Here's the link (should have included originally):
Mostly it's hard to get it up to 60, keep it solid, and have graphics as good as they could be. They claim that it doesn't have a huge effect on reviews or purchases, and that higher-end graphics probably would.
Anyway, I don't really care. I can get more done per step with it at 30 FPS, so I think as long as that is solid, it's much better. I usually design pixel-perfect collisions anyway, so ramping it up to 60 FPS isn't actually going to help in that department.
The only reason why I would use 60 FPS is because some fast-moving objects can be hard to follow, and my eyes usually see three to six frames at once. Thus, it can look like there are multiple instances of a bullet on the screen when there is only one. However, a good motion blur will eradicate this problem most handily. What having more frames would have done is make the segments closer together, more closely simulating actual movement. But, I don't think it's necessary.
After all, most action movies are at 24 FPS, and the live filming produces a real motion blur. So, simulating that would seem to me like it ought to do fine.
I've heard some complaints regarding controls feeling tighter, but I don't know that this is all that verifiable of a claim. Given the difference of 30 and 60, and given an evenly displaced random set of reactions, half of the time the reaction would be the same. The other half of the time, it would be a 60th of a second later. Big deal. It takes longer than that for your brain to fire the neurons which will tell your muscles to flex.
Anyway, I'm glad Insomniac is doing this. There have been some very impressive games lately which are only 30 FPS (Uncharted 2, for example). But, back to another question I had: Are there certain genres which are affected more by FPS than others? Racing, perhaps?