Well I cant see which one you would disagree with,  although judging from your past i would say that you dont agree with Gears 3.  Which is fine, I still see a better looking game in Gears 3 than Uncharted 2.  The other 2 as far as I am concerned arent even up for discussion.  

Well maybe my TV made Gears of War 3 extra pretty then cause I saw a better looking game all around.   The only games that impressed me more were the other 2 I mentioned

I don't know, I guess I just saw a lot muddy textures in the game. Other than that it really was a beautiful game but not quite as good looking as UC2, KZ3, GOW3 ect IMO.

I'm not sure how people are so amazed by RAGE. Its one of the most inconsistent looking games I've seen. Texture popin all over the place and low res textures living side-by-side with hi-def ones. I honestly don't get it.

For the driving sections there might be a case, but not IMO for anything else.

i do not disagree.

i feel as though some reviewers are dying to have a multiplat game be the best graphical game, so when they see one that looks pretty, they just throw out a really high score on its graphics.

ign gave it a 10, completely over looking very apparent pop-in andbland textures all over the place, low resolution much of the time. they also did the same thing for crysis it seems. they completely fell for the hype the devs were giving it, crowned it graphics king, completely over looking, lots of pop-in (and Crysis 2 isnt even nearly as open as Rage), screen tear gallore, so many framerate drops, lots of clipping (objects or people going though solid objects), low resolution.

both these games look great, but those huge glarring faults shouldnt be overlooked

The reason why people are so amazed at Rage is because 1. It's one of the most fluent FPS games you can play (60 FPS) and 2. At it's best it has really amazing graphics that are top of the line. The inconsistancies are rather lame, especially the horrible pop-in but if you can get over that it's an awesome experience.