Oh so you mean when you said this:
Except that it looked just like BATMAN: THE KILLING JOKE
You were suggesting that Gibbons hopped into a time machine, copied a comic book that came out 2 years later, and went back in time to publish it?
I don't know whether you're just trolling, or actually trying to make a serious point.
Regardless, WATCHMEN looks just like KILLING JOKE.
KILLING JOKE looks just like WATCHMEN.
They look exactly the same. Regardless of order of publication.
They both manifest that the artist worked from a detailed Alan Moore script, and the artist contributed no visible individual vision that broke away from that bland 9-panel per page script, in either the case of Bolland or Gibbons in their illustrating a Moore script. (As I said, I think Bolland is the more talented artist, but his collaboration with Moore did not show off his best work.)
So... it doesn't matter what order they were published in. They both demonstrate an artist not deviating from a Moore script.
As compared to other examples I gave, of Moore collaborations with Don Simpson (ANYTHING GOES 2, 1986), with Michael T. Gilbert (MR MONSTER 3, 1985) with Bissette/Tottleben (SWAMP THING 21-50, 1984-1986), with Gary Leach and Alan Davis (MIRACLEMAN 1-7, 1985-1986), with David Lloyd in V FOR VENDETTA.
All of which show much more innovative and personal artist's vision, with lavish ornately detailed illustration.
As contrasted with Gibbons' work on WATCHMEN, and Bolland on KILLING JOKE, both of which seem to follow a more cookie-cutter scripting approach.
