Forza Motorsport 2 hits 60fps

By Tom Bramwell Published 14 November, 2006

Fast in every respect.

Forza Motorsport 2 is now up and running at 60 frames per second on Xbox 360 according to developer Turn 10.

"Turn 10's systems architect Chris Tector checked into the latest build some magic code that now renders the game at 60 frames-per-second with most of the post-processing special effects and car HUD turned on," an update to the game's official website reveals.

What's more, the physics engine "is now running at an even higher refresh rate than the previous Forza".

But Turn 10 is being realistic, and admits that "these features are often trade-offs for other features". "It's still too early to tell what may or may not have to be changed/tweaked in order to maintain 60 fps - hopefully nothing - as far as we're concerned," it notes.

We're with you on that one, chaps. For more on Forza Motorsport 2, check out our preview. The game's due out by the end of June 2007.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (45) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Der_tolle_Emil #1 5 years ago

    Very nice job. Although I have to admit that sometimes 60fps feels a bti awkward - the smoothness looks artificial. Must be because movies etc never exceed 30fps. That's why I personally prefer a stable 30fps over less-detailed 60fps.

  • Talha #2 5 years ago

    That's more like it.

    Although I will agree with Der_tolle_Emil that if it comes at the cost of a lot detail, 30 will do as well. Then again, who looks at detail while trying to touch the apex of a corner at exactly 94.56 mph?

  • Xerx3s #3 5 years ago

    \0

  • morriss #4 5 years ago

    I want 1000fps! In fact I want one million!!! MORE! MORE! MORE!!

  • spongebob #5 5 years ago

    So, the "magic code" was really turning off some features? Just kidding, I am sure it's going to be awesome.

  • Nige #6 5 years ago

    I wonder if I can have Lorraine Kelly as my Drivatar. She was looking fine this morning...

  • in5ane #7 5 years ago

    I think we should have less frames per second in games to save the environment.

    Without wanting to sound too harsh, how is this a news worthy achievement? I mean, why do we care that they actually got their game running at next-generation rates of frame? Isn't this news story actually an embaressment for them; that in fact all this time before now they had a 'shoddy' frame rate? Is their sloppy coding also responsible for the big delay?

    This is like a news story proclaiming EA actually implement decent online multiplayer in a game. Well done and all, but these are game basics surely?

    I'd prefer to see the headlines like:
    "Forza 2 makes even Yamauchi weep with driving joy"
    "Driving game so realistic Hammond scared to play above 50mph"

    You know, actual advancements other than game mechanics.

  • asphaltcowboy #8 5 years ago

    Your name is insane right...? Yeah...

  • Kiigan #9 5 years ago

    Thank God for that. Let it be the end of racing games that don't run at 60fps.

  • Steroyd #10 5 years ago

    Wasn't Forza 1 the only racing game to be at 30 fps

  • in5ane #11 5 years ago

    'Aaah, I love it when the armchair programmers start up... '

    Why should I cut professional programmers any slack?! It's their job, day in, day out to make games. Why should they be congratulated for achieving 'the basics'

    In fact why so much sympathy for devs? Seriously, do people really think this is interesting as say, an article on perhaps what new stuff they've added to online modes, etc.

    I've seen you on quite a few forums ManicMinerUK, and you love to make some sort of note you work within game development. I don't, but I am a professional programmer, but that doesn't mean anything in this context- as a *gamer* I want to hear news about the games/gameplay, not piddly technical achievements like 60fps, 1080p that mean very little to the general population of gamers.

  • Oasis #12 5 years ago

    I want 120fps like you can get on the PlayStation 3...

  • asphaltcowboy #13 5 years ago

    I don't think 60fps @ 1080p would be a piddly technical achievement.

    And I'm fairly sure most people on here aren't "the general population of gamers"...

  • FooAtari #14 5 years ago

    Sounds awesome. All racing games really should be 60fps...

    Take as long you want Turn 10... I have high hopes for Froza 2

  • AtomicBanana #15 5 years ago

    Some of you suggesting 30fps over 60fps are just crazy. 60fps makes racing games 'feel' so much better.

  • Kiigan #16 5 years ago

    Criticise the games, fine, I don't care.. criticize the people making the games and I think its reasonable to ask how you would do it better?

    Get me the source code for the first Forza game and I'll tell you.

    Yes, I agree to some extent - all these armchair coders get on my tits too. But fact is, when you can play GT4 on the PS2 at a lovely 60fps, and then switch to Forza on the Xbox which runs a fucking dog, you can't blame gamers for asking tough questions. I am perfectly happy with lower frame rates as long they are consistent - but one exception is racing games where the 60fps pretty much has to be a fixed goal from the outset, in my opinion.

  • TripSkyway #17 5 years ago

    Great news about the frame rate. But JUNE, I'm pretty gutted now.

  • FooAtari #18 5 years ago

    I agree to a point Manic, but like Kiigan said, getting 60fps in a racing game should be a priority.

    Cut out some fo the eye candy if you have to, just get that 60. IMO GT4 is not as detailed, less um, objects (is that the right word to use) and lower detaield textures.

    But having it run at 60fps makes all the difference. Racing games/sims more than another genre need 60fps as it even effects how you control the car.

    Don't ask me exactly how though, but I have read that on several sim forums. I think it's to do with the delay between steering with the controler and it happening in game. I'll see if I can find it, if anyone wants to read it. Or perhaps someone knows exactly what im talking about....

  • Talha #19 5 years ago

    I agree that 60FPS does make a difference - you can feel it. GT4 prioritizes 60 FPS over everything else - the reason it STILL looks amazing is because it disguises the low-res bits rather cleverly.

    As I said before, no one counts the pixels in a texture when hurtling at 150 mph. Of course higher resolution DOES add to the immersion in the same subtle way as an exta 20 FPS do, but for racing games, framerate is much more crucial.

  • Talha #20 5 years ago

    @ManicMinerUK: EA are too busy thinking of a sequel to NFS Carbon (possible cadidates: Graphite, Grand Canyon, Underground 3, Hot Pursuit 3) and Burnout (from Re-Revenge, Chain of Revenges, Counter-Takedown etc) to think about making a decent racing sim. ;-)

  • moggsy #21 5 years ago

    Did PGR3 run at 60FPS?

  • moggsy #22 5 years ago

    EG readers might prefer the 60 fps, less pretty game, but the majority of the games buying public will go for prettier at 30.

    Why not make it an in game option then in a similar way to PC games i.e. 30 FPS + high detail or 60FPS + medium detail?

  • jiveguy #23 5 years ago

    None of that nonsense. Its the "next-gen" man, 60fps+high detail as standard please.

  • Vin #24 5 years ago

    Whoever has an OBSESSION with this 30/60 fisaco - you're fuckin' nuts.

  • Darren #25 5 years ago

    Project Gotham Racing 3 proved that a racing game can feel slick and fast and run at only 30 fps so I don't know why the developers of Forza Motorsport 2 are so focused on getting it running at 60 fps, particularly as they admit that things will have to be compromised in order to achieve it. Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on getting it running smoothly at 30 fps (a la PGR 3) and keep all the other things in, including adding extra detail for the cars and environments?

  • moggsy #26 5 years ago

    None of that nonsense. Its the "next-gen" man, 60fps+high detail as standard please.

    Some people just want the moon on a stick...

  • Talha #27 5 years ago

    Whoever doesn't realize the difference between 30 and 60 FPS is effing nuts! ;-)

    On a more serious note, the problem is this: No matter how much detail you are able to put in at 60 FPS, you will ALWAYS be able to cram in more detail if you lock the game at 30 FPS. That would be true even if the game is run on a supercomputer. I guess for sim-oriented racing games, 60 FPS is must (e.g. Forza). For arcade racers (like PGR), 30 FPS will do just fine as the market for those sort of games calls for more eye candy.

  • shamblemonkee #28 5 years ago

    Good to hear that Chris is still doing solid work, nice one!

  • Feanor #29 5 years ago

    Probably not the best idea for you be in a discussion about games and numbers, ManicMiner. After all, you are the guy who lied thru his teeth and claimed FFXII opened with a 30 minute cut scene.

    In truth, it's only 12 minutes long and you have no credibility whatsoever.

  • Kiigan #30 5 years ago

    ManicMinerUK - I take your point. Of course, any gamer commenting on a game who attributes some problem to "lazy developers" has no idea what they are talking about. That said though, the bottom line is that when you make games for a living, excuses about how hard it was to get things running at 60 fps don't cut it when people will just judge the end results and compare it with those of your competitors.

    When company A delivers a great racer that runs at a steady 60fps on lesser hardware, we can't be too surprised when miffed gamers say "why can't you do that?" to company B who barely scrape 30 on a better spec machine. There are no doubt a million reasons why the first Forza ran like shit - and it is likely that none of the reasons were "they didn't work hard enough". No doubt they have plenty of really clever people who tried hard and really put the hours in, but ultimately the end result wasn't quite good enough when you look at the stiff competition out there.

  • Kiigan #31 5 years ago

    EG readers might prefer the 60 fps, less pretty game, but the majority of the games buying public will go for prettier at 30.

    Certainly, but just because most consumers don't know any better doesn't mean we should shortchange them. Take your average punter, make him switch between Nurburgring on GT4 and Nurburgring on Forza, and he will know instinctively which "feels" better. The general public may not care about framerates specifically, but when it comes to racing games... feel is everything and they WILL notice the difference, even if they don't know exactly why.

  • moggsy #32 5 years ago

    It's a nice idea, but you'd be effectively making two games instead of one. Maybe not quite double the work, but certainly at least 50% extra.

    But PC games have done this for years. I'm no games programmer but '50% extra' sounds a bit excessive. Is this because you'd have double the amount of testing to do?

  • in5ane #33 5 years ago

    No one ever called them idiots. But as a gamer, it's not wrong to expect the best as standard :)

    But kudos for the phrase 'poo-filled eyes', absolutely excellent. A google cofirms it's the first use of this great wordage.

  • Feanor #34 5 years ago

    "Coming from one thread to bitch about another is really poor netiquette, feanor..."

    So is making up nonsense, which is proved to be utter tripe, and never having the guts to come back to the thread where you lied and admit you were talking complete bullshit. You're not only a liar, you're a wimp.

    And you lost your credibility for demanding that I provide you a list of games with 30 minute openings when FFXII has an opening that is not even close to being that long. And for your bizarre claims about FF games not actually selling that well, claims that were also easily proven to be nonsense.
    Edited by 1 at 14/11/06 @ 15:18

  • Hughes. #35 5 years ago

    All racing games should be 60fps, and a solid 60fps too. Why were people raving about Forza being "Rock-solid 30fps" like that was a good thing (and I've observed slow-down every time I've played Forza, on multiple machines) when it's intended rival ran at double that.

    30fps is half the information reaching your eyes, and when you're blatting into a corner at 3 miles a minute, that matters, a lot.

    It's right that they prioritise frame rate this time, the horrible AA routine they ran last time purely because they thought having no jaggies smoothness was more important than actual driving smoothness was murder on the feel of the game, whatever the refresh rate of the engine, if you can't see it, you get no benefit at all, despite their claims to the contrary.

    In racers frame-rate is King.
    Edited by 1 at 14/11/06 @ 15:26

  • king_skins #36 5 years ago

    But the thing about Forza was that the physics and joypad input where refreshed at 180fps (although frames per second isn't quite right, but you know what I means, like). So you actual had more control over your car than you did in all other racing games... it just the visual information was only updating at 30fps.

  • Hughes. #37 5 years ago

    If you can't see it, you can't react to it. 120 extra calculations you have no visual feedback from are of no use to the gamer except in preventing the game descending into a stuttery mess. They improve machine response, not player response.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #38 5 years ago

    I own both PGR3 and RR6. PGR3 looks very nice and runs at a very stable 30 fps. I never felt the need for 60 fps in PGR3 to be honest. I played PGR3 for a long time and when I played RR6 for the first time it just felt awkward because it was so smooth. Not that I dislike 60fps, not at all. I cannot really describe the feeling when looking at RR6 in any other words then artificial. It would be interesting to see PGR3 run at 60fps. Not necessarily with all the details, because I do care most for the sense of speed and far less about the details but as I said earlier, PGR3 got everything right so I never felt it was necessary to run at 60fps.

    Of course I played a lot of racing games running at 60fps but I seriously never missed the 60fps when playing PGR3. As said, maybe I would like a 60fps PGR3 better with less details, I don't know.

  • yagisencho #39 5 years ago

    Good grief, people. Who cares whether it's a solid 30fps or 60fps? Is it a fun, challenging, and somewhat convincingly realistic racing game? That's all I need to know.

    I played GT4 for a few weeks before Forza was released. Once I started playing Forza though, GT4 never saw another second of screentime. Why not? It certainly wasn't because of the frame rate. It was because Forza was such a dramatically better and *fun* racing game.

    In fact, I don't consider GT4 to be a racing game at it, but rather exactly what they marketed it as - a driving simulator. If I want to drive, I'll get step into my garage and drive my actual car out in the real world. If I want to race, I'll play a round or two of Forza.

  • Hughes. #40 5 years ago

    Good grief, people. Who cares whether it's a solid 30fps or 60fps?

    You not knowing how important it is does not make it unimportant.

  • Vin #41 5 years ago

    Shitballs.

    Give me a fucking great racer with LOADS of depth any day of the week.

  • LightSleeper #42 5 years ago

    "Good grief, people. Who cares whether it's a solid 30fps or 60fps?"

    You know, whenever I'm asked why it is that 60fps matter for racing games, I just plug in the VCS, insert my well-worn Night Driver cartridge into the slot and flick on the power switch. They never fucking ask again...

  • bloodflowers #43 5 years ago

    Hopefully this will shame more developers into prioritising frame rate. The 30/60 difference massively affects FPS too. The emphasis needs to come off making pretty static images, and move to worrying about how things actually feel.

  • Corben_Dallas #44 5 years ago

    bout bloody time xbox devs, PS2 has had this since GT3/4 >>60fps XB360 is SUPPOSED to be next gen.

    Oh and no organic tire wear in Forza2 as well, tires wear down permanently not loose all grip (go red) and suddenly go Green again after few seconds rest (see also tire wear in Gt4 for reference) :D

  • nasanu #45 5 years ago

    Tyres can overheat then cool, giving the effect of coming back to life.

    But anyway I dont see why we cant be mad at devs when they cant get something running at 60fps. Vectorman on the megadrive run at 60fps, why cant a 360 game? You can say coding is tough, but the reality is that coders have choices. Every single game can run at 60fps, but to many devs making cars more shiny is more important. And why cant we have twenty cars on the grid? Why not rain? The list of things that should be in every racing game on any platform is huge but we never get them because marketing takes over.

    Forza2 will be just like every other racer. No damage, compromised driving model, small grid of cars, no weather effects. Poor effort really.

  • Virvel #46 5 years ago

    For me 60fps is a must for racing games, it makes the experience much better. I will never forget when Sega released 'SEGA GT' on Dreamcast with 30- or 40-FPS. I had played Ferrari on Dreamcast before, and that is silky smooth. I noticed the low frame-rate on SegaGT immediately and was greatly disapointed. I tried to play it extensively on several occasions, but to no avail: The lack of any smoothness totally ruined the gameplay. So, I bought a PS2 instead with GranTurismo to get a proper GT game.

    Reality is smooth so should fast moving games be.

    That said, I have noticed a lot of people who seems to not notice the difference between 30- and 60-FPS. I dont get it, set up two screens with different games having 30&60 FPS and you should notice a great difference.

    I also want to point out that some games run at for instance 40 FPS. Hydro Thunder on Dreamcast did just that and was rather enjoyable and close to smooth. I still would immediately notice it, but 40FPS can still feel good.

    It is the same with fighting games. Virtua Fighter on Dreamcast having less that 60fps just totally put me off. I tried Tekken on PS2 and instantly threw VF away.

    Also, as a previous poster said: Ordinary casual gamers probably dont notice the difference, but I am pretty sure that the smoothness of a 60fps racing game will make many of them throw away the low framrate games. It just feels better.