I think what will separate the men from the boys, so to speak, is when they produce the same result in a low poly version. Just like in the days when producing small and efficient code was the sign of a master, the same today with 3D objects.
This.
My wife works for Blizzard Entertainment, which is a very successful game developer here where we live. They have hundreds of 3D graphic artists working on assets for their various games. Having listened in on conversations that the artists have had (at social functions, etc.; I do NOT work there myself...

), when they are doing peer reviews, or interviewing new candidates, one of the key criteria they look at isn't how wonderful you can make any object, but how incredible you can make it look with a minimum number of polys. Even with the graphics engine optimization code they have (which, mind you, for a game like WoW is
NOT cutting edge), they are constantly saying "OK, looks good... now give me the same thing with 500 less polys, and make it look even better."
My understanding is that the pressure on the artists can be... shall we say... intense there to achieve more with less, esp. when you are looking at a game whose art assets take up a huge amount of space on your HD, and when they are pushing patches, etc. As Martin says, and I agree wholeheartedly, the real measure of quality is in how well it can be made to look without extruding every wire in a mesh.
Regards,
MSP