Beauty is a personal preference.

If you want to talk tech specs (which does *not* make something beautiful) then no consoles can beat the $500 PC in my sig.

But if you think Killzone 2 is the prettiest game in the world, then that's true FOR YOU.

I enjoyed it as well. But not as much as other FPS games on the market. Its quite obvious that the engine is beyond impressive but other things aren't polished at all. Things like vehilce combat, AI, story... I've always held a belief that Crytek knows how to make beautiful engines but have yet to show that they know how to make a compelling game.

Dude, STEP AWAY FROM THE COMPUTER!  And take a day or so off to contemplate your life and nature of reality.  And when you promise NEVER to do a post like this again, then return.  Posts like this will drive people to not want to buy a PS3, because normal people don't want to hang around with people who are detached from reality.

As far as graphics go, consider THIS from Crysis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPi0AhQgrDs

And if you want to be such a nerd about graphics, chew on this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYPr9L_7UuE&feature=related

As far as Killzone 2, well.... after seeing how boring Helghast looks, I don't know why anyone would want to invade it.  The place is one giant dustball.  Seriously, let the Helghans have it and try to negotiate.  Promise them you would NEVER want to invade them.  In that world, even money says that 20% of the invading force my off themselves instead of having to invade. 

Dozens of other games look like they have far more interesting worlds to be in.  Gears 2 world looks FAR better than this world.  Farcry 2 gives you Africa.  And Crysis gives you foliage also.  But Helghan?  I am getting so UNINTERESTED in it.  It may actually make me take a second look at Resistance 2.  At least there should be some nice colors there.

Seriously dude, a trip into hell looks more interesting that invading Helghast.  Didn't want to go here, but your unadulterated fanboyism calls for it.  Artistic direction is becoming increasingly important to a game being immersive.  

Crysis was quite good until those aliens came. After that it was pure crap. Technologically its incredible game however and no console game in this gen will surpass it, because there aren't enough resources on either HD console to make similar game. I haven't seen any "Geow 2 looks better than crysis!" thread or any other X360 game vs crysis, but more than enough from sonys side. I ask why?

I am proposing a FPS's law that is like Godwin's Law.  Call it "GoBoom's Law".  It states: As a thread discussing FPS graphics is discussed, the probability of a video showing exploding barrels from Crysis will approach 1.  At that point, all sense of sanity gets thrown out the window (if it hadn't before).

In style? Easily.

In animations? I'd say so.




In physics? Debatable (depends on if you consider # of objects on screen as some barometer of realistic physics).



In lighting? Arguably.

In textures, polygons, and resolution? Hell fucking no.

I found it to be the opposite when I played it. The beginning fo the game was great, but then after Prophet is taken away, it became crappy until after you exit the alien ship and found everything to be frozen. The pacing switched and I found it to be more interesting than going from point A to point B to take out stupid human enemies.

Quite true.

Squilliam said: All I have to say is that: 1. Crysis is over-rated. 2. Killzone 2 is over-hyped. That covers most of the arguments.

True.

The SPEs can do double precision floating point operations, the PPE can not. That includes the X360's CPU. This actually happens because the PPEs in both consoles use the AltiVec floating point/ SIMD instruction set which is locked on 128-bit single precision operations.