Why do games like Alien run at 30fps on consoles?

I don't want to turn this into a PC vs console debate and I am personally perfectly fine with 30 fps (even though I prefer 60).

But I am curios why do some games that run at 60 fps in 1080p with everything maxed on a low end PC cant achieve the same on a console? I understand if a game is very demanding and requires a PC with alot more horsepower than consoles, but both Alien Isolation and Dragonball Xenoverse are able to run at 60 fps in 1080p on an i3 CPU and in the case of Dragonball, a low end card like AMD HD 7790 which is similar to the one in the XBOX one (according to digital foundry). Alien Isolation ran at 60 fps on a weak card too, but cant remember what they used.

So why is that? Shouldn't they run just as good on the consoles?

Because they don't want to put the work in, especially in the case of cheaply made licensed games.

It might not be a totally stable 60 fps, so they went for a locked 30 instead of framerate dips.

@corevi: Calling Alien: Isolation a cheaply made licenced game is to ignore pretty much everything you've seen or read about it. I haven't even played it but Christ what a silly comment.

@brendan: I wasn't. I said especially, not specifically. I was referring to Xenoverse and other games of it's ilk.

The title initially had Xenoverse in it, not Alien, but I changed it because I knew the reaction was skewed towards that type of response, even though the PC versions of both work better on cheap hardware so its clearly not as simple as they just didnt care.

I would put both names in the title, but I am limited by characters

@wilzyx: A much larger percentage of PC players are discerning when it comes to framerate than console players. I know a decent number of people who will straight up not buy a PC game if it has a 30fps cap.

The moment a console goes into production its already obsolete. PC hardware continues to get better over time. Think of a graph with a straight vertical jump every 8 years before going flat versus a straight diagonal line over the same period of time.

And I absolutely hate that mentality. They lock this down on the consoles because they are, in comparison to PCs, under powered and they lock it on PC because you're dealing with a number of hardware configurations so you can cast a wider net. Also, if I was a PC developer, I'd look at the mod scene and just think someone with the right application would unlock the frame limit anyway.

That's ridiculous, that's not how it works at all. Yes, you do have a massive number of possible hardware configurations, that's why PC games have (or should have) a video/graphics/display options menu for changing things to suit your machine. If developers want to put an option to cap the framerate in there, that's fine, but there should never be a forced framerate cap.

Most console games run at 30 because they can squeeze a lot more processing power out of the machine at that framerate. They can make it look better, they can put more stuff on screen, they can have more AI entities doing things, etc.

@wilzyx: As has been pointed out, they pick a minimum frame rate, not an average. If they can make a mostly 60fps game that happens to have frequent dips or a solid 30fps game, they'll go with the latter. It's safer, and probably wiser, especially considering that the vast majority of people playing on consoles don't care about frame rates unless they happen to notice them, and drops are when they're at their most obvious.

And also, it makes sense that a low end PC is more powerful than the PS4 or XBone, seeing as they are basically 3 year old low end PCs.

@shindig said:

If I was an author, I'd leave a few chapters out of my novel and think someone with the right imagination will fill them in anyway.

@shindig said:

If I was an author, I'd leave a few chapters out of my novel and think someone with the right imagination will fill them in anyway.

Generally speaking I always thought it was due to Vsync issues with FPS.

For reasons which are too complicated to go into here, Vsync will drop the FPS from 60 down to 30 if the application cannot render an image above 60fps. As most games on consoles are programmed with Vsync as screen tearing can look TERRIBLE on larger displays they are forced to pull the games FPS down to 30 if they are using the technique. Whilst there are still outliers if you don't use Vsync you end up with screen tearing as you can have 3/4's of a frame mixed in with 1/4'th of a frame, this shows visually as a screen tear.

Thats how I figured it was anyway, also remember that generally console hardware says its X, but its generally a lower clocked version of X for many reasons, some stupid and some not so stupid.

Its not a hardware limit, its not a software limit and it doesnt have anything to do with vsync. Developers generaly prioritise other things than 1080p@60 when they make their games is all.

The reason why you can run the same game in 60fps on the PC is simple, you are running on hardware thats better than what the game is optimised for and in doing that the developers can very easy just add an option to up the FPS with brute force. Sometimes extreamly lazy developers doesnt even add that simple option (or sometimes they made their gameengine dependent on 30fps to work for some reason and its not an easy fix to up the framerate).

@pcorb: If literature grew up where leaving blank space was appropriate, so would I.

Because they dont want to as simple as that and frankly why lose your underware for something like that ... yeah yeah 60 fps gameplay yadda yadda ... does not matter to 90 % of the player base anyway and most games dont need those 60 fps. The only games that really do need that much more imput frame are in reality fighting games and they tend to have those 60 fps so why make a hassle out of nothingness is beyond me.

@shindig: Well fortunately for PC gamers everywhere, FPS locks have historically been so rare that when they occur it just comes across as a shitty move, and modders will unlock the framerate in a day anyway, so might as well build your PC game with the possibility of 60 FPS and good enough graphics settings so people can adjust based on their hardware.

Developers tend to favor extra effects (Lighting, textures, particles, etc) when choosing between those extra effects or 60 fps.

Because as a general rule the industry decided a long time ago that graphics are greater than a smoother gameplay experience. Pretty videos and screenshots sell more games to a wider group of people.

Because most devs/publishers are unwilling to reduce taxing graphical effects in lieu of a better framerate. Seriously, give me 60fps/900p over 30fps/1080p anyday.

This whole thread is giving me a headache.

@frostyryan: Not enough frames?

it's up to developers, some choose to lock it down to 30fps to keep the look of the game consistent, games could potentially have higher framerates if the framerate was unlocked but then it would spike up and down so one scene has 50fps and drops down to 35 fps when more stuff is rendered on screen, it's sometimes very noticeable when the frame rate is dropping low so locking it down to 30fps is a good compromise in that situation.

They do it on purpose because it makes them happy to make nerds mad.

160fps or bust #quadsligtx980masterrace

He should probably increase his thread fov.

You have $2,200 worth of GPU?

Because people hate nice things, which includes framerate and color.

Let's all stop complaining and play games where everything is yellow, and which run at an ultra realistic 20-30 fps. Because all that matters is that the game looks good in trailers and screenshots in order to being in those preorders!

Right here man: