Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

John Carmack: Next-Gen Consoles Will Still Target 30fps

By - Source: DSO Gaming | B 102 comments

id Software's John Carmack still thinks next-generation console gaming will be limited to 30fps.

Id Software's John Carmack, who likely has already seen and fondled the next-generation console offerings from Microsoft and Sony, recently said via Twitter that a lot of the games running on these consoles will still target 30 frames per second instead of shooting for twice that amount.

This isn't the first time he's made the 30fps claim. Earlier this year, a fan told John Carmack that the human eye can't see more than 24Hz, the current frame rate directors use to shoot movies – except for Peter Jackson who just raised the bar with the just-released The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, filmed at 48Hz.

Carmack disagreed with the fan's "humans don't see more than 24Hz" statement, saying that it is "wrong on many levels". He then went on to explain that games running on next-generation consoles will likely continue to support only 30Hz/30fps games despite all the horses powering the hardware.

"There will still be lots of 30hz games, which I don’t think it is a good trade," he said. "If TVs didn’t add lag, it would be more clear cut." Now seven months later, Carmack still hasn't changed his tune.

There's a good chance many developers may stick to 30fps just so that more content can be packed into each frame. Epic Games is a good example of that which stuck to 30fps with Gears of War 3. "Our target is, and shall remain, 30fps," former Epic superstar Cliff Bleszinski said in an interview. "When asked about 60 we always respond that we'd rather have the extra juice to put more on screen and stick with 30."

For Gears of War 3, lowering the framerate meant adding multi-layered shadows, wind and particle effects, and levels that changed in real time. Sure, the next-generation hardware will be beefier and likely capable of 60fps, but sticking with 30fps may simply become a choice similar to what Epic Games made.

Currently the next Xbox is slated to make an appearance during E3 2013 in June, and a retail release sometime before Christmas 2013. The PlayStation 4 may also make an appearance next summer just so that Sony's PlayStation brand isn't left behind in the dust.


Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 102 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 25 Hide
    branflan , December 26, 2012 1:04 AM
    soldier2013Will stick with my gaming PC that gets 90-120 fps in current games at 2560 x 1600 res max settings with a single gtx 690. Consoles lol.


    I will stick to bragging about my hardware (that I probably don't even have) on forums.
  • 20 Hide
    adgjlsfhk , December 26, 2012 12:18 AM
    30 is the new 60 apparently.
  • 17 Hide
    friskiest , December 26, 2012 12:14 AM
    There's a big difference between 30 and 60 FPS, but I do agree on jacking up the visual instead of a higher FPS. Alot of console players would probably appreciate a step-up on graphics (compared to current generation) than anything else. I don't know- maybe putting more effects/visuals is less compute-intensive than doubling the framerate especially within the price that customers expect to buy it. A decent PC won't have this problem though.
Other Comments
  • 0 Hide
    supall , December 26, 2012 12:07 AM
    I wasn't aware that hz and fps were interchangeable.
  • 17 Hide
    friskiest , December 26, 2012 12:14 AM
    There's a big difference between 30 and 60 FPS, but I do agree on jacking up the visual instead of a higher FPS. Alot of console players would probably appreciate a step-up on graphics (compared to current generation) than anything else. I don't know- maybe putting more effects/visuals is less compute-intensive than doubling the framerate especially within the price that customers expect to buy it. A decent PC won't have this problem though.
  • 3 Hide
    friskiest , December 26, 2012 12:17 AM
    supallI wasn't aware that hz and fps were interchangeable.

    I don't think they are but for the sake of making it simple I guess they could be (occasionally).
  • 20 Hide
    adgjlsfhk , December 26, 2012 12:18 AM
    30 is the new 60 apparently.
  • 15 Hide
    trumpeter1994 , December 26, 2012 12:20 AM
    Alot of the console gamers I know would side with the 30fps and better visuals, I don't think they even notice it well until I(the PC gamer) comes over and starts pointing out how I can see the lag because I'm used to 60fps.
  • 14 Hide
    burlyed , December 26, 2012 12:30 AM
    "Heinrich Rudolf Hertz (22 February 1857 – 1 January 1894) was a German physicist who clarified and expanded James Clerk Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light ... The scientific unit of frequency — cycles per second — was named the "hertz" in his honor." - Wikipedia
  • 10 Hide
    rds1220 , December 26, 2012 12:34 AM
    Pff consoles... 30 fps no thanks I'll keep my gaming computer that 60-130 fps.
  • 17 Hide
    Anonymous , December 26, 2012 12:42 AM
    Yo Kevin,

    "...fondled the next-generation console "...what's up with that?

  • -7 Hide
    JOSHSKORN , December 26, 2012 12:45 AM
    rds1220Pff consoles... 30 fps no thanks I'll keep my gaming computer that 60-130 fps.

    Have fun with that. I'm sure you'll be able to get the same titles, too. Right? Look what happened after Halo 2. No more Halos on PC. :( 
  • 9 Hide
    atikkur , December 26, 2012 12:54 AM
    why not next-gen PC? now it's the time for PC gaming.
    i think what the most important is a steady fps.. 36fps is good enough as long it's steady.
  • 9 Hide
    beayn , December 26, 2012 12:58 AM
    I prefer 60fps in a game. Whoever says you can only see 24hz wasn't around in the old CRT monitor days. I could see a flicker on a 60hz monitor, and had to jack it up to 85hz to make it acceptable. FPS on an LCD monitor isn't as noticeable because of the reaction time, but I can still see a laggy kind of flicker when I play Halo on my xbox.. which is one of several reasons I only played it once.
  • 6 Hide
    rds1220 , December 26, 2012 1:03 AM
    I don't like Halo so I could could careless if it goes away. For the most part most games that you can get on consoles you can get for computers too. The problem is that they port these games for crappy consoles and then when it comes to comuters the gams perform like crap. Right now there are enough that it still makes it worth having a gaming computer especially since computers out perform consoles. I can barely stand 60 fps let alone 30 fps. As I said 30 fps no thanks I'll keep my gaming computer that will out perform any of the consoles.
  • 4 Hide
    boju , December 26, 2012 1:04 AM
    Copied from wiki.

    Quote:
    Persistence of vision may also create an illusion of continuity, allowing a sequence of still images to give the impression of motion. Early silent films had a frame rate from 14 to 24 FPS which was enough for the sense of motion, but it was perceived as jerky motion. By using projectors with dual- and triple-blade shutters the rate was multiplied two or three times as seen by the audience. Thomas Edison said that 46 frames per second was the minimum: "anything less will strain the eye.


    Think they're talking about shutter movies, not sure. But still, movies today with fast action sequences is quite hard to focus on surrounding objects. Have yet to see the Hobbit but have heard those blurred objects from motion blur will be extremely clear to the point it would feel uneasy at first. Just like going from a 60hz to 120hz monitor.

    Games i assume would behave the same way with motion blur below 60hz
  • 25 Hide
    branflan , December 26, 2012 1:04 AM
    soldier2013Will stick with my gaming PC that gets 90-120 fps in current games at 2560 x 1600 res max settings with a single gtx 690. Consoles lol.


    I will stick to bragging about my hardware (that I probably don't even have) on forums.
  • 1 Hide
    JAYDEEJOHN , December 26, 2012 1:06 AM
    This also allows for lowest common denominator on PC as well, which widens your customer base
  • 0 Hide
    rds1220 , December 26, 2012 1:07 AM
    I really could careless if Halo goes away I don't like it anyway. The problem I see and I'm tired of is that game developers port these games to crappy consoles then when it comes to computers these same titles perform like crap again becaus they are ported for consoles. There are enough games out there that have titles in both consoles and computers and considering that computers easily outperform consoles I'll take a gaming computer without thinking twice. As I said 30 fps no thanks I'll keep my gaming computer that 60-130 fps.
  • -5 Hide
    rds1220 , December 26, 2012 1:09 AM
    JOSHSKORNHave fun with that. I'm sure you'll be able to get the same titles, too. Right? Look what happened after Halo 2. No more Halos on PC.


    I really could careless if Halo goes away I don't like it anyway. The problem I see and I'm tired of is that game developers port these games to crappy consoles then when it comes to computers these same titles perform like crap again becaus they are ported for consoles. There are enough games out there that have titles in both consoles and computers and considering that computers easily outperform consoles I'll take a gaming computer without thinking twice. As I said 30 fps no thanks I'll keep my gaming computer that 60-130 fps.
  • 5 Hide
    tolham , December 26, 2012 1:13 AM
    JOSHSKORNHave fun with that. I'm sure you'll be able to get the same titles, too. Right? Look what happened after Halo 2. No more Halos on PC.

    same thing can be said if you buy a ps3, right? *all* platforms have a downside of titles that are exclusive to another platform.
  • 2 Hide
    jhansonxi , December 26, 2012 1:17 AM
    Here's a subjective opinion of the benefits of 24fps vs. HFS (like 48fps):
    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/12/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-masterclass-in-why-48-fps-fails/
Display more comments