The mass market is a poor judge of quality, in general. If we used them as a measuring stick, then Twilight, Justin Beiber, and McDonalds would be the best things ever.

Well, that sounds strange.
They could've said "well, we are going to 30fps so we have twice the time to render a frame. We want to make beautiful and environmental games that blow you away because of fidelity" and everything would've been fine...

But Ubisoft...

It's more important in some games than others. Most important though IMO is that the frame rate be stable. If you have an absolutely rock solid 30fps, that imo is much preferable to a loose 60fps that dips down all the time

How does the framerate make it look like a TV show? So TV shows are 60 FPS over there?

Having too many frames is nonsense, you don't see things around you in frames unless you are living in a movie. There is too few frames which deviates from actual life and 30 frames in a second is ridiculously low. People got used to the slideshows and when they are presented something closer to the reality, they feel strange. 

Also, Ubisoft.

Ubisoft needs to put a gag order on their devs and hire a PR team. lol

I've tested 48fps during game designing and that is smooth enough. who ever said it should either be 30 or 60?

lol, I can't believe that someone still uses the "30fps is better for the cinematic experience" agrument.

30fps isn't better and 60fps isn't harmful, but games like AC may benefit more from higher graphical fidelity than framerate (I think that's what the target audience prefers).

How could the industry drop 60fps when it never adopted it? As a matter of fact, the industry will go towards 60fps and Naughty Dog will lead the way.

They will? Seems like Nintendo is the one leading as usual...