Dead Rising 3 Locked at 720p, 30 FPS, Capcom Confirms

[Steven Bogos]

Dead Rising 3 Locked at 720p, 30 FPS, Capcom Confirms

Capcom assures us that Dead Rising 3's frame rate issues have been taken care of.

Those of you following Dead Rising 3's development may remember a few embarrassing trade show moments where the game's frame rate dropped to a slideshow-level crawl. The developer promised that this would be fixed [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/127116-Dead-Rising-3-Targeting-30-Frames-Per-Second] before launch, and now it have come out and confirmed that Dead Rising 3 will be locked at 30 FPS for its November launch. The downside? It will also be locked at a 720p resolution.

"I'm really happy with [a 720p resolution], with the sheer amount of stuff we have in an open world game locked at 30fps, that's just brilliant. Of course our UI (user interface) runs at 1080 native on top, but no, we're a 720p game locked at 30 FPS."

Speaking to Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-06-its-less-to-do-with-the-specs-and-more-to-do-with-what-you-do-with-those-specs], Josh Bridge, the executive producer at Capcom Vancouver, talked about the improvements that have been made to the game since the infamous frame-dropping E3 demo. "Through E3, through Gamescom, through now - the frame rate's been going up and up. And now we're at locked 30 - and that's just been purely the effort of all aspects of the team," he said.

On the resolution front, when asked if they team was ever aiming for 1080p, Josh said "It was not really something we actually set as a mantra. When we first started there was no platform, it was PC and we were just targeting next-gen, and 1080, even before then we thought it'd be prohibitive to even consider that."

Josh also said that he was impressed with how similar to a PC environment the Xbox One's dev kit was, and "Happy to not be cross-platform, to be honest - it's a huge challenge for a game like ours."

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-06-its-less-to-do-with-the-specs-and-more-to-do-with-what-you-do-with-those-specs]

Permalink

 

[Something Amyss]

Were they ever going to say "We hate single-platform gaming. Microsoft can bite our asses" or something similar?

I'm not sure I get the point of having 1080 for the UI if it's not elsewhere. Perhaps someone will explain it to me.

I have trouble giving a crap about overall resolution issues, mind. I'm just curious on the logic here.

 

[Sarge034]

I couldn't help but think, "Isn't stuff supposed to get better with new gens?" If the hardware is so much better then why are games running at the same, or lower, resolution as the current gen? So much "why" with this game and next gen as a whole.

 

[munx13]

Next-gen...


Even so, why cant they at least use 1366x768? I was shopping for a TV recently and not a SINGLE one had 720p, it was either 768p budget ones or full 1080p. At least that way the game could run natively on cheaper setups and not look that blurry.

 

[Carnagath]

I couldn't help but think, "Isn't stuff supposed to get better with new gens?" If the hardware is so much better then why are games running at the same, or lower, resolution as the current gen? So much "why" with this game and next gen as a whole.

Well, the PS4 seems to be more powerful at least, but not by a lot. The hardware jump on consoles seems to be barely enough to play... previous gen games at 1080p/60 FPS. If you want to improve the fidelity though, you again have to drop the resolution and frame rate cap. The thing is that 720p/30 is acceptable for the majority of console players, and I don't mean that in a demeaning way, I know a lot of people who play exclusively on consoles because they find their PC more uncomfortable/it reminds them of work/it's kinda old and they can't be arsed to upgrade it/their wives can participate/whatever. They don't care about the frame rate as long as the games are playable, if they did they'd upgrade their PC.

 

[Arawn]

Yet another Xbox One game running at 720. Now I'm not a graphics maniac, but I figured everything next gen would be running at a higher quality. Didn't they say something similar about CoD?

 

[Arnoxthe1]

I couldn't help but think, "Isn't stuff supposed to get better with new gens?" If the hardware is so much better then why are games running at the same, or lower, resolution as the current gen? So much "why" with this game and next gen as a whole.

Next-gen...

Even so, why cant they at least use 1366x768? I was shopping for a TV recently and not a SINGLE one had 720p, it was either 768p budget ones or full 1080p. At least that way the game could run natively on cheaper setups and not look that blurry.

That's because they're sacrificing graphics for gameplay. Besides, I keep hearing how developers should put graphics over gameplay around here. But when it actually comes to it, it seems you guys want to complain about any dip in graphics quality instead of thinking about what exactly these games are running in the background. For all we know, they could be simulating an ENTIRE ever-changing city every second.

 

[Eiv]

Just release on PC already. They did with the rest, might aswell do so with this too. The only reason the XBO looked ok was due to this game at release.

 

[Nurb]

people will buy them anyway...

 

[JadeWah]

That's because they're sacrificing graphics for gameplay. Besides, I keep hearing how developers should put graphics over gameplay around here. But when it actually comes to it, it seems you guys want to complain about any dip in graphics quality instead of thinking about what exactly these games are running in the background. For all we know, they could be simulating an ENTIRE ever-changing city every second.

Wasn't the whole point of next-gen, that they don't need to sacrifice graphics or -anything- for gameplay?
It's not that people are complaining about any dip in graphics, it's that both PS4 and Xbone has been boasting about the next-gen so much and now it all falls short.

Granted it will take some time for the devs to get used to the system, but on the other side, if it's closer to a PC, what's the problem here?

 

[munx13]

I couldn't help but think, "Isn't stuff supposed to get better with new gens?" If the hardware is so much better then why are games running at the same, or lower, resolution as the current gen? So much "why" with this game and next gen as a whole.

Next-gen...

Even so, why cant they at least use 1366x768? I was shopping for a TV recently and not a SINGLE one had 720p, it was either 768p budget ones or full 1080p. At least that way the game could run natively on cheaper setups and not look that blurry.

That's because they're sacrificing graphics for gameplay. Besides, I keep hearing how developers should put graphics over gameplay around here. But when it actually comes to it, it seems you guys want to complain about any dip in graphics quality instead of thinking about what exactly these games are running in the background. For all we know, they could be simulating an ENTIRE ever-changing city every second.

1. Then why bother releasing new consoles if the games change so little?
2. Simulating an entire city would be a job for the CPU, not GPU, which handles the resolution
3. Running games @ 1366x768 would only give about a single frame loss, while making the image MUCH more clear and sharp for people with lower-end TV's, reducing eye strain.

 

[nodlimax]

And the fanboys will still defend both consoles....

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

And the fanboys will still defend both consoles....

It's not the consoles fault here. Its the developers. Probably even the publishers rushing the developers to make the game for launch.

 

[William Ossiss]

Since when the hell did this become about what frames it runs at or what p it is? Just give me better games with improved mechanics. I care nothing for your 1080p wars nor do I care about what frames a second it will run at.

Just like I didn't care when they were saying that The Hobbit was running at whatever frames it was running at. I'm still going to watch it, so why should I care?

I'm still going to play the games. So why should I care?

I'm playing for a couple of simple key reasons. Story, and gameplay. See, I'm one of those people who liked the ending to ME3. The only thing that I didn't get was the inconsistencies of where your squadmates went, that horrible tone when Joker is flying away.

Ok, went a little off topic...

OT: It will never matter the resolution nor fps what a game runs in, to me. I am a gamer. The only thing that means to me is that I love PLAYING the games. Not bickering about which console is better just because one of them will get a few more frames per second.

 

[Clovus]

Since when the hell did this become about what frames it runs at or what p it is? Just give me better games with improved mechanics. I care nothing for your 1080p wars nor do I care about what frames a second it will run at.

Just like I didn't care when they were saying that The Hobbit was running at whatever frames it was running at. I'm still going to watch it, so why should I care?

I'm still going to play the games. So why should I care?

I'm playing for a couple of simple key reasons. Story, and gameplay ...

OT: It will never matter the resolution nor fps what a game runs in, to me. I am a gamer. The only thing that means to me is that I love PLAYING the games. Not bickering about which console is better just because one of them will get a few more frames per second.

Running at 720p is an indication that these "next-gen" consoles aren't a big leap forward in processing power. The first thing people point to is graphics, but processing power can have a huge effect on gameplay too.

The weird thing is, DR3 is a good example of this. I read at ArsTechnica that setting off an explosion managed to kill like 400 zombies. Being able to render literally 400 zombies on screen at once can completely change gameplay. You actually have to deal with a real "horde". Luckily, zombies are real dumb, so there's not much of an AI problem.

However, more power could make stuff like that even better. How about battlefields with hundreds of soldiers that aren't zombie dumb. Well, you're probably not going to see that since the next-gen consoles aren't powerful enough to handle it.

There's other stuff to. Physics can have a big affect on gameplay and it's processor intensive. Someone mentioned having a city be modeled. More destructable objects or movable objects. More shooters that model the actual bullets, shrapnel, flak, etc. instead of simple hit detection. There's tons of gameplay stuff.

So, when we hear about a somewhat simple game like the new COD having to run at 720p mainly because of the graphics, that's a good indication that gameplay innovations (that require processing power) will suffer too.

 

[nodlimax]

And the fanboys will still defend both consoles....

It's not the consoles fault here. Its the developers. Probably even the publishers rushing the developers to make the game for launch.

See, that didn't take to long....

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

And the fanboys will still defend both consoles....

It's not the consoles fault here. Its the developers. Probably even the publishers rushing the developers to make the game for launch.

See, that didn't take to long....

Not even a fan of either console. I'm a PC gamer. Just stating facts.