I'm not too familiar with the exact specifications of ESRB ratings or that there even were any. I know that for a movie to be rated PG-13 in the USA it can only use the word "fuck" once (and not in a sexual way!) but.. should the ESRB system change? Why do you think so (or not think so?)

PDF you have equated graphics with realistic art throughout the thread and I object to it.

Graphics are either the overall quality of what you see on the screen, or the technical quality of what you see on the screen. You say it ought to be technical quality. Fine. But technical quality =/= realism. You can have very good graphics in a very nonrealistic game. Example: Ratchet & Clank on the PS3.

Anyway, I don't think it would be necessary to have separate art and graphics scores in game reviews because aside from graphics whores who should care how good the "graphics" are other than how it makes the game actually look?  Art and graphics combine to present the gamer with an image and that image is what ultimately matters.  It may be of interest to tech-heads but that does not need to infiltrate game review scores.