 60Hz, I don't think you're going to enjoy this console generation much and might want to stick to PC.
 
I'm okay with 30FPS if there is no loading time and its truly an open sandbox world. 30 FPS locked with those kind of graphics in a sandbox world will be incredible. I admit, 60 FPS is what I want from most games. But I'm willing to give it a pass I think here.
 
The thing is, Infamous is mostly 30 fps with dips. It only goes up to 60 when it is hardly rendering anything.

Locked 30 is the best option for Infamous at the moment. It dips a lot.

Thank you Y2kev.

Yeah that's true. I was just more excited at the prospect of a 60fps Infamous title.
 
Your car engine does not "judder". I think you're confusing "shudder" with "judder". Am I right?
Too bad you are really sensitive to 60Hz, I don't think you're going to enjoy this console generation much and might want to stick to PC.

Judder means to shake or vibrate.

When I play at 30fps, It appears shakey to me.
 
Your car engine does not "judder". I think you're confusing "shudder" with "judder". Am I right?
Too bad you are really sensitive to 60Hz, I don't think you're going to enjoy this console generation much and might want to stick to PC.

Have to do it.

judder [ˈdʒʌdə] Informal chiefly Brit
vb
(intr) to shake or vibrate
n
1. (Engineering / Automotive Engineering) abnormal vibration in a mechanical system, esp due to grabbing between friction surfaces, as in the clutch of a motor vehicle
2. a juddering motion

My car engine can judder, and I feel it, 30fps is a juddering motion to my eyes.


Back on point, I will indeed have to miss most of the last or next to last console generation. Personal computing devices will kill off the archaic concept of a console soon enough.
 
1080p and a STABLE 30fps sounds good to me. This is an open world game with a lot of shit going on.

People seem to be getting worked up for nothing really.
 
Wow didn't know Judder actually originated from the auto industry, thanks. We can now lay this argument to rest.
Personal computing devices will kill off the archaic concept of a console soon enough.
I'm assuming you mean mobile devices? They're even worse!
 
Wow didn't know Judder actually originated from the auto industry, thanks. We can now lay this argument to rest.

I'm assuming you mean mobile devices? They're even worse!

I am talking about all manner of "PC" type devices. I can't wait until "Playstation/XBox/Nintendo" are simply brands of software that are on PC/Tablets/Android devices. Having 3 consoles in the marketplace increases the price of gaming due to having to have all 3 devices to play every game, it decreases competition and quality control due to developers accepting money to be on one or the other and just screws gamers in general.

Way back in 1993 having multiple consoles was good, as it prevented one company, **coughNintendocough** from having a monopoly and god knows what would have came from that. We don't need to be chained to consoles with silly and pedantic exclusivity agreements and developers striving for subpar performance anymore. We should strive for the very best, imo.
 
Will this game run at 60 FPS on 720p HDTVs? I'm not buying a 1080p HDTV any time soon so I want to know.

I don't expect it, but I'd like to know if their are advantages performance-wise when you play all PS4-games in 720p.

I'm glad that it runs in 1080p, never expected 60 FPS.
 
I disagree, I can handle a few temporary drops as long as I get a high frame rate most of the times. Besides, locked 30 is very rarely locked, as it often dips below that threshold. Are people honestly saying that they'd prefer it if Battlefield 4 operated at 30 fps on PS4 instead of the current situation of mostly 50 to 60 with rare drops? I can't believe that.

55fps is fine since I'll barely notice a drop like that but when a game starts hopping from 60 to 45 to 53 to 37 I'm ready to slam my head through a wall in frustration. That's when I either start reluctantly lowering settings or finding a way to lock it to 30. Thankfully that's a problem I rarely come across with my PC.
 
I am talking about all manner of "PC" type devices. I can't wait until "Playstation/XBox/Nintendo" are simply brands of software that are on PC/Tablets/Android devices. Having 3 consoles in the marketplace increases the price of gaming due to having to have all 3 devices to play every game, it decreases competition and quality control due to developers accepting money to be on one or the other and just screws gamers in general.
PC's are worse than having multiple consoles, as there are a plethora of different hardware/software combinations out there, and the same goes for tablets.
Unless there is a single console domination, this is not going to change.
 
My feelings?

If it's a fast paced MP shooter, 60FPS please.

If it's a single player experience, I'll take 30FPS locked if that means I can get more stuff going on.
 
55fps is fine since I'll barely notice a drop like that but when a game starts hopping from 60 to 45 to 53 to 37 I'm ready to slam my head through a wall in frustration. That's when I either start reluctantly lowering settings or finding a way to lock it to 30. Thankfully that's a problem I rarely come across with my PC.

I can sympathize if it happens all the time, not if it is a relatively rare occurrence. In my opinion it's simply wrong to gimp you whole experience based on sporadic drops. Changing a few settings is indefinitely preferable, especially because many graphics settings kill the frame rate without providing a much improved visual result. Obsessing about having everything "on max" is not the right way of thinking.
 
It's too bad that it's 30 fps for 1080p. I wonder if there will be a way to increase FPS if I disable some stuff. I don't need it to look fancy, but I would like it to run smoothly.
 
As long as that's a stable framerate and not the horror movie quality framerate of some of the other inFamous titles, that'll at least be an improvement. And the game does look astonishing everywhere else, so ti's all about making sure that's a rock solid FR number. I have learned on consoles ain't nothing to do about devs targeting 30FPS, but I don't have to lower my standards to some fluctuating nightmare. That's what I'll be looking for.
 
It's too bad that it's 30 fps for 1080p. I wonder if there will be a way to increase FPS if I disable some stuff. I don't need it to look fancy, but I would like it to run smoothly.

I wish console games had options like this, I'd dearly love to be able to disable AA in a lot of games even if it doesn't increase the frame rate.
 
I wish console games had options like this, I'd dearly love to be able to disable AA in a lot of games even if it doesn't increase the frame rate.

You know what, I would not be surprised if the next gen (after this) allowed something along those lines.

In fact I wouldn't be shocked if this one lasted just 4-5 yrs and the next is the same architecture that's (finally) backwards compatible with simply beefed up specs.

Days of over excessive R&D are over, just AMD gear in a black box..... job done.
 
At this point it is basically guaranteed that outside of a small handful of games there is no way the PS5 generation will be 4K. To be honest though I am not always bothered by 30 fps, it really depends on the game and how it is implemented.
 
Guys, 30 fps is rarely if ever stable. It will drop lower, it's no use hoping for a 30 fps frame rate with no drops.

there's no reason that should be. If you cannot be stable 95% of the time, lower the visual standard. Up to the devs, but that's how my money shall be spent.
 
I don't know about you guys, but I rather take 720p and 60fps than 1080p and 30fps.

I don't think that would have been the case - it'd be more like 720p with 40ish fps, or 1080p with 30ish fps.

You know what, I would not be surprised if the next gen (after this) allowed something along those lines.

In fact I wouldn't be shocked if this one lasted just 4-5 yrs and the next is the same architecture that's (finally) backwards compatible with simply beefed up specs.

Days of over excessive R&D are over, just AMD gear in a black box..... job done.

The point of console gaming is plug and play - if they allowed people to change specs, drivers and related software would be necessary, so it'd be the same as PC, and console optimization would no longer be a thing. Due to the diversity in hardware and software, and lack of optimization, if you put a console and a PC side by side, the PC would probably need around 15-25% more power (GPU/CPU, depending on the game.) to play games as efficiently as the console (With the same settings and FPS.).

Console games are already supposed to be optimized beyond settings. They could allow people to disable AA, but I don't think there are many people who would want to do so.
 
Game looked extremely smooth in the footage recently released. Doesn't hurt that the animations look like just about the best I have seen in an open world game. Anyway, I like what I am seeing
 
Guys, 30 fps is rarely if ever stable. It will drop lower, it's no use hoping for a 30 fps frame rate with no drops.

Nope. You just need to create game with FPS minimum above 30 fps and lock it to 30.

GOW3 for example was 40-50 game all the time but they choose not to lock it.
 
Top Bottom