What if Uncharted 3 ran at 60FPS?

By Richard Leadbetter Published 1 November, 2011

Amazing Sony video shows us how it looks.

Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception launches in the USA today: a game that somehow manages to eclipse the technical brilliance of its predecessor, offering up a range of graphical effects and physics work that is quite unlike anything else we've seen on the current generation platforms.

In common with most console titles, Drake's new adventure runs at a capped 30 frames per second - a necessity when you factor in the sheer amount of processing going on behind the scenes in rendering the state-of-the-art visuals. However, Jorge Soares, the editor of Eurogamer Portugal, noticed something rather interesting in a recent Uncharted 3 marketing video - the game was clearly and obviously running at 60 frames per second.

You can take a look at the 60Hz asset right here. Do bear in mind that streaming video doesn't take well to high frame rates, but most modern PCs should be able to handle the load - just switch to full-screen mode and things should be a lot smoother. The HD encode will require some pretty meaty CPU power to work smoothly - so for many, the SD encode will offer smoother playback. However, if you're using an iPad, you should get a lovely, smooth presentation.

Uncharted 3 desert gameplay miraculously running at 60FPS. Use the full-screen button for smoother frame rates - performance in the window on most streaming video is rather poor.

So how exactly was this video made, bearing in mind that the final shipping game categorically runs at 30FPS? No concrete answers were forthcoming from Sony PR, but the chances are that something akin to the multiplayer game's Cinema Mode was used to record gameplay, which was then dumped out of the system in an offline render. So how does it look? As you would expect, really: magnificent.

At Digital Foundry we're used to media assets being generated at absurdly high resolutions way beyond the capabilities of the existing consoles (Microsoft's recent 5120x2880 (!) Kinect Sports Season Two screenshots raised an eyebrow or two) but it's rare that we get to see any kind of artificial boost to temporal resolution. From what we can see, the game is still operating at native 720p - it's just the frame-rate that's had a boost (and Sony's encoder seems to have had some trouble with that, blending later frames) and as such, serves as an interesting "what if" on how Uncharted 3 might look and move on more powerful hardware.

To illustrate how the same section looks and performs in the final shipping game, check out our test below. We hope to have a full tech analysis of the single-player mode really soon.

Here's the same desert sequence analysed from in-game captures, demonstrating that the actual shipping title is capped at 30 frames per second.

Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (116) Latest comment 6 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • aidey6 #1 7 months ago

    This game looks fab whether running at 30 or 60fps. I along with many other gamers are really looking forward to this...

  • mortiz666 #2 7 months ago

    Mmmm 60 FPS, tasty.

    The PR video could have potentially been shot using a PC build of the game. Lots of developers do maintain PC builds of games even when they're shipping on console only.

  • comedyjack #3 7 months ago

    Holy Moses if that isn't the most beautifulest thing I ever saw.

  • evild_edd #4 7 months ago

    Does playing in 60fps make you better at the game as well.....?

    ;P

  • Lapidus_Beard #5 7 months ago

    Wow, but can they fix the lack of story and gameplay as well?

  • TelexStar #6 7 months ago

    As a 360 owner, I'm rather jealous of PS3 owners with this particular exclusive. One day I'll pick up a PS3 on the cheap and play them back to back.

  • glottis0 #7 7 months ago

    This is the reason why I go through all the hassle of maintaining a gaming PC. Batman, Battlefield 3, Assassin's Creed, Skyrim, Space Marine - all at 60fps with higher resolution and better anti-aliasing than their console counterparts. You can play with a TV/360 pad too.

    Of course PC doesn't help one jot with all the awesome PS3 exclusives... :S

  • layleeloo #8 7 months ago

    Its gorgeous enough as it is

  • layleeloo #9 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:51:44 12-12-2011

  • kirankara #10 7 months ago

    @Lapidus_Beard

    Can you fix your bitterness??

    Almost unanimously, the highest scoring game of the year, yet theres always one bitter c**t, isn't there?

  • Eraysor #11 7 months ago

    Sony: "And here's what our system is incapable of!"

    Bit of a peculiar way to advertise the game but hopefully 60fps will be more common come the next-gen.

  • Yuroko #12 7 months ago

    Looks superb. 60fps really makes a difference.

    Can't wait for all games to run 60fps.

  • repeater #13 7 months ago

    Probably rendered on the PS4 hardware that Sony will surprise launch in a manner of days to enjoy holiday 2011 without competition.. :)

    /trollface

  • Lapidus_Beard #14 7 months ago

    @kirankara Did you complete the game yet? Trust me, I really enjoyed 1 and 2, but this one is just not that good IMO.

  • soviet_ #15 7 months ago

    I didn't think there would be that much of a difference but it is really quite clear. What a weird thing to release before the game is even out though, after watching the 60fps video the real gameplay footage is a bit of a let down and that wouldn't be the case if I hadn't seen the 60fps video!

  • obscured021 #16 7 months ago

    just release a pc version and it will do 60fps in 3d 1080p, i have the first 2 games and will get the 3rd after i have beat gears 3, so many good games out in a short space of time!

  • anthonypappa #17 7 months ago

    thought it would have been two ps3's linked up.

    that should be a feature in games. could grab a second hand system for more horsepower. PC's can scale games up, consoles probably could too if the dev gave us the feature.

  • Toaster05 #18 7 months ago

    Is this not a glimpse of the future of console gaming? Graphical fidelity is going to be the primary factor in new hardware. We must be rapidly hitting the point now where games can't look that much better graphically, yet running the game at a constant 60fps in bonkers resolution could be the way to go.

    Pretty convincing stuff for me that this is the way I'd like to see new hardware go.

  • Razz #19 7 months ago

    Who ever was playing in that video was showing some top class badassery! Can not wait to play this game!

  • DiamondIce #20 7 months ago

    I know I am in the minority but I prefer 30FPS for a third person game. I like the 'friction' or whatever it 'adds'. That's what she said.

  • Pwnsweet #21 7 months ago

    I hope all those noobs that rate me down when I say a game should be 60fps watch this comparison video. The difference is night and day.

  • d80s0q #22 7 months ago

    Does the 3D version run at 30 FPS? Is that not then really 60 FPS just split in 2? Would it not have been possible to combine and run at 60?

  • woodnotes #23 7 months ago

    @DiamondIce

    I'm with you there. Films would look like Coronation Street if they were in 60fps. All quality TV shows halve their framerate to give a filmic look. As Uncharted 3 is all about the "cinematic experience", 60fps would surely contradict this.

  • RodHull #24 7 months ago

    60FPS is easy on PS3 dev kits. Rather than the standard Cell CPU and Nvidia GPU, they have a 486 DX/4 and Matron Mystique. Feel the power!

  • Lunatic4ever #25 7 months ago

    simply gorgeous!

  • andijames #26 7 months ago

    They both look very impressive but i guess it's a good indication of what to expect in the new gen of hardware. True 1080P / 60fps with FXAA/MLAA applied as standard. That would be nice :) Although knowing MS and Sony that will also be expensive!

  • sperties #27 7 months ago

    It does look beautiful and all but for next-gen games I am now expecting "avatar-like graphics"! :p

  • miiiguel #28 7 months ago

    Special edition comes with a PS4 only 3789.99 pounds.

  • bobfish09 #29 7 months ago

    Doesn't really show much difference. It is more obvious when looking at the BF3 comparison of PC to 360, where you can see the console version is missing animation frames to keep the framerate up compared to the PC version.

    The 30 v 60 isn't about the speed, it is about how much information can be displayed, the smoothness of the game. With Uncharted 3, it doesn't really look much different.

  • jonbwfc #30 7 months ago

    I have to be honest, I don't really think it makes all that much difference what frame rate it runs at as long as it's relatively consistent. It's a good looking game at 30FPS, it's a good looking game at 60FPS. It's not as if it's SFIV where people frame count in gameplay.

  • 00.00.01 #31 7 months ago

    @RodHull
    True that, but i didn't get any indication that this runs on a dev-kit/test-PS3. Also no indication that it doesn't....

  • Vortextk #32 7 months ago

    It weirds me out to see a game at 60fps when you never ever see it do that over many houyrs. My computer can do most console ports at 60 and any game I played a lot of before that(batman, darksiders) on console looks similarly eery at first at 60.

  • scaramanga10 #33 7 months ago

    Eurogamer trolling to make us click on videos with long ass ads...

  • magicpocket #34 7 months ago

    60fps always looks amazing and with that level of details it looks absurdly good. For those of you who have played Rage on the 360 with it installed to HDD, having not only 60fps but a high level of detail means it's arguably the best looking game on 360.

    Can't wait to play U3 this weekend.

  • Bigglesworth #35 7 months ago

    Is it only me who still can't watch any videos since the site makeover? Like a mug, I just keep getting fed the same advert over and over.

  • koshien #36 7 months ago

    Sony and the other manufacturers should allow people to combine 2 systems, in order to add frames per second or to boost 3D performance. Something similar to what they've done in the GT5 demonstration some months ago.
    I would really love these kind of solutions rather than get fake 3D (2D plus depth) in games such as Crysis 2, Batman AA and Assassin's Creed revelations. For this reason I am not buying these games, since I'll play them once I'll have a proper pc or a "3D collection" on next consoles.
    But I'm buying Uncharted 3 for sure :)

  • soviet_ #37 7 months ago

    @woodnotes What are you talking about? There is a huge difference between fps for film/tv and rendered digital animation or video games. Traditionally a film displayed at 24fps will look just as smooth as a game at 60fps because of the way it handles motion blur and the effect of fast movement on a single frame. That is also the reason any game will look better at 60fps over 30 as most games at 30fps lack the motion blur for them to appear fluid.

    Crysis is a great example of how a game running under 30fps looked smooth because of the use of realistic motion blur. Most of the time though games smear the screen in Vaseline and call it the same

  • captainjax #38 7 months ago

    meh, 8/10.

  • -cerberus- #39 7 months ago

    60 fps should be a standard on next-gen (read: xbox "720", ps"4" ) hardware!

    @captainjax: And you. Yeah you. Stop acting like 8/10 is a bad score.
    Edited by -cerberus- at 01/11/11 @ 16:16

  • Ror1984 #40 7 months ago

    Wow, that looks incredibly fluid at 60 frames. I have my copy sitting next to me as I type this (cheers, ShopTo), so I shall have to forget this video exists!

  • Svalbaard #41 7 months ago

    I dunno. The 30fps movie has more of a smooth gritty movie look to it, and the 60fps one accentuates horribly all of those jarring glitches where the character stop and moves from one animation to the next.

    60fps nice. Prefer 30 in this instance.

  • tankboi #42 7 months ago

    then it would be a PC game?

  • DAN.E.B #43 7 months ago

    What if Uncharted 3 ran at 60FPS?

    Would it get a 9???

  • Lucodeath #44 7 months ago

    But I thought the ps3 was 120fps on dual screens anyway?

  • Uncompetative #45 7 months ago

    Forza 4 runs at 60 FPS.

  • jetsetwillie #46 7 months ago

    would love to see this on my gaming PC running at 1080p 60+FPS and lots of nice DX11 effects.

    still looks nice on the PS3 though. just would look crazy good on my PC

  • FuzzyDuck #47 7 months ago

    @Svalbaard

    Haha, yeah i'm expecting my copy tomorrow, so i've decided to not look at the video!

  • evnewell #48 7 months ago

    I remember a few years back how Insomniac stated publicly that they were done with 60hz games. Apparently the market response doesn't justify the extra effort, according to them.

    No one's going to argue that Uncharted has poor visuals, but there is room for improvements. If uncharted ran at 60hz that would make all the difference in the world to me. As it is, there is a noticeable amount of lag, and although the frame rate is solid, a boost to 60 would be magnificent. I hope in the next gen we see more 1080P 60hz games. That is number one on my performance wish list.

  • Paul_cz #49 7 months ago

    Exactly the reason why I would much prefer to be able to play Uncharted/Dark Souls/ GT5 etc all on PC. 60fps and 1920*1080 + even higher detail and physics would be possible...and experience would be much more pleasant.

    Sigh.

  • Darksjeik #50 7 months ago

    Most 3D HDTV's these days work with high refresh rates and framerate upscalers. They make movies look like soap operas filmed with handycams. You probably know what I'm talking about. The effect when applied to videogames makes it look like they run at 60 fps.

    I'm not boasting but on my tv the game looks exactely like this. The only downside is that the artificial extra frames add inputlag giving the controls a "floaty" feel.

  • kirankara #51 7 months ago

    @soviet_

    Crysis 2 with its use of blur may have resulted in it looking smoother, but it still didn't mask the fact it ran like a dog, those frame rates were woeful

  • Cobalt_Jackal #52 7 months ago

    Um, you do all realise that 1080p and esp 60fps will never ever be the standard with reguards to console games next-gen (and IMO quite rightly too).
    Edited by Cobalt_Jackal at 01/11/11 @ 17:01

  • kirankara #53 7 months ago

    @Lapidus_Beard fair enough, I thought you were just.being a twat, but guess it just shows, all experiences are subjective, as most reviews ran out of superlatives for it., but hey, I hated gta4, rdr and la noire, and everyone creamed themselves over those games

  • funkateer #54 7 months ago

    @Darksjeik

    I have to say I use the framerate upscaler of my TV quite regularly. For example ICO in 60FPS in 3D is quite brilliant as it doesn't really require very quick controller response (and the added lag is not actually that severe).

  • PearOfAnguish #55 7 months ago

    Why does he run like a 15 year old wannabe gangsta with a bad-boy limp?

  • soviet_ #56 7 months ago

    @kirankara Was talking about Crysis on the PC, should've made it clearer. But yes the point was when motion blur is done well it can mask sub 30fps performance and make it look like it is running much higher

  • Alestes #57 7 months ago

    Guess we can expect an Uncharted HD Collection for the PS4 then.

  • captain_Carl #58 7 months ago

    I can't tell the difference between that and the game. I am totally clueless with this 30 or 60FPS stuff. All looks the same to me

  • cloudskipa #59 7 months ago

    This looks great, one of the best looking games this gen easily, some of the later set-pieces are beautiful. I still don't like the animation a great deal though. Drake often looks disconnected to the game world as the animation chops and changes, it looks a bit odd at times.

    I'd also love to see Alan Wake @ 60fps. That game has some highly underrated visuals, and the best lighting effects I've seen this gen.

  • riseer #60 7 months ago

    Why are all the pc gamers crying about this not being on Pc.This is a perk when you buy a Ps3 you can only play it on that one system thats what we call a ''exclusive''.Get over it Ps4 will be out sooner then most think and everything should run 60 fps with better AA and textures.I think it's lame when Pc gamers get on here can cry over things like this.

  • kirankara #61 7 months ago

    @soviet_

    crysis 2 on consoles looked fine, but the framerate drops really were noticeable in the controls, as they dropped as low 15-16fps sometimes.

  • riseer #62 7 months ago

    @glottis0 yea i got my Pc hooked up to my 48inch brava looks awesome for sure.

  • malforian #63 7 months ago

    Why does he always run as if he is constipated? the char animation is terrible in UC

  • TheSnotGoblin #64 7 months ago

    Thirsty man is bulletproof.

  • SaintDaveUK #65 7 months ago

    I actually kind of like 30fps in Uncharted. It looks rather cinematic.

  • carlosdfn #66 7 months ago

    I'm playing it right now and my jaw has been on the floor the whole time. Nobody can touch these guys, I don't know what it is but they clearly know something other developers don't.

  • Jamieb87 #67 7 months ago

    Am I the only person that thinks it looks less cinematic at 60 fps?

    Its weird I'm normally all for 60 fps (who isn't?) But this is kinda like watching a soap opera versus watching a film, one looks more real but the other has more style.

  • vadimur #68 7 months ago

    @koshien
    Interesting idea!

    But is it workable?

  • Kaminari #69 7 months ago

    @mortiz666 Obviously not. Considering many characteristic details like alpha blending and some clipping in the shadow details (see 4:30 on the left of the screen), it's definitely the PS3 renderer.

  • Kaminari #70 7 months ago

    I think it was Sam Peckinpah who experimented filming at insane speeds (100 or 150 fps -- take that, Cameron) and found the results awful because every single flaw in the actors play and the camera work was multiplied.

    I think it's the same with action-adventure games. 60 fps is great for racing games, but it sucks for games like Uncharted. The cinematic qualities dissolve into a sort of unnatural camcorder effect.

  • HeNiCiDe1988 #71 7 months ago

    man amazing that your eurogamer portugal picked up on it , it was hard to see but it did seem to look much high res the 60fps it really looked fantastic and that was the only different that it still looked amazing but the 60fps looked better. But interesting that they are started to tweak the products in press releases, maybe borrowed from the approach of DICE by just showing the game on super amazing computers.

  • Marshall2008 #72 7 months ago

    @mortiz666 Aye, ok then. Shows how little you know about development for a single platform. Yes the tools are on PC but the build is done on the PS3 dev kit.

  • Badassbab #73 7 months ago

    I remember all those PS3 fanboys going ballistic over the 60fps video on LOT and they just couldn't get into their head that 60fps makes a game 'look' better by virtue of being as smooth as a babies bottom.

  • Kovacs77 #74 7 months ago

    That's the first time I've ever seen in game footage of an Uncharted game. The way everyone goes on about it I was expecting some genuinely incredible visuals, way ahead of anything else, but it's just... normal. The gunplay looks shit too.

  • Obli #75 7 months ago

    Not THAT amazing really. I think Rage looks as good and actually does run at 60FPS.

  • svenjl #76 7 months ago

    Uncharted and Resistance make my heart bleed for a PS3. If only I could learn to love the damned controller!

  • skuzzbag #77 7 months ago

    @svenjl

    You know you can get a converter to use a 360 pad on the PS3 right? It works perfectly.

  • kirankara #78 7 months ago

    @Obli

    I had rage on 360 and was fantastic looking game , if you were looking at environments.from 100 PLUS YARDS , otherwise, it looked like a ps2 game. This is best looking game on.console this gen imo, although I understand its helped by it's linear nature

  • 3william56 #79 7 months ago

    Sweet mother of God that is beautiful. Replaying the 2rd at the moment, and that is amazing but this just raises the bar all over again.

    For the folks who are complaining about the walking, I believe the poor bloke just survived a plane crash and has walked across the desert dying of thirst, so a bit of a limp is fairly understandable. The issue (as happened in UC2 in the snow sections) is more how injuries and exhaustion instantly disappear when a gun appears. Same as when he machine guns a bloke point blank, then engages in a fist fight. Now I've never been machine gunned, but I suspect it might slow me down a bit.

    I just wish ND'd come up with a better/more realistic take on combat than shoot X times with bullet Y to kill enemy when damage Z = X x Y but enemy unharmed until dead. Make them harder to hit, but bullets do more damage. Less enemies, more damage to me. Health packs and recharging health just stand out so badly in an otherwise "realistic" game like UC.

  • ROCK-NYC #80 7 months ago

    Played first few chapters and smiled at how they showed young nate.

  • Collymilad #81 7 months ago

    Prefer 30 to be honest.

    The only thing I prefer 60 for are racing games and SOME first person shooters (ones that aren't focused on atmosphere) I totally agree with the people saying 60 look less cinematic. It's hard to explain but 60 just makes games look and feel fake to me.

    30 might be slower and more "laggy" but for me that's somehow more realistic. I find games that run close to 60 (like CoD) somehow don't feel right. They are good games but I can never get fully into them as everything seems almost too responsive and that constantly reminds me I'm playing a game.

    It sounds weird but that's personally how I feel.
    Edited by Collymilad at 02/11/11 @ 05:10

  • Lukree #82 7 months ago

    What a stupid location for a well to place it directly at front of a gate!

    ;)

  • StooMonster #83 7 months ago

    @woodnotes @DiamondIce

    60fps is coming to movies whether you like it or not, Peter Jackson is shooting 'The Hobbit' at 60fps and is reported to be delighted with the results; apparently it makes the 3D more believable and fluid.

    Other directors are talking about 60fps for movies, historically 24fps was chosen to save money as it was the minimum FPS required for the human eye to see non-juddery motion, there's plenty of articles out there about the switch to 60fps in cinema if you Google.

  • koshien #84 7 months ago

    @vadimur : I think it is...they showed this same thing with GT5, so why not? :) I don't remember whether 2 discs were necessary though. But I guess they could overcome this problem.
    I bought a ps3 for my girlfriend last year, and I would definitely borrow her ps3 in order to play games boosted in performance ;)

  • UncleLou #85 7 months ago

    Prefer 30 to be honest.

    The only thing I prefer 60 for are racing games and SOME first person shooters (ones that aren't focused on atmosphere) I totally agree with the people saying 60 look less cinematic. It's hard to explain but 60 just makes games look and feel fake to me.

    I know what you mean - if you switch your modern TV to a mode where it adds extra frames, even the best films start to look like they were filmed on a 1980s video camera.

    In games, however, the responsiveness and smoothness of a game running at 60 fps would always win for me.
    Edited by UncleLou at 02/11/11 @ 08:50

  • DiamondIce #86 7 months ago

    @StooMonster

    I don't care about films. I hardly watch them.

    I wasn't trolling in my post. I think that a lot of game types look too gamey when in 60fps. Driving games are the only types of game where 60fps is important to me.

  • flaming.carrot #87 7 months ago

    Off topic but...

    "Do bear in mind that streaming video doesn't take well to high frame rates"

    ...if you dropped Flash as the playback wrapper in favour of HTML5 for desktop then the videos would play silky smooth (as they are on the iPad version).

  • apoc_reg #88 7 months ago

    Of love to see games like this on PC, imagine how good it would look then!!

  • apoc_reg #89 7 months ago

    @Lapidus_Beard You can't level either of those at drake.

    You can legitimately say they are linear, slightly simplified discovery and you don't like the story but they are great to look at and great fun to play.

  • StooMonster #90 7 months ago

    @DiamondIce Didn't think you were trolling, and I CCed you because woodnotes was main respondent. :)

    It's just interesting that some people say 24fps is enough, but cinema is moving to 60fps regardless.

  • Caimbeul #91 7 months ago

    Dont you mean how it would look running on PC? ;-D (waits for abuse!)

    I have said it before and i will say it again. 1080p/60 should be a required minimum standard for all the next gen consoles. There is simply no excuse next time round.

  • Weezer #92 7 months ago

    Is it the high frame rate that prevents people dying when shot in the chest from 10 feet away with an automatic submachine gun?

  • TelexStar #93 7 months ago

    @Weezer

    No, it's the fact that it's a game that's meant to entertain. Imposing Rainbow Six style shooting mechanics into every game that contains a gun does not always equal "fun".

  • fifanuts #94 7 months ago

    who cares if it runs 30fps or 60fps really?. gamers have never had it so good with such great amazing looking games compared to the 80,s.
    with the ps4 and next gen xbox i cant even think about how the can push current gen of games even further.cant wait pick this soon.

  • CaptainKid #95 7 months ago

    @fifanuts
    I don't see a difference between 30 and 60, perhaps they should make one video in split screen.

    I CAN imagine how PS4 games will look like, just look at some new PC games at max settings and imagine it even prettier with sharper images, more details, better lighting.

  • KopparbergDave #96 7 months ago

    My laptop just melted... and it still didn't play smoothly, think someone else mentioned using Flash for this kinda thing just doesn't work too well (and my laptop is pretty new, should have no issues, can playback 1080p videos ludicrously quick scrubbing through on FCPX.....

    Anyways, I love my PS3, pretty much GT5 is my weapon of choice and I've avoided games like this for a while now.... graphically it doesn't excite me much. Sure, one of the best looking games but really it's still quite old school and current gen. Awkward changes in the animation cycles being one key area for improvement, plus the environments while they have great textures they still lack the massive polygon counts needed to really make them come alive as truly detailed worlds (down to the grains of dirt level).... of course those kinds of graphics are still probably not quite possible, no matter how great your PC gaming rig is, but it's the sort of thing we should be aiming for. I just don't understand the people who always say they can't see how graphics can get any better.... well when we're traversing a world that looks EXACTLY like it's been shot for a BBC David Attenborough documentary with that kind of clarity and beauty and lack of repetition... then maybe I'll believe you that it can't get much better, for now we've still very much got a ways to go, which is no bad thing, in fact it's pretty exciting.

  • Lucodeath #97 7 months ago

    I purchased BBCs planet earth on blueray and I found it unwatchable on 24 fps on the long panning shots due to judder, I have swapped it for the special edition and its smooth at 25 fps. I got a new pc because frame rates seem poor on consoles.

  • djronz. #98 7 months ago

    @Lucodeath

    i had that problem with planet earth too! not unwatchable but anoying, problem occurs because unless your tv has a 24fps or "movie" mode it has to double some frames to make it fit. 24fps does not fit into 50 or 60 hz.

  • arcam #99 7 months ago

    It's still my opinion that CoD running at 60 FPS is a big reason for it being the most popular console shooter. You won't get its fans claiming that as the reason because most of them won't know that it does or even what frames-per-second are, but they will tell you that it just feels right, and 60FPS is a big part of that IMO.

  • 43n1m4 #100 7 months ago

    There will be much more to the next generation of consoles than playing current games at double the framerate. The game, however, looks really nice from a technical point of view.

  • mikiex #101 7 months ago

    What new games run at 60fps? BF3? Goldeneye Reloaded? MWF3?

  • noelveiga #102 7 months ago

    In theory I'd like to see next gen adding 1080p and 60 fps as a compliance requirement, like some developers have suggested, but it's true that 60fps adds a certain "video" quality. While that looks like it would play better, it does feel less like a movie and more like "really being there", so it makes me a bit torn between making sure games support it and allowing 30 fps as a creative choice.

  • UkHardcore23 #103 7 months ago

    Hopefully nxt-gen we will see "real time weapon change" in Uncharted with some elements of Riiiiiiiiiiiiiidge Racer thrown in.

  • Ultraman1966 #104 7 months ago

    No need to have a "what if"; Port it to the PC (properly) and you'll find out.

  • hesido #105 7 months ago

    Sorry, I'll take the 60fps version any time of the day.

    Preference is another thing, some people turn off frame rate upscalers(?) of their tv's when watching movies, because it makes everything look like a soap opera (as they were shot using video camcorders instead of being "filmed";). I myself was one of those people, but now I've gotten used to it on my LG, I can't go back.

    For games, 60 fps is always better, at the same visual fidelity.

  • majorg85k #106 7 months ago

    WRONG TAG FOR DIGITAL FOUNDRY. THE TAG IS DIGITAL_FOUNDRY, NOT DIGITAL-FOUNDRY. THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE RSS FEED. PLEASE BE CAREFUL.

  • 43n1m4 #107 7 months ago

    @Hesido

    For games, 60 fps is always better, at the same visual fidelity.

    That's the trick, isn't it?

    Note to EG: Fix the quote button, please.
    Edited by 43n1m4 at 05/11/11 @ 08:18

  • spiny #108 7 months ago

    It'd be nice if you had a "download-proper-version" option for videos like this.

  • TazerFan #109 7 months ago

    Yeah I really can't tell the difference between 30 and 60. (not saying they are lying, just that I've never been able to see the difference)

  • Tonka #110 7 months ago

    Now imagine what it would look like if they managed to make Drake connect to the fucking ground he's supposedly walking on.

  • m0thr4 #111 6 months ago

    @woodnotes

    I think film makers have invariably experimented with higher frame rates than the standard 24fps, and found audiences rejecting the effect... but that was before our modern TVs and their high refresh rates. I think audiences may be more accepting now, and James Cameron is making to the two Avatar sequels at 60fps and campaigning to get them projected at that rate in cinemas. Peter Jackson is reportedly filming the new Hobbit movie at 48fps.

    @TazerFan
    I found this cool website that lets you play around with frame rates and motion blur to see the effects: http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/
    Edited by m0thr4 at 12/11/11 @ 14:32

  • captainCandy #112 6 months ago

    It would still be just Uncharted 3 - the tunnel running game.

  • drxym #113 6 months ago

    I don't think much of the story in uc3 but the actual gameplay is great. Unlike uc2 the game doesn't really start showing its muscles until about half way through. The ship graveyard is where things really get going.

  • Stagga #114 6 months ago

    @mortiz666 "The PR video could have potentially been shot using a PC build of the game. Lots of developers do maintain PC builds of games even when they're shipping on console only."

    All games are developed on PC but since the architecture of the PS3 is so different it's not often that the PC build will run smoothly at all. For example Killzone 2 looked like shit on PC and ran at something like 15fps with a lot of FX missing.

  • Reaver_v1 #115 6 months ago

    That guy is good!

  • BreakAtmo #116 6 months ago

    Maybe in a few years, the PS4 will get an Uncharted Super-HD Collection. All 3 games on one 128GB BDXL, running in 1920x1080p-per-eye 3D at 60fps locked. We can dream...