So true .... for 30 FPS as well.

When a game has a consistent and solid frame rate, the player will know exactely how and when to respond, he will form some kind of measurment for the field and distance. The real problem comes from dips and slowdowns in the frame rate.

Let's be clear. 60FPS does benefit the game slightly, and offers smoother animation. But, when we know that human can't click the mouse button without 245ms delay, then it is crazy that people give so much importance for an extra 16ms.

FPS significance is exaggerated.

cant wait for screenshot and video comparisons with forza 5

this game looks amazing, if you liked pgr you should also like this

Its crazy the amount of people arguing it is. I've never once noticed a game was running 30fps or 60fps. I assume Midnight Club runs at 30fps but I dont see how 60 would make a slight difference in gameplay. I push a button accelerate and steer to get from point A to point B.

Yes, it's useless to just think like that without reading the justification.  30 fps with this high technical level is not a bad thing at all.

You just gave me a really good idea!

Say what you will about the racing graphics, but autovista is gorgeous.

Those hundreds ms of your reaction time are what you can't reliably decrease, even in real life, but lag due to framerate always adds to them. 16ms can be little more than 6% for your reflexes, even less for more sluggish people, but they add EACH time you have to react, many times it can be little significant, but it's likely that it will be significant a few tens times per lap, and even if that additional lag doesn't always turn 1:1 into a penalty on your lap time, you can end up having between a few tens and a few hundreds ms penalties for each lap.
This said, the Caiaphases that tear their robes accusing PS fans of double standards implicitly implying fans of other consoles are innocent of the same guilt make me laugh. I myself may be fussy in theory, but always building low-end low-power consumption PCs, I can actually have high frame rates only on older racers or turning a little (or a lot) down details. What I like of PC is that if my PC exceeds minimum requirements, I'm able to chose, within my PC's limits, the best compromise between framerate and image quality and res, according to my tastes and/or needs.

That's a different argument. Yes 60fps can feel nicer. What matters is the rythm of the frames. Judder and frame rate dips can throw you off.

As for gameplay, for me 60fps falls more on the side of eye candy than functionality, while higher resolution actually helps me in better judging my driving line, and gives me more time to prepare for corners. Actually field of view is an even bigger factor for me. I do much better on the projector in hood cam mode, than on the tv in cockpit view. How can anyone seriously race that way.

1080p60 is best ofcourse, without judder. Wipeout HD made the right choice in dynamically reducing resolution to try to maintain 60fps. Same for GT4 that reduced the vertical resolution to maintain 60 fps.  No judder > resolution > 60fps

It doesn't add up while racing. You anticipate turns (and movements of other cars for that matter) You don't suddenly respond to them when they unexpectedly show up. When you're shaving off lap times, you get in the zone, it becomes like programmed behaviour. In the end you can almost do it with your eyes closed. That 16ms has nothing to do with setting better lap times.

Forza is a simulator, 60fps is a must for most responsive, realistic controlls and handling possible. GTs on PS2 ran on 60fps. DC is an arcade racer, not many of them, if any, run at 60fps