The beginning is so cool. I love how they start going head first into a battle. The music to compliment it is amazing. This is why revenge of the sith is my favorite movie.
Year's of being subjected to 24 frames per second conditions the mind on what to expect. Things like motion blur for example is massively reduced, removing that Cinematic look. It's silky smooth, but all those extra frames drastically alters the information captured... The best way to see this is to scroll to points where an object is moving fast, relative to the camera and pausing the video. The objects being tracked by the camera won't change much, but the motion blur of what the objects are passing by will different in 60fps than 24fps. This is why certain shots look wrong. The blur effect is lessened that we are accustomed to.
That's exactly how my dad feels. He likes it when it's in a scene like this, but when it's some thing like a lightsaber fight, or the news, he doesn't like feeling like he's right there in the room it's happening in. He doesn't want to feel like he's in the movie scene, otherwise he doesn't feel like he's watching something.
This is just garbage interpolation with all the original post-process for CGI like blur and stuff linked to 24fps. Watch frame by frame and they will look like ass. Proper 60fps looks good to me, but it ain't this. Same reason why TV motion interpolation looks wrong on 30 fps console games, so much so when they can't lock the framerate. If the comparison isn't between two proper 30 (24) and 60 (48, or heck, 120) fps streams then what are we talking about anyway?
I can't tell a difference, however, after I stopped trying and just started watching the movie, I realized that subconciously I was avoiding watching the left side (24fps) and was only watching the movie on the right side (60fps). It's weird because I don't think I can see a difference, yet my brain somehow prefers to watch in 60fps subconsciously...
It’s amazing how an artificial change of frame rate de-ages almost all of this CG. All the ships, Battle Droids etc all look so much more real, maybe it’s because the higher frame rate smoothed some of the weird stutter effects a lot of Prequel CG has.
Who's back here after the latest episode of The Clone Wars? When Obi Wan told Ahsoka that Count Dooku is dead, killed by Anakin. DAMN! We're going to have to relive Order 66 again.
It feels like the 60fps makes the weight of the ships seem so light. Take example at the Venator cruiser using its laser to cut of the head of the droid ship after the explosion that both (obi-wan and Anakin) go through. It just looks so light unlike the original in which it feels like there is weight to that large vessel.
As an owner of a 240hz monitor, I can tell you to come even close to real life you would need atleast 480hz and also the current standard for VR is 90hz, because people tend to get headaches bellow it
While it does look smoother, movies are meant to be viewed at 24 FPS, just like games are meant to be played at at least 60. Also I feel as though this isn’t a perfect test because the original footage is in 24 that’s been re-edited, so it looks a little different than if it was originally shot in 60.
That way of thinking is old fashioned and should be wrong. All movies and TV shows should have varying standards of frame rate depending on the genre: Sci-Fi or Fantasy like Star Wars should always be kept in 60FPS because almost everything on screen is 100% CGI. And as we all know, space battles with lasers and star destroyer's are not real and are thus not immersive the second we see them. Reality movies and TV shows such as ones set forth on a suburban street on Earth might do better in presentation in 24FPS because it's already realistic enough anyway.
I agree, because the original 24 fps footage was re-edited to be 60 fps, they actually both looked the same to me. Normally, I can see a difference, especially if it is originally a 60fps footage edited to only show 24 fps.
This long scene prefigures Armageddon that will take place in the year AD 3000 (sinners) where the 144,000 of the Lord will be saints gathered (sought after / raised from the past and present) and allied with the saints (Edim) and Christian / Tristan (Jaspion Black ) sent to the future for the Great Battle (Armageddon) against the Forces (aeronautics, navies, armies and astronautics) commanded by Lord Maitreya (Dark Messiah / MacGaren / Moloque) In the kingdom of his father Satan. Edim and Jaspion Black (Fallen) on a suicide mission to rescue Sharivan (prisoner of space war) from General Über (Claytronic) Jason.
I’m not so sure if there’s that big enough of a visual difference. Yes I can see the part where Anakin and Obi-Wan are flying along one of the ventators, the camera panning over the special effects is much smoother. Also when you see the characters speaking, the camera capture doesn’t look any less choppy (not that I’m saying the camera capture for the movie was awful). It’s more noticeable when you see more fast objects go across the screen like the starfighters going above or below the camera sight
The right side looks like when modern TV's use motion smoothing, it' looks live instead of cinematic, usually I'm against this but for a Star Wars space battle, it makes it more epic imo.
In my opinion, 60fps feels wrong in a movie simply because we've been conditioned to associate 24fps with a movies for over a century. If I'm not mistaken, 24fps was set as a standard due to technical limitations in the first place. They wanted it to be 48 but that was difficult to do at the time. On the other hand, we've come to associate 60fps with games and lower production value videos you find on RUclips, hence many people commenting that the Hobbit movies looked like games. I guess there's still enough prejudice against gaming in general for some people to automatically take think of that as a negative quality. Given enough time anyone should be able to adjust but at this point it's kind of like qwerty vs dvorak. Even if dvorak is actually better, so many people are used to qwerty at this point and so many other things are designed around it that it's very hard to make the switch. But anything could happen. Who knows.
I love it, episode III has always sorta been my favorite, and this definitely looks cool. Also not sure if anyone else has asked, but could we get a "Hello There" in 60FPS?
The video on the right is only 48fps with frame doubling not 60. You can tell by pausing it and stepping frame-by-frame. A 60fps video would smoothly have 11111 frames every time you go forward and a 30 fps video would have 101010 since it would only advance every other frame. However, the video on the left is 10100 10100 and the one on the right is 11110 11110 which means the left video is 24fps and the right video is 48 fps. You should remove the duplicate frames from the right video and then speed it up by 25% to get a smooth 60fps. Or you can configure your interpolator to generate 60fps instead of just 2x24fps.
Example at 0:58 the explosion effect on the right is much smoother than the original one on the left. All cinema films use a 30 frame-per-second filming standard to give the 'cinametic look' as seen on the left, whilst an image modification on the right doubles the amount of frame, making it appear slightly more realistic and immersive.
Best way to spot the difference is to pause when an object is moving quickly past the camera... But that said, was this footage upscaled? Smooth linear motion blur seems fractured, as if the shot was composited a few pixels to far in one direction. And When I paused Obi-Wan's fly by as he tried to escape a missile, you can see the artefacting of the blur of his ship.
For those saying that they can't see a difference check that you aren't in 480. It has to be 720 or 1080. The 60 fps is obviously smoother and you can see more effects that in the original its hard for example those droids getting suck out of the hangar when the shield is down.
@@mar-uv1ri 1440p 60 HD on a Macbook pro. I want to see a difference, but honestly they booth look identical. Even pausing on a motion-blurred frame like 1:43. Are my eyes broken?
@@mar-uv1ri Yea, I tried covering one side for like a minute, then I rewound a minute and watched the same footage on the other side of the screen... I think my eyes just see in 24fps hahaha
I always did, it was hilarious when you realize that 99% of the Confederate ships were piloted by droids in a sector of space crowded by like 10,00 other war ships. Things like these are inevitable.
@@SHADOWSTORM59 The description says the FPS is a comparison between 30 and 60fps. Do you mean you think the footage was up-scaled from 24fps to 30fps before going to 60?
60fps maybe more real looking, but also a bit too smooth. but i think i would prefer 60 fps over 24... but not sure that it would be better for every movie.
I don’t know, I seem to find 60 FPS to be kinda awkward. Looks more video game like rather than TV or movies. So the original 30 FPS is definitely better.
I still don’t get why modern movies are 24FPS, I understand why they use to be filmed at 24 but I see no reason why we don’t switch to 60. Sure it’s a bit more work but they could make it 24 then run it through an algorithm to make it 60 FPS then make adjustments if needed.
This entire film sequence is almost 100% CGI so in essence it already resembles a video game rendered world anyway. The 60FPS change makes the film appear as it is now happening in real-time as you watch it and immerses you into the universe as if it is a real one even though we know it isn't. 60FPS works for some movies but maybe not for others. We might not ever know this since no Triple A film in recent time uses the 60FPS standard.
Unfortunately there isn't yet, but it is possible to make a 60FPS film version of this. I got the entire digital copy on MP4 then put it through Adobe Premiere with Optical Flow frame sampling to boost frame rate. It is possible to convert the entire film to 60FPS but it would be a really big file since double the frame rate means double the file size
But basically 99% of this scene is already CGI so in essence it's really no different than a video-game rendered world anyway, but only in crappier 24 FPS instead of the industry standard 60
@@Пролетар Maybe my eyes are breaking. My macbook Pro is running the youtube video at "1440P 60HD" I seriously can't tell the difference, even in a blurry camera pan such as at 1:43 when the two background ships are suffering from motion blur.
![REVISITED Battle of Yavin | A New Hope (1977) [Revisited, DeEd, Blu-ray, Puggo]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m2iiQuGn-oM/mqdefault.jpg)
![REVISITED Battle of Yavin | A New Hope (1977) [Revisited, DeEd, Blu-ray, Puggo]](/img/tr.png)
See RSD-Guarla go to-to-to broadside with CIS-Invisible Hand in 60FPS at: ruclips.net/video/_e3IRBxTWNs/видео.html
I don't really see the difference, do you?
I don’t see a difference between the two...
This is getting out of hand. Now there are two of them!
Is that legal?
@@winterwolf7175 we will make it legal.
@@MaxwellAerialPhotography take a seat
Winter Wolf Forgive me Master.
I know this is about the visuals, but damn this movie sounds good.
It is
It is
It is
It does
It is
The beginning is so cool. I love how they start going head first into a battle. The music to compliment it is amazing. This is why revenge of the sith is my favorite movie.
60 FPS really does look like a Star Wars game cutscene as the original looks like classic 2005 cgi
Yes, 60FPS is a lot smoother, but for some reason it feels wrong... I mean it's pretty and all, but weird.
Year's of being subjected to 24 frames per second conditions the mind on what to expect. Things like motion blur for example is massively reduced, removing that Cinematic look. It's silky smooth, but all those extra frames drastically alters the information captured...
The best way to see this is to scroll to points where an object is moving fast, relative to the camera and pausing the video. The objects being tracked by the camera won't change much, but the motion blur of what the objects are passing by will different in 60fps than 24fps. This is why certain shots look wrong. The blur effect is lessened that we are accustomed to.
@Cosmic Ascendancy the 60fps feels as if its moving at slight faster rate.
That's exactly how my dad feels. He likes it when it's in a scene like this, but when it's some thing like a lightsaber fight, or the news, he doesn't like feeling like he's right there in the room it's happening in. He doesn't want to feel like he's in the movie scene, otherwise he doesn't feel like he's watching something.
This is just garbage interpolation with all the original post-process for CGI like blur and stuff linked to 24fps. Watch frame by frame and they will look like ass. Proper 60fps looks good to me, but it ain't this. Same reason why TV motion interpolation looks wrong on 30 fps console games, so much so when they can't lock the framerate.
If the comparison isn't between two proper 30 (24) and 60 (48, or heck, 120) fps streams then what are we talking about anyway?
yeah, sometimes 60fps to me feels like someone recorded the footage in slow motion first and then sped it up, it's weird
A 2005 movie and still looks Amazing, the Best Star Wars Movie :3
I think that's ep 5, but that's me
nah ep 8 is the best
(im obviously joking)
@@crook7493 no, your right
...best?
Christopher Bolanos i rewatched it last week, it grew on me
I can't tell a difference,
however, after I stopped trying and just started watching the movie, I realized that subconciously I was avoiding watching the left side (24fps) and was only watching the movie on the right side (60fps). It's weird because I don't think I can see a difference, yet my brain somehow prefers to watch in 60fps subconsciously...
🧢
Battlefront III looks lit.
60FPS looks more like a video-game cutscene due to the fast and smooth pace.
You are just used to games being played at 60fps thats why it feels like that. I would prefer movies in 60fps
Left looks like a movie, right looks like a video game
Right looks like the old republic cinematic
i thought about that too :D
Well if the video game looks better than a movie, I will gladly take video game.
@@venturoes1912 it doesn't look better
@@ALeo98 How? Left literally looks soo choppy
Regardless of choppy frames in some parts, this shiii looks good.
It’s amazing how an artificial change of frame rate de-ages almost all of this CG.
All the ships, Battle Droids etc all look so much more real, maybe it’s because the higher frame rate smoothed some of the weird stutter effects a lot of Prequel CG has.
Stutter?
I was gonna say that myself. Higher frames definitely seem to make CGI things look better and more realistic.
@@jacktheflash8478 *STANLEY HUDSON HAS ENTERED THE CHAT*
yooo gottahaha okay?
@@jacktheflash8478 it's a reference to Stanley Hudson in the office. and his famous "did I stutter?"
Who's back here after the latest episode of The Clone Wars? When Obi Wan told Ahsoka that Count Dooku is dead, killed by Anakin. DAMN! We're going to have to relive Order 66 again.
I remember seeing this in theater with my mom and my dad when I was three. Yers olvthis was the first star wars movvie I ever saw
It feels like the 60fps makes the weight of the ships seem so light. Take example at the Venator cruiser using its laser to cut of the head of the droid ship after the explosion that both (obi-wan and Anakin) go through. It just looks so light unlike the original in which it feels like there is weight to that large vessel.
60 feels so unnatural, real life ain’t that smooth
Nah, it's smoother IRL
As an owner of a 240hz monitor, I can tell you to come even close to real life you would need atleast 480hz and also the current standard for VR is 90hz, because people tend to get headaches bellow it
palpatine like unnatural
*cough* Anakin Skinwalker, I was expecting someone with your reputation to be a noob
While it does look smoother, movies are meant to be viewed at 24 FPS, just like games are meant to be played at at least 60. Also I feel as though this isn’t a perfect test because the original footage is in 24 that’s been re-edited, so it looks a little different than if it was originally shot in 60.
That way of thinking is old fashioned and should be wrong. All movies and TV shows should have varying standards of frame rate depending on the genre: Sci-Fi or Fantasy like Star Wars should always be kept in 60FPS because almost everything on screen is 100% CGI. And as we all know, space battles with lasers and star destroyer's are not real and are thus not immersive the second we see them. Reality movies and TV shows such as ones set forth on a suburban street on Earth might do better in presentation in 24FPS because it's already realistic enough anyway.
NotLessOrEqual what are you going on about?
I agree, because the original 24 fps footage was re-edited to be 60 fps, they actually both looked the same to me. Normally, I can see a difference, especially if it is originally a 60fps footage edited to only show 24 fps.
When looking at the two, it's only noticeable in very fast scenes
This long scene prefigures Armageddon that will take place in the year AD 3000 (sinners) where the 144,000 of the Lord will be saints gathered (sought after / raised from the past and present) and allied with the saints (Edim) and Christian / Tristan (Jaspion Black ) sent to the future for the Great Battle (Armageddon) against the Forces (aeronautics, navies, armies and astronautics) commanded by Lord Maitreya (Dark Messiah / MacGaren / Moloque) In the kingdom of his father Satan.
Edim and Jaspion Black (Fallen) on a suicide mission to rescue Sharivan (prisoner of space war) from General Über (Claytronic) Jason.
I’m not so sure if there’s that big enough of a visual difference. Yes I can see the part where Anakin and Obi-Wan are flying along one of the ventators, the camera panning over the special effects is much smoother. Also when you see the characters speaking, the camera capture doesn’t look any less choppy (not that I’m saying the camera capture for the movie was awful). It’s more noticeable when you see more fast objects go across the screen like the starfighters going above or below the camera sight
i tried 60fps on my vr..it looks amazing
The right side looks like when modern TV's use motion smoothing, it' looks live instead of cinematic, usually I'm against this but for a Star Wars space battle, it makes it more epic imo.
The most noticeable difference is the Explosions and high speed object like the Vulture Droids flying by and the explosion of the Munificent Frigate
In my opinion, 60fps feels wrong in a movie simply because we've been conditioned to associate 24fps with a movies for over a century. If I'm not mistaken, 24fps was set as a standard due to technical limitations in the first place. They wanted it to be 48 but that was difficult to do at the time.
On the other hand, we've come to associate 60fps with games and lower production value videos you find on RUclips, hence many people commenting that the Hobbit movies looked like games. I guess there's still enough prejudice against gaming in general for some people to automatically take think of that as a negative quality.
Given enough time anyone should be able to adjust but at this point it's kind of like qwerty vs dvorak. Even if dvorak is actually better, so many people are used to qwerty at this point and so many other things are designed around it that it's very hard to make the switch.
But anything could happen. Who knows.
I love it, episode III has always sorta been my favorite, and this definitely looks cool.
Also not sure if anyone else has asked, but could we get a "Hello There" in 60FPS?
The video on the right is only 48fps with frame doubling not 60. You can tell by pausing it and stepping frame-by-frame. A 60fps video would smoothly have 11111 frames every time you go forward and a 30 fps video would have 101010 since it would only advance every other frame. However, the video on the left is 10100 10100 and the one on the right is 11110 11110 which means the left video is 24fps and the right video is 48 fps. You should remove the duplicate frames from the right video and then speed it up by 25% to get a smooth 60fps. Or you can configure your interpolator to generate 60fps instead of just 2x24fps.
I interpolated a little bit of it to 190fps and now 60fps looks choppy too lol
The standard rate for all films is 24fps, that how you get that cinematic view. Some directors decide to add the bars on top or bottom, some don't.
The whole "cinematic view" argument is just simply bullshit.
@Daddy Max You're right. I want my movies to be choppy and headache inducing.
Borkborknomnom 9000 have you ever watched a movie?
@@jacktheflash8478 3 months and still no answer, a real shame...
TheAnimationStation / Aurora well they don’t have to reply
Second best star wars movie and I saw no difference
Example at 0:58 the explosion effect on the right is much smoother than the original one on the left. All cinema films use a 30 frame-per-second filming standard to give the 'cinametic look' as seen on the left, whilst an image modification on the right doubles the amount of frame, making it appear slightly more realistic and immersive.
You need to watch above 720p to see 60fps content.
If this entire movie was rendered in 60fps, it would've been more visually dynamic.
Best way to spot the difference is to pause when an object is moving quickly past the camera... But that said, was this footage upscaled? Smooth linear motion blur seems fractured, as if the shot was composited a few pixels to far in one direction. And When I paused Obi-Wan's fly by as he tried to escape a missile, you can see the artefacting of the blur of his ship.
James Roberts try upping RUclips’s automatic resolution mine was auto 480p so I had to turn it up to 1080p@60
I must say, both have something. Though in the hangar battle I definitly prefer the 60fps one
For those saying that they can't see a difference check that you aren't in 480. It has to be 720 or 1080. The 60 fps is obviously smoother and you can see more effects that in the original its hard for example those droids getting suck out of the hangar when the shield is down.
Hey, can you do the General Grievous comparison??
how'd you get the 60 fps one?
You can see the difference in certain scenes with enough attention. One of the most noticeable one in my opinion is 1:29
Damn, the 60 FPS looks great!
I didn’t notice a difference
@@mar-uv1ri This fixed mine. Thanks
@@mar-uv1ri
1440p 60 HD on a Macbook pro.
I want to see a difference, but honestly they booth look identical. Even pausing on a motion-blurred frame like 1:43.
Are my eyes broken?
@@mar-uv1ri
Yea, I tried covering one side for like a minute, then I rewound a minute and watched the same footage on the other side of the screen...
I think my eyes just see in 24fps hahaha
Who noticed the Recusant crashed into the Munificent?
I always did, it was hilarious when you realize that 99% of the Confederate ships were piloted by droids in a sector of space crowded by like 10,00 other war ships. Things like these are inevitable.
Where did that happen?
smoooth!!~
i´d say the difference is only noticeable in the spacebattle-scenes, but that´s enough reason to watch it with 60fps :D:D
Right one is much more fluent!!. Especially the explosions .
*fluid
'Fluent' means 'able to express oneself easily and articulately.'
Im just here for the "i keep pausing it and i cant see a difference" comment
How can you people say, that there is no difference? With 60 fps it look so much better
Normal looks smooth to me, 60 fps isn't noticeable different
Yeah, I see no difference between them.
There's actually something wrong if you can't see a difference.
The film was in 24 fps, not 30. If the 60 fps footage is just a 2x frame interpolation, it'll be 48 fps instead.
Dumb question but where do the extra frames come from?
Even though 60 FPS is nailed down, it feels wrong for me. I prefer 24/30 FPS for the movies
my only gripe is with the lasers. they look a bit choppy compared to the rest of the graphics (which is awesome, if i might add).
I prefer 30fps, it just seems more natural.
Was this video upscaled from 30fps? The motion blur seems off when you pause. Blur streaks don't flow in one long line in some places.
La vitesse pour tous les films est 24fps
I set Optical Flow to 60FPS on Adobe Premiere Pro before I exported it and got this result.
@@SHADOWSTORM59 The description says the FPS is a comparison between 30 and 60fps. Do you mean you think the footage was up-scaled from 24fps to 30fps before going to 60?
60fps maybe more real looking, but also a bit too smooth. but i think i would prefer 60 fps over 24... but not sure that it would be better for every movie.
I don’t know, I seem to find 60 FPS to be kinda awkward. Looks more video game like rather than TV or movies. So the original 30 FPS is definitely better.
I still don’t get why modern movies are 24FPS, I understand why they use to be filmed at 24 but I see no reason why we don’t switch to 60. Sure it’s a bit more work but they could make it 24 then run it through an algorithm to make it 60 FPS then make adjustments if needed.
Its the cinema purist boomers, that dont like change and call high framerate cheap and stuff
Couldn't you have just kept the audio from one source?
How did u get a 60fps version of this movie scene??
I had to run it through Adobe Premiere Pro then set Time/Frame Interpolation to '60' (i.e 60 frames)
Can’t really notice a difference but there probably is one
They both look incredible so....
Could you upload an only 60 fps video of this please?
Id say 30 fps The 60 fps For me could be in game or Story telling its weird if its a movie it doesnt feel Right
This entire film sequence is almost 100% CGI so in essence it already resembles a video game rendered world anyway. The 60FPS change makes the film appear as it is now happening in real-time as you watch it and immerses you into the universe as if it is a real one even though we know it isn't. 60FPS works for some movies but maybe not for others. We might not ever know this since no Triple A film in recent time uses the 60FPS standard.
It's not actually 60fps. My guess he used a program for this.
60 FPS is cool in fast games like racing games or competitive games. But in movies? Nah, I think 24 FPS is far more natural
Original is not 30 it’s 24...
What's the difference?
dude is there anywhere i can download the 60fps version?
Unfortunately there isn't yet, but it is possible to make a 60FPS film version of this. I got the entire digital copy on MP4 then put it through Adobe Premiere with Optical Flow frame sampling to boost frame rate. It is possible to convert the entire film to 60FPS but it would be a really big file since double the frame rate means double the file size
If that were the case, then can't the file size be somehow compressed or simplified?
@@luckypaperclip Yeah I'm sure you could do that. Its unfortunate that the publishers didn't release a 60FPS version.
Good, double the fps double the fall
Twice the frame rate, double the fall.
Why does the prequels look more like what episodes 4,5,6 looks like?
60 fps feel like a game.
Is there supposed to be a difference or is this a scam
60fps feels like a video game cut scene and looks to smooth
But basically 99% of this scene is already CGI so in essence it's really no different than a video-game rendered world anyway, but only in crappier 24 FPS instead of the industry standard 60
Nope, 24 fps in a movie keeps the CGI more realistic
how u convert in 60fps? looks good
With this: ruclips.net/video/bbKzhJfFD4g/видео.html
The original is much better because it feels so much more real than 60fps
thanks !
Boys into battle
wtf, the 30fps one looks so choppy in comparison
BlueShit199 That’s the point Sargent
@@jorkkeker8097 my point is that I never noticed that it is so until it was put next to 60 fps footage
is there a way to download it on 60 fps?
Try SVP, it renders it in real time.
I saw no difference😂Is that normal?
chan kinhoi You need at least 720p for it to play in 60 FPS. Difference is very noticeable when the camera is panning around.
@@Пролетар
Maybe my eyes are breaking.
My macbook Pro is running the youtube video at "1440P 60HD"
I seriously can't tell the difference, even in a blurry camera pan such as at 1:43 when the two background ships are suffering from motion blur.
I can't see a difference
60 FPS is good for games, for movies is kinda strange...
60 fps is like battlefront II
I see no difference.
The original is a standard 24 FPS. This is also the FPS at every cinema. It is cinematical FPS
No its the lowest possible to achive a video that looks smooth enough to be watchable. Its not more cinematic
Left: Movie Right: Star Wars BF2
Uhm to those who cant see the difference, maybe ur video is on 480
Soap opera effect. I absolutely hate it watching films. Takes away from a cinematic feel.
Unfortunately, I couldn’t really see a difference.
get on that with some 144 fps
24 fps ist für filme am besten.
2:49, 3:40, 3:44
1:54
I can’t tell the difference
60 FPS is so smooth is horrible to watch
It's the same.
Ah, so much better in 60...
Se ven igual
Lo estas viendo en telefono?
I don't see any difference
I don’t see the difference
Its the same
It's the same
60 fps feels like those cheap knock off movies lol