I'd have to compare to the demo to be sure, but I am pretty positive it is at 60.
I dunno. . .I think Insomniac is a really good developer, but like you said, they are not innovators. They are refiners.
They started by taking pages from Crash and Mario to make Spyro, and then from Jak and Daxter to make Ratchet, and then from, well, Call of Duty and Halo to make Resistance. . .but the thing is, their games are generally so good that you don't give a fuck that you are playing something that's been done before. It helps that they are technical whizzes, too, and that their games are all easy to play for just about everyone.
I think this is a sequel to far for them, really. The Ratchet and Clank formula is starting to show its seams. And I mean, it is a good formula. This is my 6th R&C game, and only now am I *really* caring that it's kinda long in the tooth. Fuck, it's a great formula! Apparently the end has a sequel call,t oo, which is :-/
I'd like to see them do a Resistance sequel. Resistance, no matter what you think of the game's objective quality, was a fucking phenomenal launch game. Aside from a slow start, it was legitimately good through and through, and not just launch game good. It was polished, with tight, lagless multiplayer that supported a ton of players. It even had a few good multiplayer maps. The single player campaign was pretty long. Most of the game was pretty great looking (again,e arly levels are kinda eh). It had the weapon variety of R&C. Imagine if they had the time to produce a sequel that they could do to their own standards, rather than working from Sony's release schedule.
I really think Sony must have asked them to do a new R&C game. Resistance notoriously undersold, and Sony probably wanted an entry in a franchise they knew they could take to the bank. Previously, Insomniac ditched Spyro at the end of the PS1 generation, and I think they intended to do the same with R&C at the end of the PS2 gen.