To the unbiased observers and 360 fanboys then yes, to the ps3 fanboys no.

From a technical standpoint GeOW2 is more impressive.... By that i mean, GeOW2 probably uses more GPU power to be rendered than KZ2. KZ2 just has a better art direction and some techniques that the unreal engine can't perform. KZ2 has the cell for those particle and smoke effects, but i bet it can be done on the X360 as well with the right engine.. And that blur is very smartly used to hide lots of stuff you don't wanna see..

And you guys are forgetting Halo: ODST. The last Halo is not graphically that impressive, but who says this one won't be? If you wanna take a look at early screenshots, click the link below. You never know... Don't know if some are in-game. Probably not, or touched up. Judge it for yourselves.

http://www.bungie.net/Projects/whvidldshbyjsdo/default.aspx

Alan Wake can be a good candidate too. It's been in development for a while so it wouldn't surprise me if it matches/surpasses KZ2 (both art direction, and technical) but the PS3 still has Heavy Rain... Which is still the best looking one i think. Alan Wake might be the Heavy Rain for the X360, i don't know.



What I do wanna stress here is though, a lot of KZ2 fans claim the X360 can never do KZ2 graphics, but that's not true at all. Let's take Mirror's Edge for example. It's a game developed with Unreal Engine (same as gears of war), developed on PS3 (PS3 as lead platform like some people call it), ported to X360 later. Both run native @ 720p, but X360 has 2xAA while PS3 has no AA. I think this is one example of how the X360 GPU is a tad better (especially because of the unified shader architecture, which gives it 90% efficiency, while PS3's GPU only reaches 50-60%). The only limit the X360 has compared to the PS3 is the disc space.. Most 3rd party devs are going to PS3 as lead platform now. That's not because the PS3 is better, but it's because it's easier to port to the X360 maintaining the same graphical value (or even make it higher), than the other way around. Porting from X360 to PS3 is just a pain which cost devs too much time and money. Because the PS3 is harder to program for (mainly because of split memory) usually they lose quality with ports. In order to maintain the quality on the PS3, they develop there first, and then port to X360, which may look worse, same or better, depending on disc space...

Both consoles have their advantages and disadvantages against each other.

360 will probably never match the PS3 in the physics department.
PS3 will probably never match the 360 in the texture department.

All the while PC owners just laugh at us console kids debating over which console with hardware at least a few years old is the most powerful.

@ Badassbab: You're probably right.

Gears 2 looks like an original xbox game compared to killzone 2 (IMOB), lets not get carried away with baseless comments that even the commentor knows is nonsense.

The technical blindness of some people amazes me.. (I'm looking @ u overrated KZ2)

What's IMOB?
In my opinion, Boy?

IMOB= in my opinion Bitches!

They said that the Xbox 360 wasn't capable of a big step up from the first Gears, but Gears 2 looked MUCH better.

And contrary to what someone said, there was no sacrificing of draw distance.

Sigh....."Could gears of war 3 look better than KZ2"

360 fanboys says: yes

ps3 fanboys says: No

who to belive?

none has proof weather it will or will not.

I'll just w8 and see if it will or will not happen instead of predicting "ohh yes definitly 360 FTW just look at gears men gears" or "No ps3 is superior 360 can't handle it ect" and getting into some stupid arguments over the other console fanboys.