Lets take a look at his original point, and what would actually be affected by his 1080p photos that got blown up to a resolution it shouldn't have So, within this paragraph, what is actually being affected by that photo being incorrectly capture? Higher quality textures wouldn't be affected by it - Looking at the photos both games seem to not be too great to be honest. If we use the road surface texture GTS looks a bit lacking and flat/smeared. Forza is it a bit better but I wouldn't say either is over the other in that department. This can just boil down to personal opinion, and thats no problem because neither is really trumping each other. Higher quality car model - It depends on what one would call quality: slightly more polygonal meshes or more modeled compartments of a vehicle? Both have their instances of high quality in different regards. Better Texture Filtering - not exactly sure so someone else can elaborate on that. Would that be affected by the resolution change? Better reflections - Something that also wouldn't be affected by the resolution issue with the image. Wasn't that even stated in that DF video that was floating around that everyone likes to quote? GTS definitely gets that glossness down to reflect light greatly, but you'd also have to think about how it's actually functioning in comparison to each other. That's something no one bothered to ask him to clarify on. Better weather - Not sure how that is also going to be affected by the images being messed up. Either way, this you can't really argue at all. better shadows - Isn't it a known thing that the shadows in GT haven't always been the best? Although I could have sworn it has improved with this iteration. Better track side detail - this is one I can see being an issue, because the farther something is the worse it'll look because of the aliasing on the photo. Even then, you can tell that this is one of the area's they are putting more time in than Forza Draw distance - while it can make things look worse in that photo it wont be affecting the actual draw distance. This is something that I'm not sure either is trumping each other. So with those points in mind, what exactly was being misrepresented with that photo compared to what was said? To be honest, the most noticable thing that that photo is misrepresenting is the actual aliasing issue, it's very much pronounced there. However, that was one thing that was no mentioned whatsoever. Most of it boils down to personal opinion, and even if that photo got blown up to a much larger size, it still can still largely represent the points that were listed. I wouldn't go around calling people fanboys. Not just because its a term frowned upon, but just because of how hypocritical you're appearing here. I don't understand how people see others doing it, so they decide to do the exact same thing to try to prove a point against them. What exactly are you trying to prove?