Dying Light's resolution and frame rate on consoles revealed

30 fps...but at least it's 1080p. But knowing Techland, it will probably end up being more like an unstable 20-30 fps.

Huh, interesting that it's 1080p on both consoles. was expecting 900p on the bone.

And that frame rate better be dead locked after all that

More zombies... no thx

Let's see what that natural movement does to the ps4's slower cpu config.

I wonder why if they can't achieve 60fps then why not go for something like 48fps locked ala The Hobbit?

Even 1080p @ 48 fps might be too much for consoles, it seems.

wiener wiener wiener wiener wiener

Nice and soft. Not erect!

That's good.

I'm still not sure why I should be remotely interested in this game. All the trailers leave me cold.

When it comes to framerates, it depends on what kind of game you're playing. Sometimes 30fps is just fine, but still, you can't deny that a solid 60fps is more playable, no matter what. I prefer a better framerate to better graphics, myself. That said, I was going to get Dying Light on PS4 anyway for mostly co-ops and I have 5 friends that are going to get this game.

Im glad they realize what kind of game they are making and prioritized that over the rage of the web.

Dead Island was mindless fun but the frame rate problems did affect the game.

If they can lock it without dips then im all for it. 1080p means more clarity in the world so hopefully the haze that comes with their engine is minimized.

Looking forward to more info on this, hopefully its more RPG than action, Dead Island became a drag after a while because the story and side quests were samey

Wonder if it's gonna be even optimized for the PC version.

some areas will most likely dip on the xbone...compared to the solid stready 1080p on the PS4 version like other games. imo

Steady 1080p...what?

• but muh parity, MUH PARITY!

**** you.

how much were they forced to hold back because of that piece of shit xbox? ANSWER ME?

Damn consolites are weak as ****.

You sir are a loser.

TIL that resolution can fluctuate on a game.

Developers really need to stop getting hung up on resolution. By the end of this generation, I bet every game is going to be 900p or lower to achieve better visuals or higher framerate.

Well Wolfenstein: New Order dynamically reduced vertical resolution on consoles in order to maintain frame rate. That's the only one I know of that does it though.

not sure if serious

MINIMUM:

OS:

Windows® 7 64-bit / Windows® 8 64-bit / Windows® 8.1 64-bit

Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-2500 @3.3 GHz / AMD FX-8320 @3.5 GHz

Memory: 8 GB RAM DDR3

Hard Drive: 40 GB free space

Graphics: NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 670 / AMD Radeon™ HD 7870

Sound: DirectX® 10

RECOMMENDED:

OS:

Windows® 7 64-bit / Windows® 8 64-bit / Windows® 8.1 64-bit

Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-4670K @3.4 GHz / AMD FX-8350 @4.0 GHz

Memory: 16 GB RAM DDR3

Hard Drive: 40 GB free space

Graphics: NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 780 / AMD Radeon™ R9 290

Sound: DirectX® 10

lol at that 16Gb ram :P

30fps? eeew

they cut the ram requirement in half for both. 4 for min, 8 for rec.

Which makes their reqs seem kind of bullshitty

I would take 1080p30 over 900p60 or even 720p60 any day. I'm absolutly alright playing console games at 30fps with a controller. It's far from ideal and I do enjoy 60fps quite a bit and love when games are 60fps on the console, but I'm sort of a graphics whore so I would take a clean 1080p30 over lower resolution for higher framerate any day.

Because movies are projected while games are usually displayed on a display, and the display has certain refresh rate, usually 60hz; thus if a content is displayed at 30 fps, it mean 1 game frame rendered every 2 times the display being refreshed

48 fps will result on tearing due to the imbalanced rendering vs refresh rate time

We can only hope.

99% of the "gamers" on these forums whining about resolution wouldn't even be able to tell you the resolution unless Digital Foundry or the developer stated it.

Solid frame rate is by far the most important variable. After that, resolution is just one of dozens of variables that go into making a game pretty.

I'd rather have solid frame rate with a lower resolution and Anti-Aliasing than a higher resolution with shaky frame rate.

its funny and sad at the same time seeing them bickering over resolution and fps on a console

It's like two "special" people arguing over who placed 3rd at the Special Olympics.

@evildead6789: I wonder what visual effects they will remove from the X1 version to deal with the significantly weaker gpu.

@AM-Gamer: they'll probably just remove them from both for parity...or should it be parody...whichever is funnier

For me it's the other way around, I would rather have 900p60 over 1080p30

Hell yeah, me too. Frame rate over prettier graphics ANY day.

Lol consoles...

As a PC gamer I will have both 1440p resolution and 60fps.

stop it just stop it okay

lol nothing...

What happen to your thread..lol

I'm less concerned about the framerate and resolution as I am about Techland's past performance with Dead Island and Dead Island Riptide being glitch ridden. Now, I myself was able to overlook many of the flaws of those games and found something very enjoyable, however they really do for their sake need to make sure all that crap is ironed out before release, especially given gamers are growing tired of games that are launched full of glitches. Plus, patching after release doesn't amend harsh reviews; they need to remember that.

Looks like it won't be optimized then.

@AM-Gamer: it isn't significantly weaker, it's a slightly weaker, especially when it's paired with a faster cpu. You might get some extra grass on the ps4 version... But that's about all we've seen from this supposed 50% more power lol

@soapandbubbles: LOL "in your opinion"??? Whether or not a game dips is a fact not an opinion. Also, BOTH consoles will have crisp 1080p so frame rate wont affect clarity. Also both are LOCKED at 30fps, LOCKED... Stop being a pansy fanboy... Also maybe you should do a little home work and look at some of the games that came out the past few months, many actually performed better on Xb1 simply because of dynamic resolution(which is the way to go if you ask me) on xbox one..

Yup same.

I lower what I have to so it ensures I always have over 60 fps. Thankfully I can still keep everything at ultra for the most part.

Get out.

This game has a huge CPU bottleneck on PC. At least if you crank up the view distance. I have to have it at 60% to get 60 fps with my i7 3930k 4Ghz in the outdoors areas.

Indoors i get 120-200 fps.

If you have the GPU power to spare, definitely crank up the res with DSR so the GPUs don't sit by idle.

Image quality is pretty poor as well and the only AA option is some post processing AA method.

I'm mostly a singleplayer gamer, so 1080p at stable/locked 30fps sounds perfect.

I really hope not. 1080p30 >>> 720/900p60 any day to me.

To me, I'd rather prefer 900p/60fps.

That's cool. As long as it's a steady 30fps that works.

So what happens when DF releases their analysis and neither is locked at 30?

And Xbox One performing better because of dynamic resolution? Don't call someone out for being a fanboy and then make a fanboy comment like that. It's not a good look.