Interesting article on the CoD series, graphical evolution, or static evolution as it turns out.  Don't know how Activision evades the public scorn of not updating their graphics engine, since many gamers rate a game primarily on graphics (which is obvisiouly quite limited criteria).  You certainly wouldn't expect a game that comes out at the end of 2010 to have both it's singleplay and multiplay rendered in DX3D9, especially with the financial resources of Activision.  

It's apparent to me that Activision's mindset is 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'.  They want frame rates up so you can 'fly' around the maps guns blazing.  BFBC2 has a good comprimise of great graphics and fps, both singleplay and multiplay are in dx3d11.  Not saying CoD graphics are bad, just could be better, especially in the 'effects' department.  There's great realism effect in dust/smoke/particles flying around from grenades/explosions, etc. to give a sense of being in a war zone.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6283992/index.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=picks&tag=picks%3Btitle%3B1

---

If we're going to publicy scorn the makers of COD lets do it over the fact they choose to put out a new $60 title every year rather than expansion pack it like BF2.  I like the COD4 and W@W graphics personally.

---