Reviews continue to refute this opinion. many reviews state the game impresses visually. It's a game with a lot of things happening on the track which most other racers don't have. If that is where the focus is, instead of the environment, then that is where they put the budget. The game has to make budget for environmental/track changes. That's what they decided was the priority. You can harp on and on about outside track details but comparing it to other racers, sans 30fps racers, you're going to see the same thing likely worse.
It is typical of us to cherry pick the worst and to cherry pick the best and creating a dialog that the whole game looks like either the worst or the best. It's really just a matter of ultimately playing the game and deciding as a whole how the graphics are. We've done this song and dance a million times for a million games. Ranging from AF issues to puddle gate. And now we're at boxy trapezoid hills. All games make concessions in places they are hoping you aren't looking.
I'm' not going to say it isn't disappointing to look at when it's freeze framed in this way, but I hardly think this is a major gripe, considering how much is going on in the game and it's not a gripe that I've seen in reviews yet. There are all sorts of incredibly terrible textures in Drive Club but no one really seems to care because the full presentation is enough to keep you from looking at how bad it is.
Same with FH4, there are some majorly bad areas with bad lighting and shadows. But where most people are driving that's where they put their effort.
