The goal of motion pictures is not to recreate reality, it's not even to show reality. I want to create a little psychic link between you and my pictures. I want to suck you into the world of the story, suspend your disbelief and make you forget about yourself and your life and just be in the moment of the film.
By not showing enough visual information, we force the brain into filling in the gaps... it draws you in even more. It's part of how you let go to the point where you can laugh or cry or feel tense or afraid or elated.
I just saw the Hobbit in the new 48 fps 'HFR' extreme 3D, and man, it DOES make a huge difference, especially when things are in motion, and ESPECIALLY the parts that are 3D. I think 48 fps is even STILL a little low, and I could only imagine how it would be at 60 or more fps.
It seriously was the clearest thing I've ever seen on a screen, and can't really think of any good ways to describe it. It almost looked 'soap-opera-ish', like how they look kinda more clear and 'realistic' with the lighting and smooth background movement and whatnot. I always thought it looked kinda cheap, but in The Hobbit it's completely different. Took a bit of getting used to, but it was actually amazing.
I like the direction cinema is heading. Wish a lot of older movies had been filmed that way.
What I mean is, the time between console generations. PS2 was out for five years when the 360 came out. PS2 survived on, of course, but new technology was still out and development was being done on it. --- i3 2130 @ 3.4 GHz | Team Xtreme 8gb @ 1600 MHz | GTX 460 (768mb) @ 855 MHz / 2000 MHz
I honestly prefer the look of slightly blurred 30fps. Still, it hs no place in a highly technical action game, or what is supposed to be one, as it interferes with gameplay. Stick your 30fps to cinematics.