Yeah - IIRC, back in the olden days of CRTs, 40fps was the cut-off point in benchmarks under which the GPU was considered insufficient to run the benchmarked game in tested resolution/settings. Given that it's easy to convert 40fps to 120Hz TV, it would be nice for all new games to have that option.

When I play with KB+mouse, it always used to bother me with anything under 75-80 fps. But, honestly, when I play with gamepad, while 60+ is very nice due to smoother panning and overall fluidity, 30 doesn't bother me as much. After all, something like Zelda was 30fps since transitioned to 3D and nobody complained...much.

Even in current TVs 120Hz isn't universal, a big share of the console audience is still playing on 60Hz panels, hence why not that many games on current gen have a dedicated 40fps mode.
Would it be nice to have? Of course.
But given most players probably don't have the hardware for it and that 30fps gives more headroom for fidelity and consistency anyway, I can understand Ninja Theory's decision to stick with the traditional target of 30 instead.
They're already pushing UE5 and the Xbox Series pretty hard, the extra work needed to get it all running at a locked 40fps may simply not have been deemed worth the payoff.

We don't know if most players of the target group (Xbox Series X owners) don't have a 120Hz TV.
Most Series S gamers probably still have 60 Hz TVs, but I doubt that it is the same for the majority of Series X gamers.

Many Xbox games have a performance mode only for the X-model... this could be 40 fps if 60 fps ain't possible.

The 30 fps-mode would then be for Series S and for the fidelity mode on Series X.

Two different presets ain't that complicated. Any UE5 game can scale.

Series X isn't some super niche $800 box reserved for only the most techy/hardcore gamers, it's simply the 4k option, and 4k was actually the resolution of most American TVs by 2020. Again this is just to say people are not necessarily buying Series X based of a 120hrz promise or anything. Most will simply be buying it to make the most of the 4k60hrz TV they already have... Same with the PS5 which is the same price tag/performance profile of X

Of course regardless of what the current numbers are, the numbers of 120hz users will only increase as the generation goes on so devs would be good to consider it as it will become the default for 4k TVs in the next years or so.

It's not like Series X owners are the only target audience though; a lot of people will be playing this on Series S, and on 60Hz panels.

A 40/60fps mode would certainly be possible, and nice to have, but it would cost time and money, and devs don't have unlimited resources, so I can understand why a higher framerate wasn't a priority in a game that's built around creating a rich immersive world rather than split second reflexes.

I would not be surprised if a performance mode is added post-launch, as has happened for a few games this gen.

Whatever Microsoft touches they turn them into complete garbage,

They have the backing of Microsoft and they still making indie games,

So it's not a triple AAA game priced at 50 and only last 8 hours

Has 30 fps option only on consoles,
One of them named the most ''powerful'' console of the world...

The first party releases from Microsoft is always incomplete and then straight to gamepass isn't helping them either,

Just look at Forza motorsport, halo infinite, starfield, redfail and now this lazy lazy lazy.

Microsoft ur suppose to make big ambitious projects,

And man you were hyping us about this but now you've shown everything,

No one is going to buy this game,
Just play it thru gamepass...

Meanwhile Sony financing Korean company Shift Up with Stellar Blade.
20 hours+ gameplay might be more for completionist,
Has multiple graphic options 3

Balance
Graphics
Frame rate

What a shame from Ninja Theory.
What a big shame from Microsofts mismanagement

Not every game needs to be AAA, and there's nothing wrong with a game lasting 8 hours.

I'll take a well crafted 8 hour experience over a 50-100 hour game full of padding any day. Hellblade 1 was like 5 hours long and it was one of my favourite games of last gen.

I agree 100%, game length is a terrible metric.  50 hours of crap is still crap.  But 30 fps max is crazy.  30 fps needs to die in a burning inferno.  

Ninja Team did not want to make AAA $70 game and I'm glad MS didn't force them into doing. Thank god we have top class developers who are still invested in bespoke experiences and able to work to their team size/scale instead of being forced to try and make the next 20m selling franchise. 

And it's pointless to compare it to a game like Stellar Blade which looks like it could comfortably run on PS4 at 900p30fps. 

You're saying this as someone who plays primarily PC. It's like a PS5 owner going back to their switch and saying it's crazy Tears of the Kindgom is only 900p30fps. 30fps is still totally acceptable to the the vast majority of the console demographic which is why Sony has set it as the default in most of it's AAA PS5 releases (Miles Morales, Ratchet, Spiderman 2, Horizon). They also have a lot more user data research and feedback than what twitter & forum discourse provide you. 

Personally none of my friends who aren't on forums ever mention framerate aside from when games obviously can't runs stably (think Elden Ring).

Even on Xbox, once starfield released, I didn't hear anyone crying about its framerate once they actually dug into the experience. Instead the complaints targeted the actual gameplay and it's still Bethesda's fastest selling title. A stable 30fps vs 60fps will never break or make a single player game for the general console consumer