I don't understand the difference between 30 and 60..once it gets close to 30 fps, I stop seeing any difference. I understand it from a technical standpoint, and I have really good eyesight, but 30 fps looks just like 60 fps to me..
60fps is butter smooth. 30fps is choppy but still doable as long as its consistent. I noticed the difference all the way back in 2007 with CoD4 and Halo 3 (CoD4 is 60fps, Halo 3 is 30fps). There is a huge difference between the two although tools like killak will try to tell you otherwise by using mediocre games like DmC to gauge the difference.
What is faith then but persistent hope in the face of relentless doubt. Now Playing: Anarchy Reigns, Far Cry 3, Torchlight 2, Final Fantasy 9.
I don't see anyone being critical and saying it's of utmost importance for all games. At some point somebody states that a game looks better on PC because it runs at 60 fps or people discuss the possibility of PS4 running natively at 60 fps. Then someone says that it either doesn't matter at all or that the human eye can't detect anything higher than 30 fps. Multiple people then correct that person for being wrong, but I never see it blatantly shoved down anyone's throat.
It's a simple fact that it's better, but everyone seems to be on the same page that playing a game at 30 fps doesn't make a difference in the world if that happens to be the only option.
i7-950 3.4GHz | GeForce GTX 285 | 16 GB DDR3 | NEC 2490WUXi 1920x1200 glory of power metal is an anagram of Lame Flowerpot Orgy. ~ kirbymuncher