In the case of next-gen video games, 30fps and 60fps seem to be the debate of choice among gamers and developers alike. Many titles are taking advantage of the potential of next-gen hardware, while others are playing it on the safe side to avoid compromising smooth gameplay.

A new website was launched and dedicated to head-to-head comparisons between 30fps and 60fps versions of titles. The goal was to determine if the difference actually mattered visually and experientially.

Sony and Microsoft maintain the PS4 and Xbox One are serious upgrades over the previous generation, and developers are utilizing the potential to deliver the next level in gaming, in scale, visual quality, and gameplay.

The preference goes either way, though. Developers choose to stay with 30fps to invest on graphic rendering. Stepping up to 60fps is more involved and expensive, and graphical quality is usually compromised.

The fps comparison site samples four titles, the same segment of each game viewed at different frame rates. Sleeping Dogs, Dirt 3, Red Orchestra 2, and Battlefield 4 are showcased.

60fps is doable in PS3 and Xbox 360, but developers were cautious not to push the hardware at the expense of subpar gameplay. There's a 16.6-millisecond lag (from input to response) in 30fps games, and in many titles this is frustrating enough for gamers.

Developers optimize and balance graphic quality and frame rate speed. The discrepancies are oftentimes noticeable, such as in GTA V in the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Smooth graphics is one of the holy grails of next-gen consoles, and users are allowed to experience next-gen video games 30fps 60fps. Rumors of titles maxed out at 1080p and 60fps are already about, especially the anticipated Watch_Dogs (gearnuke.com).

A recent online ad leaked the Watch_Dogs specs, later removed. The information is either an error or an unintended mistake; other developers are likely to seriously consider ramping up their title's capabilities.