I don't see that as trolling. What is 'good' about the screenshots? I see a bland track, with little technical merit. Shadow detail's good. Atmospherics are okay. Oh, and the lighting and detail on the tyres is good. But everything else, including artistry (it's just a track shot!) is ordinary, even bland. And they're super-res promo shots, not in game shots, so they aren't even representative of the quality of the final game. If the final game has trees that sharp and fences that sharp, that's a plus point, but we know from earlier that they won't. So not even the excellent IQ is relevant to the game. Hence, what is good about those pictures? They don't strike me as presenting a strong example of best-quality racing game graphics. In and of themselves, they aren't anything to get excited about, and I don't doubt that if the photos weren't included, no-one would post any comment about those track shots because there's nothing comment-worthy about them. However, the inclusion of the photos makes for a talking point because they've been passed off as screenshots. Relative to the other screenshots, the photos are the only good images. That's only not true if the other images are good in their own right. Take away the photos, would you say those track shots are good shots? Well, that's always subjective. I've presented my take on them. F5 is capable of much more interesting screenshots. If one agrees the other shots are 'meh' then the photos are the only good shots. At which point, what's the issue with DieH@rd pointing them out as he did?
