Crysis 2 was made for consoles, and so had to work with very little graphics processing. Starcraft 2 is also impressive graphics, but it's an RTS, where there are many more units to process, and therefore likely many more polygons. What's more, Crysis 2 has smaller maps than Crysis 1, so you don't have a lot on screen at once.
Also, it could be that because Starcraft 2 is an RTS, there are just more things to process, so it could be a cpu issue, not a gpu issue.
It all makes perfect sense; you just have to try to understand it. Of course, I know there are better things to do than understand computer gfx, but just don't go preaching that it makes no sense
If I may add, crysis 2 was a disappointing step down from crysis 1 in many parts, and a step closer to consoles. What's worse is that people like IGN don't seem to keep in mind that there was a crysis 1, when they review the game, and instead they seem to compare it with CoD, like that's the only FPS ever made... Have fun playing it
