Player2 said:
That's because the money needed for the other 30 FPS was spent on something else. Reviewers are graphic whores confirmed. |
30fps + visuals tends to cost more :P
Really though, reviewers could give two shits about visuals if the game is bad. Killzone:SF and Ryse are two of the most graphically intensive next-gen games available and neither was reviewed particularly well (also worth noting that Killzone's MP is target 60fps ^^). Likewise infamous, arguable the most technically impressive of them all, while reviewed well didn't receive a score that would align with its visual placement.
All ten of those PS3 games were reviewed well and sold well. That's pretty damning evidence that while yes, 60fps can benefit many types of games, as long as the final combination of performance, graphics, art and atmosphere are good, then neither consumers nor reviewers could give two shits if the frame rate is 30fps or 60fps.
