Absolutely false.  The human eye sees about 72 frames per second.  Fighting games damand 60 frames per second.  At least the ones I play.  It isn't even about it being enough.  Playing Street fighter, tekken, virtua fighter, or ANY fighting game that isn't the recent jojo's game, will result in unbearable unplayable lag.

If an attack has a 30 frame start up, and running at 60 frames per second, the human eye does pick up on all of it, and if you are too slow to react to an attack coming at you at half a second, when some of the moves have even smaller windows at 16 frames per second, which you should also be able to react to, you're just wrong.

If it was a 30FPS game, a 15 frame start-up attack would be half a second.  Not a quarter.  Huge difference.  But, I'm not sure what you're saying anyway.  Everything can't run at 60FPS, because it pulls away from system resources.  There are times when 30 is fine, and there are times when 60 is absolutely demanded.

Imo its all situational. Some games are better suited for 30fps, but most games are better suited for 60fps.

Strange rant post...anyways it runs so much smoother. Does not "look" really any different but it is a lot more fluid and responsive.

haha, brilliant! Are those two websites set up to trick people into saying they can see a difference when the framerate is the same in each video? Either way, I can't see any difference in them which probably is a contributing factor to why I care as much about framerate as I care about dressage

Good thing I read the OP, stopped myself from looking like an idiot.

BTW, The Human Eye does not see in frames ergo there is no frame limit.

The eyes pick up light directly so it would be akin to infinite frames a second or a frame per c, c being the speed of light.

Perception speed is a function of the Brain, which is a matter of condition. The longer you play at 60, the easier it is to notice drops of sub 60. There are even people who can tell the difference between 60 and 120.

I was struggling to see any difference for the first website... but I do think I noticed fewer scene jumps when the guy was spinning on the spot.

Of course I don't give a damn either way, pretty sure due to my integrated graphics the "high-end" games I play on my laptop (Mass Effect 2 & Assassin's Creed 2 being the "best" looking technically) are probably displaying at about 20FPS. (maybe even lower when there are flames or other fancy special effects)

In light of the fact that your sensory input in this case comes exclusively from vision, how can FPS not be about seeing?

I can easily tell the difference past 60 fps even. I don't know how inferiority elitists came into existence, but they exist now in the gaming world.
Their logic is similar to this "No, I don't even want to make $200k a year for my job because 30k gets me by just fine!"

the human eye can't resolve more than 80fps. ppl should think about that . we can perceive way higher though.

I havent been able to tell the difference in anything presented to me. Consistent, locked framerate does make a difference to me.