"There is a hell of a lot going on," he told OPM. "Increased visual fidelity does cost, there's no argument about it. The PlayStation 4 is very capable of doing both but we've gone for a fully dynamic environment, so you can go any time of day, anywhere on the planet, and it'll calculate the atmospheric density, whether you're up the top of a mountain or at sea level."

"So while we are aiming for sixty, there is always the chance that we'll never quite reach there."

"If I had my way, I'd rather have more stuff going on at a prettier level and a lower frame rate, but that's where the arguments start,"

"The coders would rather have a higher frame rate, and put less stuff in. So it comes down to Col [Rodgers, game director]'s decision in the long run. Personally I'm quite happy with a 30 frames a second game, as long as it's rock solid at thirty, and being an art director I want it to look beautiful."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/419746/driveclub-dev-debating-over-60fps-target/

Probably not in there budget to push it to 60 i guess.

The environment of DriveClub is really in another graphical level...

More like Design decision and not budget... make fully dynamic environment is really demanding... just the dynamic lighthing uses a hell of processing.

?

Driveclub is going to be great, no doubt about it.

I like that the dev has gone out of their way to give this comment. Let's see if this can stir more insightful comments by users.

Edit: Nvm. Don't want to derail.

Can't they just aim for...hum...45 fps and ensure you don't drop from 30?

What exactly is the point of this?

Well most TVs works with 60hz... so to vsync you target 30 or 60fps... but they can created games with 45fps too.