It's one of the things consoles, and tv companies have left to sell you new stuff. Once it becomes boring/common place for 4/8K they're SOL. Are you gonna buy a 8.1 or a 10.1 sound system. Over say a 5.1. Most likley no. There is no good reason to bother getting anymore speakers. All I really want from phones is them to focus on making a 12 hour battery and 1TB of space. All the "new features" are becoming more and more boring/pointless.

Sure, while most people don't really see any difference between stable 60fps and stable 30 fps. The same is true of 1080 and 4K. Esp when most TVs can't do 4K. But I think there are more people who do care about 60fps than there are people who really care about 4K. So being so dismissive is bad. And then some of the responses are irrelevant to the discussion anyway.

Its obvious that resolution and graphics quality are more important to the majority of players, many developers and publishers have done research and come to that conclusion. Frame rate isn't a deal breaker for me but I sure do appreciate it more than resolution.

But I actually thought that if any console manufacturer would advocate strongly for frame rate it would be the one that tries to push the idea that it has unsurpassed precision and perfection of its controllers. Everything is designed perfectly to help you excel at gaming, well I suppose you need all the help you can get when the screen is juddering about and the control inputs are lagging.

Not that I personally benefit from any reduced latency, because I suck at competitive games and single player games rarely require such precision that 30fps (or even lower) won't cut it. I just massively prefer the visual improvement of higher frame rates.

I feel bad for these executives. They get asked about so much stupid and trivial shit yet gamers can go ballistic over their answers. I would not have the temperament to be in that position.

If you care about 60fps so much get a gaming PC.

Expected nothing less from the head of a console division. Yet the small shred of respect I still had for Phil is gone now.

The sad part here is, that he says that it is a matter of opinion and that different people like different things, yet they refuse to let those people make the choice for themselves and rather force their opinion on them.

This just shows that Microsoft cannot follow their own lead. Forge its own path as a console maker. They have to be the other to beat the other. So what they're doing is coming across more as corporate centered instead of consumer Center. This is why they are out of touch with gamers.

I fully agree with you, consoles aren't and will never be made for 60fps so people should learn to live wit that.

As a game developper, let me tell you that what you just said is wrong (bold part) :)
You are mixing 2 things here, the rendering of your game and the game loop (where inputs can be captured or things can be moved in the game world, AI stuf etc)...

The game loop can (and usually runs) way faster than 60 fps and not every frame is going to be rendered; and even for a 30fps games...

So while you want to have a smooth framerate in any case for fighting games for instance, it will not affect the responsivness (for the input part). Now I give you that having a better framerate helps with the visual and it feels just way better at the end. You can actually even see that with other things in video games, one very good exemple are the objects that are out of screen or far away. You can sometime see some objects behind "refreshed" by the game loop only 10 times per seconds (Dragon Age Inquisition does that a lot and it is actually really weird some time)...

Regarding the OP: I think at the end I would prefer a lower res with higher fps. So I care about FPS yes :)

Well that just gave me cancer.