Its not the frames so much as it is the consistency. The absolute last thing I want when playing an FPS is for the frame to jag from 60fps to 15 fps. A locked in 30 fps is just fine by me.

@benkenobi---> you can tell it on the PC though, but thats mistake I suddenly realized when everyone starts to post on this thread, TV isnt PC. Bad mistake there SORRY I apologize on what happened...

You can barely tell the difference, and most games just run at 30 fps, honestly, who cares?

Just a random question, can you run a game at anything other than 30fps and 60fps?

Could you run a game at 45 fps for example? That way it would be slightly more fluid, but you could add more detail.

30 is fine for me, I haven't seen a problem in any other FPS I have played, most of which I am pretty sure were 30fps or less.

I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think that the eyes work in frames pr second.

They have a picture, and then they note the changes. The things that didn't change aren't totally updated. So in a 30 fps game, it takes more than twice the time for the eyes to react on the change.

At 30 FPS, a gun sticks out behind a wall. It isn't big enough for your eyes really to see it at once, but after some time, you see it.

At 60 FPS a gun sticks out behind a wall, and there are so many changes that your eyes are more sharpened and thus sees it.

I think that's how it is.

Also, I don't think you can run at 45 FPS.

Movies used to run at 32 FPS (or 24, not sure) and due to that, car's wheels moved the wrong way, because between each picture, they moved a little more than one round (not all the time, but at normal speed). So at 45 FPS, I guess you would have to program it differently, which would be a lot harder because you have to add 1/3 speed difference to the math.

This is the video the reason why I want a game to be 60 fps, and to prove Im not trolling on this thread when I reacted that The Conduit isnt 60 fps, and yeah, our eyes can capable of seeing 60 fps beyond that its overkill:

http://kimpix.net/2006/12/03/60fps-vs-24fps/

Movies have been running at 24 fps for the past 70 years at least. In the early silent movie days, they shot at 20 fps, and when you see those on TV today, they are usually sped up to 24 fps (NTSC) or 25 fps (PAL), so that's why they look silly.

24 fps is the standard for movies now and it will stay that way in the forseeable future, in PAL land movies that are shot at 24 fps is played back at 25 fps, so all PAL DVDs you buy actually run 4% too quickly :P

With Bluray movies this isnt an issue any more, all Blurays are at 24 fps.

If a PC game runs at 30FPS it's quite possible that it will dip below 24 (critical point for the human eye) at some point. On the consoles, that's quite unlikely, so, it doesn't matter for me.

I'm looking forward to 3 things in Conduit regardless of awesome graphics:

1) It plays as well - if not better - as it looks
2) HVS should license the engine to many developers / publishers
3) It sells well enough to establish the Wii as a great selling platform for mature titles

Since we're discussing frame per seconds here, and our own human eye, we can perceive only in 30 fps was a myth, we can perceive more than that. The myth happened when movies till now have 24 fps, decades later the tv were born and we can perceive atleast 30 fps, and now video games and FPS were born and we can see as 60 fps 75 fps or even 120 fps. Theres a interesting article about that here:

http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html