DriveClub Dev: “I’d Rather Have More Stuff Going On And A Lower Frame Rate”

Are you happy with the PS4’s initial first party racing game running at thirty frames per second, half that of the competition’s Forza 5? It seems Evolution are battling internally over the best solution, but hearing that they’re having to have this debate is disheartening, even disregarding the Xbox One’s launch title.

Sony’s free-to-play community-based racer might look pretty on launch, but the E3 demo didn’t do the game a huge amount of favours, and hopes are high that the demo to be shown next month is of a different course with better visual fidelity.

“I’d rather have more stuff going on at a prettier level and a lower frame rate,” says Driveclub‘s art director Alex Perkins [via], “but that’s where the arguments start.”

“The coders would rather have a higher frame rate, and put less stuff in. So it comes down to Col Rodger‘s decision in the long run. Personally I’m quite happy with a 30 frames a second game, as long as it’s rock solid at thirty, and being an art director I want it to look beautiful.”

“There is a hell of a lot going on,” Perkins adds. “Increased visual fidelity does cost, there’s no argument about it. The PlayStation 4 is very capable of doing both but we’ve gone for a fully dynamic environment, so you can go any time of day, anywhere on the planet, and it’ll calculate the atmospheric density, whether you’re up the top of a mountain or at sea level.”

Cute. But we were told the developers are aiming at 60 frames a second, and – to be honest – it really needs to achieve that level. If that means sacrificing atmospheric density, let’s do that.

– PAGE CONTINUES BELOW –

45 Comments

  1. Don’t drop the ball with this one guys, nothing less than 60fps will do for a showcase title like this, deal with it!

    • Agreed.

      Racers are one genre where the devs should hit 60fps first & foremost then dial the graphics up as high as they possibly can without dropping a single frame.

  2. I fully appreciated that the PS3 couldn’t do 1080p at 60 FPS very easily, but my opinion on PS4 is that it should be 1080p at 60 FPS at least. Then 30 FPS at 4K resolution.

    I don’t want to have a game on a PS4, and the same version on PC and have my PC trounce it by 30 FPS… :(

    I may seem like I’m being picky, but if my 1 1/2 year old PC can do 1080p/60 FPS, the brand new PS4 should be able to as well. It’s technically more powerful than my PC and has a smaller OS…

    • I guess for PS4-exclusive games such as Driveclub, I can’t really complain. Because I won’t know any better for that game. But for multi-platform stuff such as F1 2014 and Watch Dogs, if it runs at 60 FPS on my PC but not on PS4, I won’t be very amused. :P

  3. I’m with the dev. Much rather have a great looking game at a rock solid 30fps, than a bland game at 60fps.

  4. Sigh, fail.

    I had such medium-high hopes.

    • Lol, good to see that you didn’t give it the full ‘high’ hopes and kept a little in reserve. :P

  5. Time for a twitter campaign! #driveclub60fps

  6. And what effect exactly would atmospheric pressure have on a racing game. Why people think we want everything totally realistic is beyond me. I just want fun not a flight simulator. Don’t waste system resources computing behind the scenes stuff that will have minimal effect on game play.

    • My thoughts too, why do they need to be getting into pure simulation territory like this with atmospheric density likely affecting car performance.?
      Give Kaz a call at Polyphony Digital and see if he wants it for Gran Turismo 7.
      Just get it running at 60fps…..do it!

      • It’s doubly bizarre as they’ve been at lengths to say it’s not a pure sim experience, offering something in between arcade & sim

      • Yep, that’s been the impression I’ve had from it’s announcement, an arcade racer with simulation style set up if desired.

        Having the atmospheric pressure/density effects in the ‘DriveClub World’ would obviously have an affect on the cars air intake and performance…..which to me seems a bit over the top for what is primarily an arcade racer, it’s more like F1 Wind Tunnel shizz!!

      • Aye exactly. I’m with Freeze on this one. Just give us a decent racer that runs @ 60fps and never mind the atmosphere shite.

  7. Classic case of being rushed to complete a project by launch day. Such a shame as the game looks cool but it strikes me as one which needs more development time.

    • It definitely sounds like it to me aswell. The demo at E3 wasn’t good or finished properly and its not long until release and they are saying this now?

      I would have thought this was all sorted by now. Wowsers trousers

    • Yes!

      :(

  8. I’m one of those people that gets motion sick pretty easily with some games. I remember playing Ecco the Dolphin on the Megadrive and having to have a lie down after about 10 minutes. Goldeneye on the Nintendo64 was the same – almost all FPS on the PS2 were unplayable to me and even now games like Assassin’s Creed can leave me with a massive headache after extended play.

    So for me it’s not just some dry discussion about minimum graphical standards, 60FPS means a more comfortable playing experience. Although I have friends who have similar experiences with some games I don’t think it gets mentioned much. We can’t be the only ones can we?

    • No, I’m the same. Racing games should aim at 60fps, the difference between (say) Need for Speed and Burnout Paradise (or GT5) is huge.

      DriveClub needs to hit 60.

  9. At least make it optional for the user, 60fps vanilla, or 30fps with bells and whistle effects. Metro Last Light looks great at an unlocked 40-50fps but i’m not sure how that would go with a racer.

  10. So is it not as powerful as we thought or are they having difficulty programming it? Seems pretty embarrassing to me.

    • From what I can gather, its the initial first time getting used to new hardware and (incomplete) development tools, as well as a preference from some of the developers to cram as much juice into a single frame, and then worry about the frame rate later.

      I’m no game dev, but it seems to me that it would be better to get the 60fps performance first, then build from there with better code and optimizations and clever use of textures.

      It could also be down to their engine, if it has a bias to a longer rendering pipeline, then it will be better at 30fps.

Comments are now closed for this post.