Just give up. Don't argue with him when the PS3 or a PS3 game is concerned.
Oh I'm not trying to change his mind or anything. I lurk on the forums a lot so I know how most people operate despite my low post count. I'm just showing everyone else that he shouldn't be taken seriously and I think I'm succeeding.
Also I don't think I've directly responded to the OP so I'll make this short.
The reason I (and many others) believe Crysis to be superior to Killzone 2 is fully based on a technical analysis. I've given you the example with the explosion and can go more in depth with why the lighting is way more impressive than anyhing else if you'd like me to.
What's more visually appealing depends on a person's tastes and I can fully see why people would prefer Killzone 2's presentation over Crysis's. It all does look very fluid and every object in the game world fits into the atmosphere presented.
And there's the distinction I'm trying to make. Technical graphics vs visually appealing graphics. Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, God of War 3, Gears of War 2, Resident Evil 5, etc. are all very visually attractive games. I'd say a lot of them even have better textures than Crysis and most probably have higher poly counts and better animations. But Crysis is just unmatched in lighting, particles and physics as all those things are so dynamic compared to the games listed. Crysis is superior technically while those other games could very well look nicer to different people.