Sections

Carmack: There’ll be “lots of 30hz games” in the next gen

Thursday, 24th May 2012 11:32 GMT By Alex Donaldson

Legendary game designer John Carmack has suggested that we won’t see 60 frames-per-second become a ‘standard’ next generation as some gamers are hoping.

Speaking on his twitter account and in response to a question on if he thought we’d see more 60fps games on consoles in the next generation, Carmack was quick to quash the idea of 60fps becoming a standard.

“There will still be lots of 30hz games, which I don’t think it is a good trade,” he said, reiterating his well-documented belief that a high frame rate makes for better experiences. “If TVs didn’t add lag, it would be more clear cut,” he concludes, scuppered out of going deeper on the issue by Twitter’s character limits.

While a tiny passing comment from Carmack, his opinion on the situation is notable as he’s the co-founder and technical director of id Software, a company always proficient at squeezing the best performance possible out of hardware – from Doom in 1993 to last year’s RAGE.

Thanks, EvilAvatar.

Latest

24 Comments

  1. G1GAHURTZ

    Don’t judge other devs by your own standards.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. mad1723

    As far as we can tell, some devs are underwhelmed by the specs of the next-gen. Epic has stated that they need more power from the specs they’ve seen for UE4 to have its full potential exploited on consoles.

    Might be another dev who saw the said specs, or he might just be pessimistic :P

    #2 3 years ago
  3. OlderGamer

    Gonna say it again, next gens graphics will be an evolution, not a revolution. I wouldn’t be suprised if a few early launch titles didn’t look any different then current gen titles.

    That going for PS360 games. I think the WiiU games will be significantly better then Wii games. But as a whole, I expect crisper, faster, smoother. But I was betting on 60fps too for the new Sony/MS systems. Time will tell.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. drewbles82

    People forget these amazing graphics every one wants, just for an awesome graphics card you’d be looking at well over £2000. No console maker will ever consider using that, they will always use tech thats been out for a few years esp since its gotta go through a lot of testing and its cheaper.

    They want to sell as many consoles as possible so the more up to date the tech, the more expensive the console.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Eversor

    After a bullshit pc_port Rage, I don’t even care what says that guy. Studio with almost 20 years history made in recent 10 years only 2 mediocore games. Their fame lost in last century.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Edo

    @4 “People forget these amazing graphics every one wants,just for an awesome graphics card you’d be looking at well over £2000.”
    WHAT?!!?I was hopelessly waiting for him to edit his ….comment….sigh…ATI 7970 3 GB costs around 500 euros and that is more than enough for the rest of anyone’s gaming life.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. freedoms_stain

    @4, that’s pure bullshit mate. Sounds like you have absolutely no clue what the gpu market is like. Even for the most ludicrously over powered luxury consumer grade gpu on the market right now you’re looking at £900, nowhere near £2000, and as I said, that’s for a ludicrous gpu.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. kupocake

    @4 Knock a zero off of that figure, and you’ll be entitled to an opinion again.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. OlderGamer

    Drew, your right about the point your making. Their is a glass ceiling, a couple of them actualy. Hardware pirce point is one of the two biggies. Software investment(dev cycle time/cost) being the other major factor.

    Your numbers are off tho. I bought a video card last winter for my PC that is more powerful then the projected one for xboxnext. The card only cost me 120usd at Best Buy.

    I don’t know the exact cost, but it will prolly run MS about 35-50usd for the graphics card per xbox next. And that is a wild ass guess at best. But no where near what your projecting.

    And honestly, if you really think those level of numbers, your prolly over estemating the graphic power levels of next gen systems.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. drewbles82

    Im not a techno wiz, i just googled graphics cards and then higher to lower and top one was over £3000. I didnt bother reading what it is was for.
    ~Graphics card for gaming next one down was bout £750.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Malmer

    There is nothing wrong with 30 hz and some nice motionblur. It is a matter of taste. Personally I prefer it and get the extra graphical fidellity that comes as a bonus.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. Gadzooks!

    Barring Nintendo and a select few ps360 devs, 30fps is always going to be the target for consoles. Maximum pixelwhoring is required to shut the idiot pixel whores up.

    Fucking surface-deep, moaning asswipes arent happy until they get a photorealistic slideshow and they dont give 2 shits if there’s an actual game behind the postprocessing or not. Industry-ruining wankers, the lot of them.

    It will get worse too. Back when photorealism was completely impossible, gameplay was the unchallenged ruler. Now its the pixels bitch, and the closer to achievable photorealism gets, the more it will be called for.

    I’d love for a platform holder to have the balls to mandate 60fps. Never going to happen though.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. Maximum Payne

    @10 I don’t even ….

    #13 3 years ago
  14. NiceFellow

    @1 what his own standard of delivering one of the few graphically nice 720p 60fps engines on console? (admittedly powering a weak game).

    He’s probably right. 60fps as standard is unlikely because – exactly as with this gen – a lot of developers are going to use the power to stick more pipes, detail, particle effects and the like on screen with the result they’ll skip 60fps for 30fps rather than have 60fps with less detail.

    Heck, look at how many games this gen were sub-720p as a compromise, and look at how badly PS3 sold due to a high price point initially.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. endgame

    Meanwhile, we(PC gamers)’ll be playing games at a few hundreds frames per second. :))

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Ireland Michael

    Good thing that graphics don’t make a game then.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. freedoms_stain

    @10, there’s a big difference between consumer grade gpu’s meant for home desktop uses such as gaming and professional workstation grade gpu’s meant for high end graphic design.

    You can get a solid high performance consumer gpu for under £200, if you’re on a budget there are even decent solutions sub £100, and as I already mentioned, the ceiling for that level of product is around £900 right now, and that’s for a state of the art piece of kit that no gaming software currently exists that will test its capabilities – in fact there probably won’t even be anything that gets that thing hot for years because nobody makes games that high-end any more.

    If someone asked my advice on building a new computer where money is absolutely no issue, I still wouldn’t recommend a card over around £300-350, because there’s no need for it.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. Erthazus

    3000 EUR graphics card? LOL.

    For 3000 EUR i will have QUAD SLI Geforce 680-690 GTX series and will run Crysis 1-2 with Over 120 FPS. :D

    Stop these moronic numbers, seriously.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. Llewelyn_MT

    I got my new budget gaming PC last month for ~700€. That’s a whole new Windows PC. It can run BF3 on High in FullHD @60 fps.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. ManuOtaku

    Guys i understand that the estimated numbers given by previous commenters are too high, but i like to point out that iam not a graphics card expert myself, but if you add the price of the best graphics card in the market or prototypes that surpass the power of what is availabe right now, with everything else under the hood, and the marketing costs, the assembling costs, etc, all the direct and inderect costs, i will say that if sony and microsfot want to go with the best of them all graphics/gpu cards, a rough guess will be the new consoles will be between 700 $ and 1000 $, and thats a little bit to much for a home console, thats why i do believe they will go with good graphics, but no the best of them all right now or even surpassing what is available right now, like OG said an evolution rather than revolution.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. endgame

    Erthazus wtf is Quad SLI dude? Are you high right now? :)) Oh! Ooooh! Nooow I get it! LOL

    #21 3 years ago
  22. Sini

    LOL console peasants with their 30fps

    #22 3 years ago
  23. endgame

    @2 Well when you pay the value of a wagon you get SURPRISE!! a wagon! :))

    #23 3 years ago
  24. laughing-gravy

    Ah good old Carmack. Another has-been wanting to try and prove he is still relevant. Instead of griping about things he knows very little about why doesn’t he make a game that’s actually worth buying at full price? He seems to be judging other devs by his own standards, ie not that great.

    #24 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.