They aren't, in some places they look really bad. They do have their moments though.
Ok, but overall, its graphically astounding.
The dogs I feel were the most interesting part in that when I first saw them, it was through the sniper scope, and they were running towards me and the way they ran was perfect, they looked perfect, and everything was just so spot on that I really did feel like I was being attacked by a dog...
Unfortunately, once the thing was on me and ripping my throat, it was a whole new ball game, the whole plan fell apart and it was a let down.
Other than that, I cannot think of a single part of the game that I thought the graphics were bad.
Even so, as has already been said, graphics are not the be all and end all of a game. Gameplay is vital and this is so true. I was brought up on computers that could not do sounds or colours and was blown away when they went beep so I am amazed by any new game that does somehting different to the norm, but at the same time Im also annoyed at the over-hyping of games that fail to deliver the goods. COD4 didnt over hype itself and certainly delivered the goods, while Crysis was hyped to the hilt and quite frankly the game is *****.
If COD4 isnt good graphically, then what game would you say was? Jericho was certainly visually impressive for me... But I got to the bit where they had to get past the door thingy and I kind of gave up... Not cos it was hard or anything but simply because by that time, I had had enough. It looked nice, but it was just not doing it for me.
PainKiller - Certainly not the most visually amazing game, but for me, it was just great - frantic noisy, fast paced... Spot on.
Everybody sees games differently I suppose.