I'd rather it be locked at 30fps, dropping from either 45 or 60 is going to hurt my eyes.
In a game like tomb raider, unlocked frame rate isn't an issue.
*to make my post shorter*
I read it all, and the ESRAM is indeed an issue, and a real challenge, but it isn't, and never will be, the biggest cause for lower resolutions or framerates on the Xbox One. They both play a part, but the GPU is the bigger culprit here. Maybe in the early stages, there are things that the ESRAM can take the lions share of the blame for, such as COD and BF4 being 720p on the Xbox One. Surely the xbox one gpu can do better than that, but even with full mastery of ESRAM (which will obviously help), with both consoles at 1080p, you will still see a sizeable gap in framerate between the two systems. Even with a lower resolution on the Xbox One, the PS4 still has a real and legitimate chance to still lead in raw framerate, as is the case in BF4. With full mastery of ESRAM, I do not think this would change in any tremendous way. I do think it would be a big help, just not in a way that will completely erase the gap that exists between the GPUs. Framebuffers can be stored between either ESRAM or DDR3, even separating parts of a specific framebuffer is possible, so the size of the framebuffer isn't as big an issue as you think. It just takes more work and planning to decide what will be where and when, and that's a legitimate and real challenge.
Forza 5 was a launch game. Just as turn 10 made amazing strides on the Xbox 360, the same will hold true for their work on the Xbox One. Just give them time, although I suspect the resolution will be lowered in some future titles, but I don't have a big issue with that. People would do well to remember what Forza 2 looked like on the Xbox 360. It was a far cry from the drastic improvements seen in the follow-ups. Forza 5 is just the Xbox One example of Forza 2. I'm quite certain of that. I don't deny that the ESRAM is a challenge and part of the problem, but I think it's crazy to label it as the biggest culprit when we know the type of GPU gap that exists between the two machines.
The system delivering great graphics well into its life isn't an issue. There's no serious concern of the system not delivering on that front, and Ryse at launch is a shining example of that, I feel. However, if we're talking comparisons as between xbox one and ps4, depending on the type of game, the xbox one version will suffer in obvious ways if the dev attempts to achieve resolution parity, rather than lowering the resolution to give the Xbox One some breathing room. With or without ESRAM, the Xbox One was always going to be better suited for resolutions lower than 1080p in order to produce the kinds of games we want and expect, and I expect this to remain true well into its lifespan. Every dev, if they wish, can always produce less impressive looking Xbox One titles at native 1080p. I don't feel that's an issue for them, but at what cost is the million dollar question? Devs will get more out of the hardware, but the realities of the GPU aren't going to change. Even once devs get a firm grasp on ESRAM, we'll still see some devs making the decision, particularly on exclusives, to target 900p. I fully believe Halo 5 will be less than 1080p also, especially since it's going for 60fps. And everybody expects it to look good, obviously.