If I have to choose one, I prefer frame rate to resolution. But, more important than the number of frames is the stability said rate. I'd prefer a steady 45 than a variable 45-60.

Run at 60fps and 80% also look like Wii U games.

I prefer 720p, 60fps over 1080p 30fps so it's nice

though if possible, 1080p is good too :p

And I'm gonna assume that the majority of them is actual 60fps and not console 60fps. Looks like Nintendo hating AAA 3rd party games is paying off.

I don't get why people don't just get options on consoles. Just a little entry in the options menu, 60 fps or higher resolution, simple as that. That way everyone could play the way they want to and we would all be happy. Why is it so hard to do something like that?

Thats fair enough. However it depends what type of games you are playing. Games like Mario Kart 8 you don't want to play at 30 frames. Trust me on that one.

No, you misquoted him. He said some and not a lot and other stuff. Just listen in.

And besides, I find this discussion tiresome. You misquote the guy, you ask me a question I just answered in the post you quoted, you set a tone. Just say outright: this is no feat because a lot of the games aren't that demanding. That is an outright opinion. Instead you try to weasel, make your opinion fact (it is fact that there are a lot not so demanding games, as on every platform, but that this is no feat is your opinion), or put your opinion in the mouth of the DF-guy. Why not be direct with your opinion, do you fear to stay to your position? Because, momentarily I assume this is your opinion, but I can't even be sure because you don't actually say anything. Can't we talk like normal people instead like lawyers? That's all I want. And you just add another layer of weaseling. So, be direct or the discussion is ended for me.

Well, sure, everything improves. But, I think some stuff, visual novels for instance, improve more with higher resolution. Because it also can be said, that everything improves with higher resolution.

Because all companies - be it Square, Sony, EA or Nintendo - know better what we want than we know it. Trust in our game-maker overlords!

Well, yeah, in seriousness, for some games it is useful for better play-experience, some people would choose higher resolution and then complain about unsteady framerate. People do stuff like that. So for a fast game (Shooter, Racer, Fighter) I prefer they lock in 60 fps so the experience is similar for all. For other games (more visually oriented) it might be better to have the option, but the companies feel the need to decide for us in any case. If I think about it, if you have a visually great game, you might turn to high resolution to make a screenshot and turn back to better fps for gameplay. That seems like a good thing.

Because that way console owners would learn of the dangerous concept called "choice". First it's graphics options, then it's more hardware configurations and the next thing you know they start to demand mods and DRM free software. It's a slippery slope.

Console manufacturers and console devs simply cannot take that risk. It could lead to terrible consequences like slightly smaller profit margins.