By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 15 January 2015
Edit Thread
Podings said:
curl-6 said:
Podings said:

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.

Except the world is filled with foliage, characters, all kinds of different elements that you can't just render as a single entity. Big, detailed world = more assets to render = bigger processing load. There's a reason 60fps in an open world game is virtually unheard of on consoles.

The foliage and other set dressing details seem to unload at a certain distance though, leaving just large chunks of relatively simplistic level geometry with normal maps of scalable quality and apparently no shadow generation.

When over world games rarely run 60fps on consoles it is also because many technical directors on productions that also feature crummy art direction (ie. GTA/Crysis/FarCry/Just Cause/Crackdown) don't have a clue about where to hack and slash to optimize.

I could just keep walking backwards in GTAV on 360 until the raytraced shadows from palmtrees started pixellating and miscalculating. Fade that shit out at a reasonable distance where nobody cares anyway, and spend the power on frames, people. 

Every game unloads assets at a certain distance, if everything was rendered always, PS4 would choke on open world PS3 games.

Monolith could have made XCX 60fps, but it would mean they'd have only half as much pixel fillrate per frame. A console is a closed box with a finite amount of rendering power, you have to pick your battles. Detail over framerate is the logical choice to make in a game like this, and a choice I personally agree with.