2007 saw the release of Madden ‘08 on every platform known to man (even the original “left for dead” Xbox) but nothing garnered more attention that the 360 version running at 60fps while the PS3 version chugged at half the frame rate. Xbox head Peter Moore was probably still unpacking his boxes from his defection from Microsoft to EA when this story exploded across all gaming media.
While a definite improvement over the lackluster PS3 version Madden ‘07, there was no avoid the fact that if you owned both a PS3 and 360, you’d want to get the game on the 360.
Read more after the jump…
The immediate explanation was that the developers had an extra year under their belt and their relative experience on the 360 allowed them to better leverage the the system and get 60 fps video. They went on to say they felt confident they’d be able to do the same on the PS3 in the future and that indeed proved true when other sports games from EA were released at 60 fps.
So if nothing else, the public stink made over EA’s “doesn’t-give-a-crap” attitude to PS3 development has sparked Moore to to publicly announcing an end to 30fps sports games (or at least one platform getting 60 fps and another getting 30 fps). I think it’s pretty clear some games will always be released at 30fps while others, like sports games in particular, greatly benefit from the ultra-smooth movement provided by 60 fps. That said, I can’t wait to see an EA sports game on the PS3 next year and kick Uncle Peter in the nads… (verbally of course, not literally).
That’s why the PS3 version of Madden ‘08 running at 30fps checks in at number 82 in our top 100 Gaming moments of 2007!
Click here for the rest of Sarcastic Gamer’s Top 100 Gaming Moments from 2007 all in one place!
![[Post to Twitter]](http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/tweet-this-small.png)
Tweet This| Related Posts:
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
2 responses so far ↓
1 Zimbaa // Dec 20, 2007 at 4:18 am
Okey! What is the deal with 30fps? Its damn good. Fine, its not 60 fps, I understand that. But why do everyone complain about it? The regular movie is at about 25-30 fps. Does anyone complain about a movie being to slow for a regular tv?
2 Sean "rothbart" Workman // Dec 20, 2007 at 10:45 am
Sports games benefit greatly from the smoother motion of 60 fps video. And it’s really only a “huge” deal when one platform has 60 fps and the other one _doesn’t_.
Games have run at 30 fps for years and yes, it is generally considered an accepted frame rate.
The next time you go to the theater to see an action movie, sit up in the front row and pay attention to the screen when there’s high speed left/right panning and notice how on screen images hop a couple feet across the screen each frame in a jittery motion. _That_ is what a lower frames per second will do for you. For low-motion scenes, 24 fps is just fine. Even watching sports on TV looks better/smoother if you can get a 60 fps source. Some people prefer 1080i @ 60 fps over 720p @ 30 fps for sports.
Leave a Comment