The whole debate over 30 fps vs 60 fps is ludicrous. They're both fast speeds, you're comparing a ferrari vs lambourghini. A fun debate for some, sure, but frivolous in its nature.

I, for one, choose to lock my framerate at 8 fps. It's truly the thinking man's framerate. Think about it logically. One may say that 60 fps is more "responsive", but riddle me this: In one second 60 frames will pass by, that leaves only 16 milliseconds each frame to make a decision. Far too fast for any reasonable human. Sure, maybe a professional e-sports player can make inputs every 16.6 milliseconds, but I sure can't.

Now, at 8 fps, the frame gets updated every 125 milliseconds. Now that's plenty of time to analyze the frame that you're seeing, decide what your next move is, and make the input - by the time that happens you'll only have to wait a few milliseconds before seeing the effect of your actions. It's efficient.

Think of an analogy of strategy games. For the sake of the argument let's use Civilization 6, lets say it takes you roughly 1 minute to think of a strategy for your turn and carry out the actions. That's 8 fps, nice, calm, cool, and collected. Plenty of time for thinking and action. Now what if we cranked it up to 30 fps or god forbid 60 fps. At 60 fps you would only have 7 seconds per turn! Completely preposterous. There is no way you could play a full round of Civilization 6 in only 7 seconds.

That is why 60 fps and 30 fps are absolutely foolish standards to strive for. It's literally impossible to process and react to 30 or 60 images every second. 8 is much, much more reasonable. 8 fps is the framerate of strategists, architects, engineers. 60 fps-ers just fly by the seat of their pants whereas 8 fps-ers carve their destiny from stone. 8 fps is TRULY, the thinking man's framerate.