That's not baiting at all, that's a great question.
As I said, it's a matter of mental association, and there's absolutely no technical reason to favour a lower framerate. VR and videogames don't have that same association in our minds because they're in an entirely different context where the higher framerate also has a direct positive impact, so the higher framerate is always desirable.
One major reason is obviously interactivity. In video games, higher framerates mean better responsiveness while playing, which makes a difference to how well the game plays, so people have favoured high frame rates in games long before games got to the point that the visuals themselves were up to that level of quality.
Another reason is context. As I said, people have a mental association with 24fps looking like a big movie and looking "better", whether they actually understand the why/how of it or not. But regular gameplay is not usually comparable to a movie, so people don't judge it as such. Therefore simply faster is better. Cutscenes are different of course, but modern cutscenes often do simulate a movie in that regard.
There's also motion blur. Traditionally, video games didn't employ motion blur, so a game at 24fps does not look like film at 24fps, which is why a video game running at less than 50-60fps can look jerky, while 24fps looks smooth despite the low frame rate. Modern games do also often utilize motion blur, but often only when they run natively at 30fps rather than 60fps. So higher framerates than film are usually needed to look as smooth.
VR is a different context again, but interactivity again is the major difference. Because VR is simulating/replacing an entire sense and includes realtime positional/rotational feedback, the higher framerate (and low input lag) is simply necessary to avoid a conflict of sensory information in the brain which leads to motion sickness etc. And again because of the context of simulating reality directly as we see it rather than being compared to film, the higher framerate is more desirable.
We view real life at the equivalent of a much higher framerate than film (the humans eyes don't have a framerate per se, but it equates to being able to resolve individual images at around 200fps or so from what I recall). 90fps has been determined as the approximate minimum figure necessary for VR "presence", because you're trying to trick human vision directly, unlike staring at a static screen.
Short answer, there isn't any technical reason that higher framerates are worse, it's all about overcoming a lifetime of movie viewing and expectation. It's likely something people will adjust to given enough time, but as a unique movie experience, it's not one people react to positively, unlike 3D for a lot of people.
Poll
Topic: Will the new Star Wars movie top Avatar at the box office? (Read 53976 times)