Would you buy a PS4 Pro or an XbOne Scorpio if they could do 60fps?
I personally thought they threw away a golden oppurtunity. Because their goal seems to have been to adress dissapointment in underpowered hardware, especially compared to PC gaming, in fact Sony specifically said this was to combat the usual bout of people migrating to PC that they said often occurs about half way through a generation.
But here's the thing: No one's complaining about resolution. Okay some are, I do think it's fairly ridiculas that in this day and age a console can still have to upscale to 1080 and still dare to show its face, but really, the big beef everyone with the PS4 and the XbOne is the low frame rates.
I personally don't give a shit about 4k. Okay, the higher the resolution the better, but I don't know if I'd buy a console all over again just for the privilage. Plus the in both cases, the phrase "true 4k" comes with so many astrikses I feel like sticking with my PC just for simplicity's sake, which is not a phrase I ever thought I'd be saying.
But you know what WOULD make me interested in these new consoles? And what would give reason to buy one to even those who don't have 4k TVs?
If you had the option of choosing whether those extra terraflops went towards a high resolution or towards pushing the frame rate up.
Can you imagine what a boon it would be to the PS4 and the XbOne to be able to say "Now in 60FPS!".

You might not care, 30fps might not bother you, but you can't deny there are a lot of people online saying things like "I simply can't play a shooter at sub 60. It feels so unresponsive! I'm been spoiled by PC for so long, now I can't go back!

If it was possible to make it happen with these new hardware, then personally I think they were foolish to instead focus soley on "Oh my god! It's 4k!***"

What do you think? Are you interested in these new consoles? If so, would you be even more interested if you had the option between high resolution and better performance? And if you weren't interested, would you be in such a case?

Theyve been doing 60fps on console since at least the Nintendo64. It's a design choice, has been that way for more than the past decade.

I think Tomb Raider will give you the option between resolution/detail and fps, which I think is a great feature. Would be nice if it became the norm, but it won't. Not all games really need to be 60fps, although it may be optimal, so on some I would personally pick more detail and resolution.

Devs will normally pick better graphics though, because it is more marketable and nothing will change that

Of course it is. They have only so much processing power, and they prioritise pushing the graphics up to the point of dipping to 30 fps (and sometimes lower).

But given that these new consoles seem to have been largely to placate accusations of underpowered hardware, I think being able to say "we're not stuck at 30fps" anymore would have been market-savy.

But they haven't been "stuck" at 30fps since the early 90s. It's a design choice. Just like someone could make a modern day crysis on PC that could barely scrape 30fps on the highest end of the GPU spectrum. If people really cared about 60fps like the vocal minority on the internet likes to believe, we would have more titles at 60fps.

And also, PS3 and 360 weren't considered underpowered when they launched. The underpower thing wasn't really an arguement until the gen was well underway, but that's a thing that will always be so on hardware that is designed to be static in a field where theres constant improvement.

And, actually, "underpowered" is completely relative to your own personal benchmarks. Again using a top of the line GPU for example, someone might feel that the card is "underpowered" the moment AMD or NVidia releases something that's exceeding even past benchmarks. Which seems to be happening every few months. It's all relative 

Let's just say that they'd provide more value for me if they prioritized framerate over resolution. As to whether I'd buy either of them, I don't know for sure. The price of the Pro is still quite painful for me, for what it offers. I'm primarily a PC gamer and there aren't a lot of console-exclusive games out there that I care about.

Already buying one.

i'm getting PS4Pro for PSVR games anyway...

Add me to this. Buying a PS4 Pro, PSVR, a XBR75Z9D 4K HDR TV, and a STR-ZA5000ES Receiver.

Frame rates are up to the way the development team wants to make their game. If PS4 Pro had been a 20TFLOP goliath, with 16GB of HBM RAM, and the most powerful CPU, devs still would have made some games 30fps and some games 60fps. It is a development choice, not a matter of power.

This.

I so hate how every gen people clamor, "omg, it's going to finally be able to do this"

Meanwhile dev's spend all time making the gmae look as pretty as they can because some shiny trailer will sell more copies of any game than its fps or other game improving features can do.

Scorpio could easily do current games at 60 fps, but I'm fully expecting them to worry about graphics again and thus we will still get just 30 fps games due to that.