Pete said they haven't discussed it yet so this website is bare faced lying. Simple as that.

GTA V on the Xbox One is 1080p. Not sure what other games there are but it is not much AFAIK.

EDIT: http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates

Dear fellow PC Gamers,
Please calm down. If 1080p 30 FPS is to be believed, it is for consoles. Consoles all have set hardware. PCs are variable. Usually Dev studios have a target frame rate and resolution for that specific Hardware.
Bethesda usually packs in extra options for PC. Bare minimum we should have resolution, antialiasing, and anisotropic filtering options with an uncapped frame rate.

Bethesda has always had options for object fade, shadow, and water quality. I suspect they will add more options for some of the new effects they are adding.

Lastly, there is always the ini file and dedicated modders willing to push the graphics further.

this is for consoles only, anyone who thinks this will be effecting the PC is just looking for stuff to complain and whine about.

This 100%.

Even if Todd did say it, which he didn't, he would have been talking about consoles. Anyone can see that.

False. This myth has formed because people are conflating two things being able to see individual frames refresh and being able to se visual difference from pictures with 30 fps and higher frame rates.

So there is a major difference between 30 and 60.

1st) The human eye can not detect and individual frame at around 20ish and higher FPS, but the human eye can detect the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. This inability to see indivual frames render creaes the illussion of movement. This illussion of movement gets better and smoother at faster frame rates so while you are no longer seeing an individual still frames you can still see quality differences at various frame rates.

2) The biggest issue between 30 FPS and 60 FPS isn't visual but response. With slower render speeds there is a longer gab between responding to stimuli and seeing the game render that response. We can still register the differences in response times at 1/30 of a second and 1/60th of a second. Once you start to get faster refresh rates you are getting into areas that are faster than human reaction times and thus you wont be able to feel a delay in response time.

To the topic at hand. Saying their goal is to have all platfrom be ABLE to run the game a 1080p at 30 fps is not saying that it is capped at such. If you are running at a higher reselution faster you have still met the goal of being able to run the game at 1080p @30 fps.

Maybe you shouldn't listen to rumors without a confirmed original source in the first place.

The writer or interviewer could easily misquote or intentionally mislead in order to drum up some drama.

Some games in the past have tied frame rate to game speed for some reason and therefore needed to be limited to not make the game explode. It is possible in theory for scripts to fire incorrectly or for graphical errors to appear such as flickering etc. In Skyrim if you changed the timescale too much it was possible to break scripts. If timescale was effected by framerate that could be a reason why

I doubt however Bethesda would have been so amateurish and naive. The game will be modded within 24 hours to unlock it to 60fps and having a game that crashes or fails above 30 will make them look silly

Even if it was true for PC:

iPresentInterval=0

I hope that PC will be 60fps...

Digital Spy gets its gaming news from posts on their forums, I'd take everything they say with a shovelful of salt.

RickerHK don't speak for everyone I can definitely tell the difference between 30 and 60 so much so that below 45ish it aggravates me to the point that I drop the settings down which if a game is locked at 30 that wont help and will severely impact how much I enjoy the game until modders crack it.

The human eye can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps is actually a misconception. I have no idea where that even began, but it's not true.

http://i.imgur.com/Erm0LJZ.gif

The saying is that the human eye will not be able to notice frame rates higher than 60 very well for most practical Object Velocities in digital media.


Anyways... There's probably a good reason to capping consoles at 30. I doubt they capped PCs at thirty.

Probably hardware constraints from one of the consoles.

Here's the real issue with 30fps (if it's true) that no one can deny.

Mods.

We all know having a decent amount of mods can slightly lower your framerate. Normally that's fine because most properly optimized PC games run at 60fps or more on a good pc. 30 fps does not leave us a lot of wiggle room for mods. That non-noticeable drop in framerate suddenly becomes very noticeable, reducing the game to a choppy slideshow. This is the real issue that we should be focusing on.

Sharing what we just tweeted:

Fallout 4 is 1080p & 30fps on Xbox One and PS4. Resolution and FPS are not limited in any way on the PC.

Thanks for the confirmation up Gstaff.

Now.... about those PC system requirements?

Thanks for the confirmation, those false articles riled me up for no good reason.

Thank you very very much for the confirmation!

^^ This.

Would certainly be useful information eh?

Like as not, they probably aren't certain what they will be yet. Consider all the optimisations Skyrim went through post-release. There could be a fair bit of that left to do yet.

They probably can't give accurate specs yet since they are not finished the game. Depending on optimizations they make between now and release could change required specs highly.

Last thing they want is to say the game will run on a certain spec only for it to be released and that spec be too low. Leading to internet arm chair warriors taking to social media and forums to complain the built a PC for FO4 that is no longer satisfactory.

Too much of a headache, and with 5 months til release there is no reason anyone needs to know yet anyway

As the 30 FPS limit is officially confirmed for console, and mods will be coming to Xbox One at least, this is still somewhat relevant. However, we just don't have enough information to know it it's a real issue or not.

Mods can effect framerate on PC in two ways. One is by increasing the load on the GPU. The other is by increasing load on the CPU.

It's quite possible to have a situation where framerate is limited by GPU, and mods putting load on CPU have little if any effect. Similarly, on a CPU limited machine, loading the GPU will have little effect.

We have no idea whether the consoles will be graphics or processor limited (and I gather there's more overlap due to shared memory), or even if a generous safety margin has been imposed in order to guarantee absolutely stable framerates. It could well be that a console can take a fair number of mods before there being any serious effect.

We also have no idea if graphically intensive mods (like very large texture replacers) will be allowed on console. And, where scripts are concerned, we don't know how the scripting VM will synchronise with framerate and what effect that will have on the running of mod scripts.

With so many imponderables, it really is way too early to worry. Some mods may not run on console. Consoles may be well able to handle most mods, but only a few at a time, or only a few of particular types (script heavy, AI heavy, graphics heavy).

And, after all, there's such a wide range of PCs that run mods, that there are plenty of PC players who have to be careful about what mods they load up on Skyrim (comparing FO4 with FO3 would be misleading, as the whole script scheduling system changed a lot - script heavy mods on Skyrim have much less effect on framerate).

It's sort of true. This explains it perfectly: http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/327353-What-is-the-max-FPS-the-human-eye-can-see?s=0153362a08047758af61f8c0a3052da8&p=3066148&viewfull=1#post3066148

Essentially, at 30 fps or higher (I think it's 27.6 technically), the brain processes images as motion/video, and it won't detect "stutter". That doesn't mean the brain cannot detect higher frame rates though, but it does mean that the brain will interpret 30 fps and 60 fps as "fluid" and that frame rates above 30 fps are excessive when the goal is to simply create fluidity. For practical purposes in most cases 30 fps works fine. Now that said, when you slow down video, either due to lag or slow motion, that's when 30 fps becomes inadequate. If you slow down 30 fps by 20% you get 24 fps; by 50% it's only 15 fps - your brain will notice dropped frames or stuttering at that point.

Also, that gif is rubbish pretty much - it's all running at the same frame rate since it's all one image.

------ EDIT ------

To clarify (kind of a major point), the necessary frame rate needed to create fluid motion is relative to how similar the images are. 30 fps works in most cases: our brain does a neat trick where if one frame is dramatically different from the rest, it basically discards that information - it can't process it fast enough. So even though it can detect individual frames at higher speeds, it can't process it and "leaves it out of the report" so to speak.

I'm ok with this although I wish there were two options but probably not viable especially considering this studios history.