[drbojingle]

A well designed feature IS considerate of time and attention. Why would I want a game on 20 fps when I could have it on 120? The smoothness of the experience increases my ability to use the experience optimally because I don't have to pay as much attention to it. I'd prefer if my interactions with machines were as smooth as my interactions driving a car down a empty dry highway mid day.

Prehaps not everyone cares but I've played enough Age of Empires 2 to know that there are plenty of people who have felt value gains coming from shaving seconds off this and that to get compound games over time. It's a concept plenty of folks will be familiar with.

[DrewADesign]

Sure, but without unlimited resources, you need to have priorities, and everything has a ‘good enough’ state. All of this stuff lies on an Eisenhower chart and we tend to think our concerns fall into the important/urgent quadrant, but in the grand scheme of things, they almost never do.

[jfengel]

Isn't there a limit to human perception, well below 120 fps?

Perhaps 120fps might result in a better approximation of motion blur.

[8note]

i still prefer 15fps for games. if theyre putting the fps any higher, its not considerate of my time and attention

i have to pay less attention to a thing that updates less frequently. idle games are the best in that respect because you can check into the game on your own time rather than the game forcing you to pay attention on its time