Animation is a very important, in my opinion even the most important, factor in "graphics", because we don't play screenshots...  screenshot graphics =/= graphics

I don't know, is there really a need to be the "BEST" graphical game out there? Can't they just be content with looking good.

killzone 2 surpasses crysis? of course not. marginal graphical improvement on geow 2? thats xboxfanboy BS.

KZ2 is probably the best looking console game to date. Its hard to see in the screen shots because to be honest it doesnt look all that better than gears 2(also a fantasic looking game). KZ2 really showes its stuff when you actually play it then you see why it gets all the attention. Its all the stuff that isnt really showen in screen shots like how the light plays over objects or the anamiation things like that. I will be the first to admit that I play and like my 360 much more than my ps3 but I can never see why people wont give credit to where its due. The 360 might never reach the graphic level of kz2 lol does that mean games will look bad on the 360 lol does that I mean I will like gears 2 any less(closes game to date that compeats with kz2) of course not lol does it mean I will pick up kz2 lol oh yes. Lets just be gamers and give credit where it is due no matter what system it is on. Lol ah yes the origanal post in my opinion it doesnt look as good as crysis but is very darn close.

It's exactly this kind of over-hyping that always leads to dissapointment.

I think Killzone 2 looks pretty good. I personally can't comment on Crysis as I've never really seen it at full capacity.

Wouldn't it be entertaining if a game that came out in the first few months of 2009 swept all the 2009 GOTY graphics awards?

People are already up in arms about MGS4 winning multiple graphics awards (over Crysis I might add), I can't wait to see what happens if Killzone does.

It's also going to be fun when reviews start coming out and we'll have reviewers saying this is the best looking game on any system to date (always happens with games that have hyped up graphical prowess), just to see people flip out all across the internet and write a novel about how much better Crysis is.

In the end, it doesn't really matter, they both look great.

As animations - Yes
In term of graphics - No

WRONG.

No console game will surpass Crysis until the next-gen. The system killers on the PC, Crysis and before that Supreme Commander just can't be replicated on a console. Fanboys really need to wake up to that fact.

Supreme Commander was released ~3 months after PS3. Barely scored a 5 for the 360 because it just WON'T run despite gimping graphics and unit limits.

Crysis was released a year after the PS3 and it's taken 3-4 GFX card generations since then to be able to max it.

Where here is an almost definate first....

A poor game franchise which is getting a sequel that might actually be a far superior to the first one.

When is the last time you heard of a developer making a sequel to a piss poor first game with this level of hype and anticipation?

Sony and Guerilla have really pulled out all the stops to turn Killzone into Playstations own Halo (which was the original aim). Looks like this time they will succeed. Now that's commitment.

why do people differentiate animations from graphics ?

in my opinion technical execution, art style and animations are all parts of "graphics"