And nobody cares.

that Kz2 level is REALLY big, with lots of open areas and it can support 31 AIs running around and shooting you in Elite difficulty. Level design in Kz2 does NOT mean the game can't do it, you'll see this in Kz3.

even if the game has a static camera, the game runs @60fps most of the time, and with the level of detail, and effects, you can't say the game isn't a powerhouse...in fact, the game won most of the graphic awards in 2010... pretty sure that if you cut the framerate to 30fps, you can have a free camera with that detail, and much more.

talking about LOT comparison, which is pretty interesting btw.... to me, it looks that KZ2 does much more things better than Crysis 2....

Anti-Aliasing: Kz2 does a proper QAA all the time, while C2 is selective and does not affect the whole screen.

Texture Filtering: Check this images...compare this C2 screenshot

http://www.lensoftruth.com/wp-content/gallery/h2h_killzone2_vs_crysis2/image8.jpg

with this Kz2 screenshot

http://www.lensoftruth.com/wp-content/gallery/h2h_killzone2_vs_crysis2/image10.jpg

Particles: Check the explosion comparisons, clearly Kz2 has the advantange on this.

Polycount: Again Kz2 looks to exceed C2 in this department.

http://www.lensoftruth.com/wp-content/gallery/h2h_killzone2_vs_crysis2/image14.jpg

Post-Processing: I don't even have to compare this.

And the action in Kz2 is much MUCH bigger than the action in C2....

besides all this, WTH happens at the beggining of the video in C2 when the guy shoots the window? why does it explodes into pieces!? the same happens with everything destructible, the LCDTVs have more "life" than the actual enemies! it takes like 10 bullets to destroy a LCD panel...try to shoot to a light source and see if that light source dissapears...this exact details are the things that shows how downgraded the cryengine3 is on consoles.

O_O'

Killzone 2 had a number of small areas indeed but there were some maps that were pretty open. Also, even the smaller maps would have certain areas that were pretty open and would get very hectic in gametypes like search and destroy. Their'd be tons of bots placed around and a ton of soldiers working on one area. This was also the case in Botzone with 15 AI's around and in one spot. The framerate held up just fine and everything.

If that's not open enough for you then I'd like to hear what you think of Killzone 3 when that finally arrives. 

I would say that arguably Crysis 2 was designed less with the shortcomings of console hardware in mind so therefore the art style and techniques they use only really shine when applied to a platfrom which can smooth out the rough edges which pop up on consoles, I.E. PC. The visual technology of Crysis 2 is almost certainly better than even Killzone 3 however the gap will be bridged somewhat by excellent art work and focused design from Guerilla Games on Killzone 3.

Crysis 2 has more realistic graphics with a higher polygon count and slightly sharper pixels, but Killzone has a more dark and gritter Sci-Fi look to it and overall has a much better visual appeal. It has way better animations, It has some amazing particles and physics engines and overall a better graphical style. The guns have better recoil and aren't bitch sounding which overall add to the graphics and the sound which the Cryengine 3 is sussposed to have "the best" of.

I never realized how dark and green KZ2 looked.
Crysis 2 looks so much better! Although I'm not sure which one is better on a technical level. Crysis 2 looks a lot bright and cleaner, which makes it more interesting to look at.

Exactly this.

Fanboy ammo in some fruitless forum war.

thats because you guys are blind to the truth. Crysis 2 looks better then Killzone 3. And the PC version is better than that.

Actaully 1152 x 720 is still considered HD and the lack of [Real Time Global Lighting] talk proves that these are bunch of noobs with capture card out to make a name for themselves.

Neither of the games are yet released so I don't see how someone is "blind".