High or low fps?

[marurun]

This is actually a very complicated question. Lower FPS is better if higher FPS has more stutter and inconsistencies. And certain game types don't require 60 FPS to be playable or smooth. It depends on just how quick and responsive the action needs to be and how fast-moving the game is. Complex animations, too, are going to be better at high frame rates, assuming that frame rate is steady and reliable. Stutter is the enemy of all gameplay, and if 60 fps comes at the cost of consistency, 30 is probably going to be a better experience for all.

[Anapan]

Screen tearing aside (well that's RIGHT OUT) it depends on the game. If it's a RPG, and the system can't do higher with the prettiest graphics, I'm okay with 24FPS realtime rendering the best cinematic experience.
If it's a beat-em-up, puzzle platformer, 3rd person shooter or the like, I'm okay with 30FPS locked if there's no slowdown.
If it's a shmup, an action platformer with shooting, maze game or other arcade-like game, I really need to have 60FPS and responsive controls. I remember me and my friends thowing the snes controller with bad arcade ports and yelling it's the controllers fault. We weren't that far off, without proper control responsiveness the game is ruined. LCD displays with processing, bad ports or bad emulation with slowdown can easily break a game.

On a game that's on the rails (like the PS4 port of Shadow of the Colossus), I'll still choose higher FPS @ 1080p. On my PS4 PRO, I couldn't tell the difference, tho if I had a 4K screen I'd definitely choose lower FPS in that scenario.

[Tanooki]

This is actually a very complicated question. Lower FPS is better if higher FPS has more stutter and inconsistencies. And certain game types don't require 60 FPS to be playable or smooth. It depends on just how quick and responsive the action needs to be and how fast-moving the game is. Complex animations, too, are going to be better at high frame rates, assuming that frame rate is steady and reliable. Stutter is the enemy of all gameplay, and if 60 fps comes at the cost of consistency, 30 is probably going to be a better experience for all.

You sound like some switch developers (virtuous, panic button, etc) who have been working on converting PS4 titles successfully to the handheld. The one uniform comment I keep seeing the lot of them go back to is that the lower consistently locked frame rate and frame times trump having a target higher fps (60.) Digital Foundry and others pointed out that Dark Souls on Switch is better than the PS4 etc releases because of this. While it is a solid 30, it is that, and the others try for 60 but usually wobble all over in the 40s which causes tearing, jittering, and other stuttering problems that make the gameplay experience itself less than optimal as it's not consistent. The argument has been even from those who at Blizzard did D3 on the system some games work better than others. Stuff with a set rendered space, a large or smaller (visible or trickily hidden) corridor type environment works well on the handheld because they can apply a lower solid FPS and just deal with in spaces lesser lighting, a dynamic resolution, or whatever that still works to keep that 30fps solid and the gameplay is enhanced by the stability.

[isiolia]

While it is a solid 30, it is that, and the others try for 60 but usually wobble all over in the 40s which causes tearing, jittering, and other stuttering problems that make the gameplay experience itself less than optimal as it's not consistent.

Part of the problem there is that Dark Souls (or Soulsborne stuff in general) are far from ideal on a technical level. Even when you have consistent framerates - which the Switch does come close to achieving - the frame pacing can still be poor (still the case for that version).

Regardless, there are ways to address performance dips in general, they're just (so far) not common for consoles. However, HDMI 2.1 now supports variable refresh rates, and the newer Xbox One variants (at least) already support Freesync. Seems like it's just a matter of time. Still nice to see the option to prioritize framerate on console titles though, which is a not-infrequent option.