I agree that this will be fuel to the fanboy fire for sure, and possibly make tech junkies shy away from the game, but this is one instance where the "cinematic experience" bit actually factors in. Modern films are shot in 23 fps, because years of experience in the industry has shown these people that this is the sweet spot for believability, for creating intriguing worlds and moments, this is the rate that makes all of your favorite movies look like they do. It's also why The Hobbit's HFR made some viewers sick, and typically was considered to not look as good as the standard version. So when a developer is truly pushing for a cinematic experience, it only stands to reason that they will factor in cinematic boundaries like these to keep the experiences close in feel. Games can make this work w/in their own play styles, multiplayer twitch shooter games live & die on how fast the player can respond to the screen, but sp games move at a pace that is fully dictated by the developers. Enemy reaction & movement would also factor in to these kinds of situations, games can be interesting & compelling w/o testing the limits of its players hand-eye twitch abilities and if this game is aiming for a full package of immersion & 30 frames is fixed, then it should be totally valid to even the most discerning of gamers.
commented on Five reasons you should be excited for Xbox One
"When I look at both PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, I see a gaping difference in this idea. Microsoft has plans set in motion for instant switching, prompt voice commands, in-game social features and much more that’s going to push us into the future." Where is this gaping difference you speak of? I'm genuinely curious, because the ps4 has the instant switching, the playing while downloading and all of the in game social features as well, also hearing it has the capability for voice control with the eye....this article seems like a lot of empty words w/o showing the other end....ultimately Microsoft hasn't really showcased a single launch idea for kinect beyond the voice controls (which don't need a camera to work), whereas Sony has actually shown off new gameplay experiences w/ their OPTIONAL camera in the playroom demo....to each their own, I say buy what you like, but this is a pretty one sided article that is misrepresentative of the info that's out there right now....for my money it ultimately comes down to game experiences, and Sony have proven that they have a more diverse lineup of first party titles time and again, whereas Microsoft had the money to buy franchise rights, they then throw our gaming babies to developers w/ horrible track records such as double helix instead of keeping the quality up in house