Game graphics for consoles suck now a days. Even more so when you know what texture should look like. Ever since I started using blender I've been noticing the amount of over used blur, visible seams, faces, and low texture quality of everything in a game. I was playing black ops last week at a friends house. It all looked pig disgusting to me. Current gen consoles are so outdated it hurts. that's coming from a guy with dial up wololol
TreyArch did not necessarily update the engine of Black Ops. It uses the very same engine Infinity Ward used for Modern Warfare 2, which was slightly upgraded from Call of Duty 4 in the year 2007. World at War and Black Ops, developed by Trey Arch, features dismemberment though. In my personal opinion, Call of Duty in general is absolutely overrated where it was able to sell very well, regardless of the recycled gameplay it featured since 2005.
Halo: Reach, developed by Bungie and published by Microsoft, had better graphics than Black Ops in my opinion. Especially if it's a uses a much more updated engine than Halo 3 from 2007.
The only games that may reveal the full potential of consoles in terms of graphics, are the following games: Far Cry 2, Crysis 2, and Battlefield 3. Far Cry 2 uses
Dunia, an engine that introduces realistic and immersion game world (However, I can't wait for what Far Cry 3 would be capable of). Crysis 2 uses
CryEngine 3, which I believe uses the full potential of the consoles if Crysis 1 using CryEngine 2 on the PC in Very High settings have better graphics than CryEngine 3 used in consoles. Battlefield 3 uses
Frostbite 2, a game engine that fully utilizes destruction as well with earthquakes, also supports realistic character graphics and movements used in EA Sports games like Fight Night Champion, FIFA 11, NHL 11, Madden NFL 11, etc., as the graphics improve each year.
Call of Duty is a poor example of defining graphics, MadZombie.
None.