In one of the writer's comments to some of the responses we get this,

"I used high-res pics. All those pics are from the build of Killzone 2 i played, which according to one set of people is the latest and according to another set of people, is from E3 ‘07. The pics off the net looked pretty much the same as the actual game."

Pretty much, huh? (E3 2007 vs December 2008)

Graphically, Crysis at it's max is obviously going to look better. This person's comparison of the Crysis and Killzone 2, however, stinks by trying to find the earliest (and worst looking) Killzone 2 images.

Thus, can we just be done with this?

Wow I didnt realize how beautiful Crysis looked. I'm going to have to play this game when I upgrade my computer.

Do we really need more of these threads? If someone is deluded enough to think that Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis, that's their prerogative. While it's nice to look at Crysis pics and such, I think most of the time threads like these just stroke the smouldering fanboy embers back into a bigger flame.

This is one of the first things I needed to do with my new PC.  I must admit that on a technical standpoint, there is no way Killzone 2 will be able to compare with Crysis.  The amount of trees and bushes that are present is amazing, this coupled with them actually blowing in the wind and accurately being pressed aside by AI characters is amazing.  The other thing with almost all the enviroment being destructable in Crysis is another technical milestone.

Crysis is an amazing looking game that offers a cookie cutter FPS experience.

So what you're saying is, you are treating your opinion as fact. Ok then.  No need to get mad big guy, I'll leave you alone.