It looks great, but it's certainly not setting a new standard for visuals, which I guess some people were expecting. It doesn't look any better than Dragon Age: Inquisition for example, which is a similar game with similarly large environments, but the fact it looks as good coming from a studio without anything like the resources of EA behind them is impressive in its own way.
I think a lot of people consider design and graphics quality the same things when they aren't.
Same as art, you can like a painting that is well put together even if I don't know, the brush work isn't actually technically very good. The design of the world is pretty damn good and looks great, but the pieces in that world aren't particularly high quality. If the textures were significantly better, the colour palette wasn't insane at default settings and certain other things were improved it would look even better.
You also get games that have technically speaking brilliant lighting or ultra high quality textures... but were designed by a half dead colour blind emotionless husk and have a game that has great graphics but looks terrible because the games design/style is awful.
The world generally looks very good, but closer inspection of a lot of it shows most of it is for a 2015 AAA release.... fairly substandard in quality. Textures up close are the most obviously lacking thing, with frankly crap looking/modeled armour/weapons. Player model and NPC's look pretty poor by current standards and stick out the most.
).