rts and fps musst be 60 fps, rest doesnt realy matter as long as its stable

Ever played platformers and racing games? Or fighters? 

never had a problem with 30 fps platformers, and i play fighting games and racing games just in localmp, so it doesnt realy makes a difference  for me

There is not such a thing like a linear balance between senses. If you lost 20% of your view, you will not gain 20% with sound. I am in fact currently facing a problem of hyperacusis (I hear a lot too much, like smiultaneously 20 keyboard in my workspace, including some guys at a distance of 20 meters), and there is not any lost in my view.

The other point you made about continuous vision is exactly why we are sensible to a low framerate. In fact, a movie at 24 frame per second would be extremely sluggish if the brain was not tricked by the blur of the picture. Pause your dvd, and see the picture blurred where things are moving ? That's the trick. What happens is that 1/24 s of exposition for each picture, displayed at 24 fps will produce something similar enough to a continuous display (but still there are differences, you will notice that a lots of travelling are sluggish, you will loose details, you will not be able to display a flash realistically). So, it's not about how much fps, but how these fps are rendered.
Which came to the difference between a movie and a game. A game is interactive, so it would be hard to play with the same level of motion blur as a movie (and I'm not sure it can be as perfect because it's calculated in real time). And a game is interactive, so you will feel lag when the result of your action takes time to be displayed on screen, what ever the quality of the motion blur is.

I can't stand playing Mario Kart 8 with 3 or more players. Difference is incredibly noticable. Smash with 30 fps? Ewwwwww.

Platformers that aren't a stable 60fps are also mediocre. 

What an odd selection.

Minimum 30fps on all games.

Preferred 60fps on FPS & fighters.

All I can say is that 60FPS is obviously more smooth than 30 FPS. I can't think of one person I know (Gamer or not) who can't immediately tell the difference. Same goes for 120 FPS vs 60.

Some games, fighting games, in particular, are unplayable at 30FPS.

Some actions require strict timing. Timing that would be made easier in 30FPS. I'm not 100% sure as I don't have frame data in front of me, but there should be fighting games out there that require 1 frame inputs. You have 1 frame to perform an action. When the game is 60 FPS, this is harder.

If something is 3 FPS in a 60 FPS fighter, you can't change it to 1.5 frames. It's either going to be 1, or 2.

I wouldn't play any fighting game sub-60. We've had fighters running 60 FPS since the Genesis and SNES days.

Interesting observation. I never thought of it that way.

I've needed glasses since I was 6, yet can easily hear the difference between lossy Dolby Digital, and lossles DTS-HD MA. 96khz and 192khz sound tracks stand out above that again. Good surround sound stands out for me, I hated the fact that everything on 360 went through a lossy Dolby Digital filter.

The difference between native and upscaled 1080p, and quality of AA is still easy to spot (with corrected vision ofcourse), 30fps feels good enough though. I see the difference when switching back and forth, yet after a few minutes I don't notice anymore. For example I had set TLoU remastered to 30fps for photo mode with better shadows, then forgot to set it back to 60fps. Didn't notice for days.

It also depends on light level. 24fps for movies looks fine to me in a darkened room on my projector at about 15 fL (cinema screen brightness) While on a tv it stands out. TVs are in the range of 40 to 50 fL to compete with ambient light.

Still despite not conciously noticing, Wipeout HD and GT feel smoother at high speed than any 30fps racer.

I have hearing good enough to easily distinguish between low-quality MP3s and high-quality lossless encoding. There is no situation, all things being equal, where 30 FPS is equal to or better than 60 FPS just like there is no situation where a low-quality MP3 file is better than lossless encoding.