It's just cherry picking, they aren't doctored. Anyone can choose a track, car, lighting setting etc and make any game look bad compared to another game where you choose the track, car, lighting setting etc which make the game look bad. It's like using the photo mode but instead of saving the shots that you think look great you only save the ones you think look bad, just for... fun... or whatever. The most unbiased comparisons might be comparing the games from the pics in the photo threads, at least then all games are shown at it's best. But I guess this thread is about how the games look in gameplay.
Video comparisons are better but you can still do some cherry picking because lol why did they make FM6 run at like 15 fps in that video? Makes zero sense and I'm just laughing at the whole thing here, just play the game, it might not look like DC in stillpics but it looks phenomenal in motion.
I actually did an A-B comparison with Driveclub and Forza 6, switching hdmi inputs with the remote, when taking the photos in my last post when talking about the realistic dullness in DC. My take from that comparison is that the differences are not night and day as some say here, that only happens when you look at the framerates where FM6 obviously makes DC look like a stuttery mess, or when you're driving in the rain where DC obviously slaughters FM6 since the rain effects in DC is extreme well done. The best looking courses, cars, lighting conditions, etc in both games make them both look amazing. Personally I think FM6 looks a bit too close to DC considering it's 60fps, but until we see DC running with unlocked framerate we really don't know how far ahead DC really is, if it runs at like 45fps unlocked in the rain then FM6 isn't quite as impressive in 60fps from my point of view.
