Then what do they mean? They claim the game stutters but all I see is a smooth game on my TV.

'This may not seem like a big deal - most will probably not notice it at all, and it has zero affect on playability - but it has a noticeable impact on image fluidity that mars what would otherwise be a perfectly consistent frame-rate. And for us at least, once it is seen, it can't really be unseen.'

They somehow act their eyes are superior compared to ours because they cant unsee it, but they are the only one.

Yep, how dare DF be so biased as to make a brief statement on an issue they specifically stated the majority of people wouldn't notice at all :P They may have been able to see it, but when your entire job is the analysis of video games, their tech and their performance, i imagine you become somewhat more observant/sensitive to the small issues.

Really though, outside of the minor stuttering issues and terrible IQ (both of which were stone cold facts that can be validated by anyone with the inclination), they praised pretty much everything else about the game. What a huge bias

Watched the PS3/PS4 comparison and It really makes Watch Dogs that much more disappointing when the graphics of the PS4 version, while noticeable, aren't really that much of a boost and it only runs at 900p. I really can't wait for cross gen games to be done with so the last gen consoles don't hold the next gen ones back.

Watch Dogs get praised for its 4fps drop on PS4 while the graphics aren't that much better compared to PS3 and the resolution being 900p (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g950RU3EQGA) and MK8 gets critized for its 1fps drop. Its like they really want something to complain about.

Errrrr...... did DF kill your puppies or something?

They are a tech site, and they take into account all the tech that goes into rendering a game and how much is asked of any engine. They point out thing scause not only do they have the equipment to find them they know what to look for. Its borderline extreme when you get this way whenever the slightest complaint is levied against your platform or game (even if they even went on to say no one wil notice it). 

DF does what they do, if there is no obvious technical flaw, then they will keep digging till they find one. Funny thing is that you are hammering at them complaining about a 1fps drop in MK8 but somehow ignored them saying that AA is completely nonexistent in the game. That is the real problem they talk about. Anyways, if you don't wanna see your game get nitpicked to hell and back, I will advice that you stay away from that site.

You really need to learn about the context of praise/criticism. They never criticized MK8 for being 59fps, they criticized it for essentially very briefly freezing once a second. Though they "criticized" it, they were also pretty clear that for most the issue was no minor they wouldn't even notice. It's their job to report anything they notice, even if it was something a unbelievably tiny as a game being 1079p.

With WD, they praised an open world game with a advanced physics engine for only dropping by a small degree during a heavy stress test. Somewhat different. Despite that, they had an awful lot more criticism for WD than they did MK8.

For MK8 they said it had a shitty IQ (due to the 720p, no AA and sub par filtering) and the stutter issue. That was about it. With WD they said it had uneven textures across the city, over saturated lighting during the day, sub par texturing filtering and occasional screen tearing. They also said that its facial animations, effects and IQ didn't live up to the standards set by inFamous. And, on top of all of that, they said WD had a pretty murky input lag (something they praised MK8 for, even in the 4 player split screen).

The only game they've had almost no visual criticism for was inFamous, but even then they had plenty of criticism for the game itself (describing it as a last gen game with next gen visuals). Does that make them biased against Sony too lol?

You may want to learn about the meaning of criticize.