The reason they do that is to show off the capability of gaming as well as pushing the technologies further faster.

@JasonXS12
There is a problem in PC gaming today which is developers trying to cram in as much features as they possibly can (i.e. DX11 without proper optimization) to show off their developing "prowess".

It comes at a cost for us gamers who don't have 300$ every six months for a decent card and the fact that PC developers oversee is that pumping up seven thousand different features with next to no significant improvement over others makes playing the game at a satisfying level completely impossible. Crytek started such foolishness with Crysis and Crysis 2, and although they look great and in recent years run great, they were pointless at the time because no computer could run it properly at it's maximum settings. I mean, look at Far Cry 3. It doesn't look better than BF3, it's brimming with settings that are hard to choose from and above all else it doesn't run as good as BF3.
PC gaming is not all about a million settings to choose from, it's about running better and looking great at the same time. Props to Rockstar for Max Payne 3. That is an example of a great looking and smooth running game. Far Cry 3 is fun, but it's overcomplicated and power hungry and it doesn't even look as good as other modern games. Crytek's statement about Crysis 3 melting top of the line rigs makes me want to punch them in the face. All of them. They have lost sight of what gaming is about.

But games are scalable... you don't need to run at max settings if you can't/don't want to.

And I call BS on needing $$$ monthly to PC game. I made a 900USD PC 2 years ago and haven't upgrade since, even when I got a 1440p monitor (a cheap yamakasi).

Look at The Last of Us,the PS3 Exclusive

It focus heavy on an insanely good AI(best AI in gaming right now) combined with probably the best console graphics ever achieved.

The AI of that game should be a stepping stone for the Next Gen and i hope a lot of developers try to at least get on that level.
Cause hopefully Naughty Dog can't be the only one who is able to achieve such crazyness.

Doom 4 should be up close horror like Condemned 1 and 2 with monsters. I would like to see monsters throw you across the room to the wall, only to roar in your face as you get up off the ground. It would be like a roller coaster thriller, all in first person.

Yeah I pre-ordered it too on PirateBay. Wow the things a PC can do for free.

It's more about what you're trained to perceive as opposed to what you're capable of perceiving. Plenty of gamers who regularly use 120hz monitors can easily tell the difference between 60 and 120 FPS. Particularly with games, where framerate also affects input response time. Once you've spent some time playing at higher FPS, lower will feel considerably more sluggish and imprecise.

Linus of LinusTechTips did a test where he setup a system running BF3 on a 120hz monitor. The monitor would be set to 60hz or 120hz by a 3rd party without the player knowing. The player then attempted to identify which was the correct refresh rate.

He did two tests. The first was with an "average" gamer, accustomed to playing on 60hz monitors. The second was on Linus himself, accustomed to playing on 120hz monitors. The "average" gamer only identified the correct refresh rate 1 time in 5 tries. Linus, however, quickly and easily chose correctly all 5 times.

"Average" gamer - https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Linus - https://www.youtube.com/wat...

@droodle- to my knowledge the current consoles only output at a max of 60hz, so for console gamers its irrelavent. Don't you need a dual link DVI, display port, or at least a higher speed HDMI input for 120hz?

In the end the only thing that matters here is that the PC Version runs at 60FPS like the old Devil May Cry Games and not on 30fps like DmC does on consoles.

For such games 30 or 60FPS is an insane difference especially if you are into skill combos and perfectly executed moves where you need every frame.