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

Naughty Dog won't push Uncharted 4 to 60fps if it compromises player experience

Even if it's not to the pedigree as Ubisoft, the fact that ND had to kill expectations like that doesn't change the fact it is the same type of PR speak. Most disappointing, especially from a pedigree like ND. They could've played it safe but they tried to buy free "PR" by releasing a faux-60fps to build unrealistic expectations.

As someone who advertantly defended them from such design choice only made me feel like a damn idiot. If you're going to wow me and buy my expectations like this than you lost a day-one sale. I'll rather wait for a PS5 remaster instead.

I've always wanted an excuse to buy a PS4 but now it seems the reasons are getting crossed out one by one each year.
 
lukeskymac said:
Because the difference between 30fps and 60fps as far as input latency goes is negligible for most types of games (including this one).
Click to expand...

That is completely false, as the screen takes half the amount of time to update since there's less frames to display. The difference in gameplay experience between 30fps and 60fps is huge. The difference in gameplay experience between 60fps and 120fps is huge (maybe not as much).
 
Prime crotch said:
Player experience encompasses a lot, and if we narrow the focus to the Uncharted experience, graphical fidelity is more important. Naughty Dog impressed everyone with the quality of visuals achieved and at a stable framerate. They probably find the uncapped experience far too jittery to be playable and or cant spend more resources in it.
Click to expand...
Yea sure. So long as they want to ensure that Uncharted is never anything more than a 'for its time' graphical showcase, then I get it. Its not that I don't understand, I just really wish things were different and these games that value presentation over gameplay/playability weren't as popular. Sets a bad precedent.
 
Yet again we find ourselves with people failing to understand the gulf between 'aiming for' and 'will not accept less than'. This is an ND game, they exist to push the visuals TLoU was an aberration born of the 'spare' power enjoyed in bringing a game designed for last gen to this. Are people seriously trying to claim that Uncharted 2 was crap because it was 30 FPS?
 
Good grief, Uncharted threads really bring out all the shitposters. Why the hell are most people overreacting to Bruce's statement? The game is still 10 months away from release and I'm sure by the time of release the game will either hit 60FPS or look significantly better if they really target 30FPS.
 
Fletch said:
That is completely false, as the screen takes half the amount of time to update since there's less frames to display. The difference in gameplay experience between 30fps and 60fps is huge. The difference in gameplay experience between 60fps and 120fps is huge (maybe not as much).
Click to expand...
Input polling IS NOT tied to Screen refresh rates, that can run autonomously and many games do this mostly racers (need for Speed, DriveClub) and makes the ms gap between the 2 not really an issue.

Most making out 60 is the be all and end all are basing on some false elevated status os superiority.

It is objectively better = Yes
Does it make a game better = No


Seanspeed said:
Yea sure. So long as they want to ensure that Uncharted is never anything more than a 'for its time' graphical showcase, then I get it. Its not that I don't understand, I just really wish things were different and these games that value presentation over gameplay/playability weren't as popular. Sets a bad precedent.
Click to expand...

The thing is and this is very common, that the thought that lower fps is ONLY for visuals and it is completely false and uninformed.

Many aspects of the framebudget are fixed if 30 or 60 (33 vs 16) having to working within a budget of 8-9ms for everything else including, physics, AI, path finding etc for some tiny examples is/can be hard and results in content cut. Having this budget go to 25-26ms makes a HUGE difference.

Sacrifices get made by the individual dev, visuals are a big part of that but not all changes are for that reason alone.
 
Well... ever since that ICE guy came out and mention that he would rather have 30 fps with the bells and the whistles, I think it would be safe to assume that all Sony first party games are going to be stuck at 30 fps MAX with HOPEFULLY really cool effects and graphics
 
cyberheater said:
LOL. They did not promise. They hoped they could get to 60fps and shared that hope with their fans.
Click to expand...

They strongly implied multiple times they were aiming for 60FPS, that is more than just 'hoping'.

Yes, they never explicitly stated the game was going to achieve it (some of the reactions in this thread act like they did), but they created false expectations which was not a smart thing to do. Like I said, I agree with their decision, but they could have easily avoided disappointment by not doubling down on their statements about 60FPS.
 
I'm not liking the way people are taking this generation at all. We even have a poster who will accept screen tearing to reach 60fps. This is crazy and I really hope developers don't start pandering to it. We'll just end up with a higher resolution version of last generation's visuals at 60fps.
 
1080/30 locked with all the good stuff in SP and 1080/60 in MP would be great. TLOU 60 was glorious but for me only made an impact on gameplay in MP.
 
R_Deckard said:
Input polling IS NOT tied to Screen refresh rates, that can run autonomously and many games do this mostly racers (need for Speed, DriveClub) and makes the ms gap between the 2 not really an issue.

Most making out 60 is the be all and end all are basing on some false elevated status os superiority.
Click to expand...

What you're talking about is completely irrelevant, the screen still shows HALF the frames and takes HALF the time to show them to you. It's a pure visual thing, and it feels delayed.

R_Deckard said:
It is objectively better = Yes
Does it make a game better = No
Click to expand...

Are you serious? A higher framerate doesn't make a game better?
 
R_Deckard said:
The thing is and this is very common, that the thought that lower fps is ONLY for visuals and it is completely false and uninformed.

Many aspects of the framebudget are fixed if 30 or 60 (33 vs 16) having to working within a budget of 8-9ms for everything else including, physics, AI, path finding etc for some tiny examples is/can be hard and results in content cut. Having this budget go to 25-26ms makes a HUGE difference.

Sacrifices get made by the individual dev, visuals are a big part of that but not all changes are for that reason alone.
Click to expand...
Yea, I forgot all about all the advanced AI and physics that Uncharted requires. Silly me.

Its about graphics here dude. We all know it.
 
Stereogatari said:
And here it is at 60fps:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VnfcoHPAJk
Click to expand...

Oh shit, look how much better it plays at 60fps, why has it taken me this long to open my eyes.

8 years of playing games at sub 30fps on last gen was just like playing with a pile of dog shit.

IVE SEEN THE LIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fletch said:
What you're talking about is completely irrelevant, the screen still shows HALF the frames and takes HALF the time to show them to you. It's a pure visual thing, and it feels delayed.



Are you serious? A higher framerate doesn't make a game better?
Click to expand...

Unless you are playing a twitch shooter does it really matter?

60fps whiners shitting up threads is getting irritating. If you want 60fps+ then buy a PC, if you have a PC then play on it, if you want to play on consoles then put up with 30fps. The hardware is set, the decisions have been made, moaning about it on a forum won't suddenly make current gen consoles more powerful or all devs decide to make 60fps games.

If they did you whiners would probably whine about how the graphics look like last gen.
 
Just going to point this out.

Neogafs most anticipated games 2015

1.UC4 30 fps
2.MGS5 60 fps
3.Zelda 30 fps
4.Bloodbourne 30 fps
5.witcher 3 30 fps.

4 of the top 5 are 30 fps, 8 of the top 10 are 30 fps. My conclusion is that 60 fps is nice and even very important for certain genres, but not requured for most games.
 
Well that's a bit disappointing, was looking forward to the same smoothness that the Last of Us delivered on.
 
So you mean that highly controlled, pre rendered, super short teaser trailer running no physics, no AI or any other computationally intensive processes wasn't representative of what the final game will be?

Shock horror.
 
Just lock the single player at 30 FPS and ratchet things up to 60 FPS in multiplayer. Keep the spectacle and visual wow and have it play great where it counts.
 
Bricky said:
They strongly implied multiple times they were aiming for 60FPS, that is more than just 'hoping'.
Click to expand...

A dev saying they are aiming for is NOT the same as promising. If Uncharted fans are confused about the difference between those two words then that's on them.
 
ArkhamFantasy said:
Just going to point this out.

Neogafs most anticipated games 2015

1.UC4 30 fps
2.MGS5 60 fps
3.Zelda 30 fps
4.Bloodbourne 30 fps
5.witcher 3 30 fps.

4 of the top 5 are 30 fps, 8 of the top 10 are 30 fps. My conclusion is that 60 fps is nice and even very important for certain genres, but not requured for most games.
Click to expand...

I don't think many are saying it's required for all games, most are reacting to others saying that 30fps is "fine" and 60fps isn't worth it. Which in my opinion, is crazy.
 
Fletch said:
What you're talking about is completely irrelevant, the screen still shows HALF the frames and takes HALF the time to show them to you. It's a pure visual thing, and it feels delayed.
Click to expand...
But your argument was input being slower, now you have moved it to the visual side. Flip flopping arguments never work out, presentation is better in 60 than 30 as i have already said.



Fletch said:
Are you serious? A higher framerate doesn't make a game better?
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. It looks better but playing Alien isolation (as one example) is identical at 30 as it is at 60, gameplay, immersion and enjoyment are altered not a jot only presentation.
 
I think 30fps is fine, and can be smooth. The fluid nature of 60fps is appreciated when possible. Stability is king though. The problem with 30fps is that is tends to be unlocked and fluctuating from teen to mid twenties and that experience accounts for the jank feeling. Imo.
 
ArkhamFantasy said:
My conclusion is that 60 fps is nice and even very important for certain genres, but not requured for most games.
Click to expand...

Yep. some of GAF will tell you that racing games must be 60fps. Drive Club says high. It's super smooth and plays great at 30fps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Naughty Dog 40th Anniversary Retrospective
Trailer  2
58
761
alabtrosMyster replied
Naughty Dog censors certain symbols in their 40th anniversary video
2 3 4 5 6
293
2K
Memati187 replied
I miss Naughty Dog so much
2 3 4 5 6
270
3K
evanft replied
Jason Schreier: Naughty Dog enacts mandatory overtime for staff in order to finish Integalactic internal demo
9 10 11 12 13
612
2K
Andro Dunos replied
Why is Naughty Dog Causing Outrage !?
2
84
2K
Randall365 replied
Top Bottom