Please go here and help get this game on PC 
 
http://www.aksysgames.com/forums/topic/206
 

Petitions don't work. -_-

I know but I can dream.

" I know but I can dream. "

Because I want this game and don't want to buy a 360 or PS3. 65 bucks for a 360/PS3 game no thanks. 

They used to make Guilty Gear for PC that was available in Europe but they stopped after Isuka. There is not a very large market for PC fighting games.

Never going to happen, it may have happened with GG but the spec on this would require some serious work in the studio. Besides that fact, when the fuck are people going to realise this shit simply doesn't work. There's a good reason why it's not on PC, this game doesn't have the mass appeal of SF4,
 
Try this out on PC instead, it's pretty good, made by an ex Capcom employee apparently.
 
  http://www.giantbomb.com/blazblue-calamity-trigger/61-21768/screw-you-blaz-blue/35-250977/

The spec? From what I have herd this game runs off a modified XP arcade system or something.  I love 2D fighters and I know it does not have mass appeal that SF4.  I bought SF4 and I play GG midnight carnival more then SF4.  

" Petitions don't usually work. -_- "

Well amended, SJSchmidt. 
 
Petitions sometimes work, and most specifically work in massive numbers.   If someone could get the digg effect going on the petition ( 
http://www.aksysgames.com/forums/topic/206 ) or somesuch, the developers might stand up and take notice. 
 
Street Fighter IV PC sold over 80,000 units in 2 months.  They made more than 2 million dollars in sales in the first month alone.   Not too shabby.   Seems there's a market for the PC Fighting game after all.  And not only that, but BlazBlue is actually /better/ than Street Fighter IV, as much as it pains me to say.   Since the arcade machines are just modified Windows XP systems,  there'd be no development costs.  Since they already have a deal with Microsoft's 360 live service, Games For Windows Live support would be very easy to implement.   Since Steam allows for large amounts of sales at low distribution costs, a PC release wouldn't even need to cost much money at all. 
 
...No reason not to let them know we want it.   Citing the above wouldn't hurt any, either.

Street Fighter IV PC sold over 80,000 units in 2 months.  They made more than 2 million dollars in sales in the first month alone.   Not too shabby.   Seems there's a market for the PC Fighting game after all.

Since the arcade machines are just modified Windows XP systems,  there'd be no development costs.

Only 50 people signed the petition more gamers need to sign.

There's a market for big name fighting games like SF4.  Realistically a PC version of Blazblue would probably only sell a few thousand...
 

....It's the same arcade hardware as Street Fighter IV runs on, Taito Type X2.  It doesn't eliminate the costs of getting it to run on consumer PCs, nor any other work involved in licensing or any other troubles.  The big cost comes from the required testing across many different potential setups.  Blazblue runs on 1 hardware make in arcades.  It would be easier to port than SF4 though because they wouldn't have to make lower graphics quality models & effects for low spec PCs. "

Petitions don't work.  Almost ever.  If they eventually release it for the PC, it will not have been because of this.

You might be right, and you might not be.   
 
What most certainly won't help is naysaying, so please, if you've got all of 2 minutes free, reg, add your 'sig', and help us try.  

I've always wanted to play BlazBlue with a mouse and keyboard.

Why would you want a fighter for PC?  That would be terrible. 

Last I checked, Street Fighter, Tekken, and Guilty Gear /are/ the big name fighting games.   Guilty Gear extends itself to BlazBlue, so...  Furthermore, Street Fighter IV sold that well in one month with very minimal advertising before launch.   A game being available on the front page of steam is like a high quality advertisement all by itself.     Indeed, BlazBlue runs on the Taito Type X2.  However, it was already running on several various  non-modified XP rigs when it was being shown before release at game and anime conventions.   Thus, it stands to reason that they already have the game available to run on consumer operating systems, and any additional compatibility testing needs be pretty minimal.

I don't think BlazBlue would work in a PC environment. The mouse and keyboard aren't really meant to play a fighting game like BlazBlue.

Wow, a lot of flaming for a simple and well-intentioned request.  
 
First and foremost, if using the setup I mentioned above, requiring an online GFWL profile to save and play online, piracy is decently discouraged, just like with SFIV PC, which cannot be played online with a pirated version.  
 
Secondly, while I am actually quite capable of playing fighting games with the keyboard, ( It's really not that hard, folks. ) most gamers that play more than FPS and RTS games on the PC have a gamepad of some sort or another.  I've got several.  My old PS2 pad and the USB converter I have for it is a nice one, for starters. 
 
Finally, if any of you actually played Street Fighter IV for the PC, you'd find that the online matches, so long as you're not playing against someone on the opposite side of the planet from you, are quite responsive, and have little to no lag.   Also, the game is superior to the ps3 and 360 offerings, as not only does it possess higher resolution textures and models, and sport higher gameplay resolutions in general, but it also has features that aren't enabled in the console versions, such as full self and soft shadowing, full anisotropic filtering, and 16xQ antialiasing.     The end result is it looks better on PC, and with a gamepad, will play exactly the same, only with less lag on the online matches. 
 
I understand that it feels good to bash on an idea that you don't believe in, but truly, this is a good one, particularly considering the nearly zero development cost of a game that's already practically finished and ready to market for the PC (Test runs of the game were done on normal XP machines with a variety of hardware before the game ever made it to the arcades or console ).  If it was distributed solely via steam, as well, for example, it would also have no real production costs, so they would be making almost entirely profit from the beginning, with very little investment on their part.

@Kalean

Also, the game is superior to the ps3 and 360 offerings, as not only does it possess higher resolution textures and models, and sport higher gameplay resolutions in general, but it also has features that aren't enabled in the console versions, such as full self and soft shadowing, full anisotropic filtering, and 16xQ antialiasing

The SF4 info was posted in response to the statement that there's not a big fighter market on the PC, and in response to the statement that there's no advantage to having them on PC. 
 
The textures are higher resolutions, I examined the files off a friend's PS3 copy, and am looking at the PC texture for Chun Li right now in comparison.  In addition, the self shadowing and soft shadowing do exist on both consoles, but not to the degree they are used on the PC version's max settings.  Look into it personally if you don't believe me.
 
At any rate, this thread is a simple request to sign a petition so that those of us who don't want to drop 300 dollars on a console can buy a copy of BlazBlue, too.  Once a week at a friend's place doesn't really fill the urge.
 
Is there some particular reason you guys want to discourage a PC version? Why the hostility?

The textures are higher resolutions, I examined the files off a friend's PS3 copy, and am looking at the PC texture for Chun Li right now in comparison.  In addition, the self shadowing and soft shadowing do exist on both consoles, but not to the degree they are used on the PC version's max settings.  Look into it personally if you don't believe me.

I guarantee that no one who is serious about BlazBlue gives two shits and a fuck about this game going to PC.  They typically play on PS3.

  @jakob187 said:

" I guarantee that no one who is serious about BlazBlue gives two shits and a fuck about this game going to PC.  They typically play on PS3. "
 

@Diamond

" @Kalean said:

The textures are higher resolutions, I examined the files off a friend's PS3 copy, and am looking at the PC texture for Chun Li right now in comparison.  In addition, the self shadowing and soft shadowing do exist on both consoles, but not to the degree they are used on the PC version's max settings.  Look into it personally if you don't believe me.

Dude, the textures are NOT higher resolution.  How did you examine those files, rip the game to a friend's HDD with his bluray drive, then be the first person in the world to successfully reverse engineer Sony's PS3 game file system and security measures?  The only thing that the PC version of SF4 can do better is taking more soft shadowing samples.  There is no difference in the self shadowing, all versions use shadow buffers.  I have looked into it personally, and I understand enough tech to know you're talking complete bullshit. "

While I should think that the information reported on anti-aliasing and the ps3's dynamic downscaling found here, and the information on the ps3's lighting, self-shadowing, and textures found on the next page over here  would be sufficient for you, I've also included a direct comparison between ps3 and PC (with the ps3 texture resized upward for effect.)  It is here with a closer up version here.  I had to use image shack for the first one, instead of xs.to, because the full texture is too large for xs.to.     That should be sufficient proof for you.  However, even on the off-chance that you don't believe, still, the fact remains that the PC version can run much higher Anti-aliasing settings, and much higher anisotropic filtering settings.  This of course speaks nothing of the three additional (and optional) shader overlays present in the PC version. (Ink, watercolor, and e-sumi.), as I don't consider those to have any impact on graphical superiority.   You are mistaken, though it was an honest mistake.

 you're going to have to show me how you magically ripped assets from a PS3 game. 

@Diamond

 the eurogamer article doesn't even touch on lighting differences, but anyways that's been the 360 and PS3 version.  PS3 supposedly has 1 shadow sample while 360 has 2.  That's really the biggest difference besides resolution anyone has brought up between those 2. "

The eurogamer article doesn't delve into specifics on lighting, it is mentioned, however.  Furthermore, my argument was that the PC version possessed not only higher resolution textures, but a great many other higher quality graphical effects.  Clearly, it possesses higher resolution textures than the PS3, though whether they're higher than the 360 or the same, I couldn't tell you, as I have not examined the 360 version's files directly.    The graphical features that the ps3 has over the 360 are all featured on the PC version, and likewise the same with the features that the 360 has over the ps3.  And then there's the AA and AF control, and higher resolutions.   The argument is sound, the PC version has the best features from both consoles, and additional graphical improvements (or potential improvements. If you don't want to believe the shadowing, the AA and AF are indisputable).  Therefore the PC version is the best looking version, unless one has a rather low quality PC.    That's not an opinion, it's quite factual, and you've made no point to refute it.   You have, however, successfully diverted me from the original purpose of this thread.   If I spend all this time explaining things to you to your satisfaction, will you (assuming I do eventually satisfy you) sign the petition?  I'd be grateful. "

Rendering resolution aside, you understand that the PC version is going to have the best features of both consoles, since the development was done on PC code, and any graphical features were first implemented there, yes?

If you combined the strength of each console version into one, you'd basically get the PC version on 2X AA and most settings on high.

What I claimed was that the PC had levels of self and soft shadowing not found on the consoles, and that's true, and can be displayed, not just to my satisfaction, but to anyone's, and Eurogamer has a nice comparison here. (  http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/street-fighter-iv-tech-comparison?page=2 ) The Chun Li and Zangief shots are the only reliable ones, since the character intros can be duplicated exactly due to the fixed camera, whereas the gameplay shots (like Ken vs. Ryu ) would be much harder to manage for various reasons.

The ram requirements on the PC are almost irrelevant, as there is different code between the two, and I'm relatively certain that the ps3 version requires less ram than the PC version at similar quality levels, due to a lower OS overhead, more native code, etc..   This is good, because the PS3 only has 256 megs of ram, with an additional 256 of video ram.   If, however, you wanted to argue the point, you'd also find that your video card uses between 140 and 180-ish megs of vram if available, when playing the PC version.   If the ram requirements were remotely similar between the two versions, that would be a greater ram requirement than would run on the ps3.

Let's move away from the ram footprint you gave me, however.  If you do not accept that the ps3 has lower res textures, and Eurogamer and I are hardly the only places that say it, that's fine.   If you're particularly interested in disproving me, feel free to go and image a PS3 hd yourself, there are tutorials out there. The SF4 folder is BLUS3 something or other, or at least my friend's copy was.   I did this test when the PC version came out a while back, the only textures I bothered keeping from the PS3 version was the chun li, for comparisons sake.  

 The models topic is a tough one to debate, because at the moment, I have no way of viewing the actual model files for direct comparison, not that I kept any model files from the ps3.   When playing the game, the high quality models looked cleaner to me even without AA, and that was the source of that statement.  It was not intended to be deceptive, but must be discarded if you want proof, for I have none.  

It's not a big deal to me if you don't believe me, the only reason I brought the textures and shadowing up was to illustrate that the PC version looks superior, which you've come as close to admitting as I feel I'll be able to get you, even with further evidence.    Spending further time discussing it with you only illustrates my foolishness, as each post brings us further away from the point of the thread.  

I'll ask again, would you be willing to sign this petition?  BlazBlue is not likely to look any better on the PC, unless they secretly have even higher resolution artwork that didn't make it onto the PS3 and 360 versions, and see fit to include it on the PC.  Which I find unlikely.   
 
What bringing BlazBlue to the PC will do is allow me to purchase a copy and play with my friend online, who has a PS3, but would only purchase BlazBlue to play with me.   Since I do not have a PS3 of my own, and I'm not going to borrow my friend's (it was already nice enough of them to let me muck about with their HD), a PC version would suit us both perfectly.  I'm not the only one who wants it, but it looks like I'm one of the only ones here who wants it, and that saddens me.    
 
Still, if you have two minutes, I would be very appreciative.    Examining a steam-only GFWL release from a strictly fiscal standpoint, it would take very little development cost overhead, very little production overhead, and begin turning a profit almost immediately, probably from day 1.  It's good for the company and it's good for the fans.  I don't see a downside.

" Because I want this game and don't want to buy a 360 or PS3. 65 bucks for a 360/PS3 game no thanks.  "

" @Funzzo said:

" Because I want this game and don't want to buy a 360 or PS3. 65 bucks for a 360/PS3 game no thanks.  "

It would cost the same on the PC...Unless you just want it on the PC so you can pirate it and play it free....But you wouldn't do that right? "

" @Milkman said:

" @Funzzo said:

" Because I want this game and don't want to buy a 360 or PS3. 65 bucks for a 360/PS3 game no thanks.  "

It would cost the same on the PC...Unless you just want it on the PC so you can pirate it and play it free....But you wouldn't do that right? "

PC games do not cost the same as console games... ever. "

PC games do not cost the same as console games... ever.

The arcade version was designed for a very specific set of PC hardware lower spec than the 360 & PS3.  The 360 version is technically upgraded from the arcade version visually in the cases of AA & shadow map samples.  

If you combined the strength of each console version into one, you'd basically get the PC version on 2X AA and most settings on high.

Simply wrong.  For one thing the PS3 version has not technical advantages over the 360 version. 
 

 For another the 360 version uses more than 2xAA (although I hear it scales dynamically), and the 360 version is equivalent to all the PC version settings maxed except perhaps particle effects and shadows I suppose.

That's not what you claimed.  You said the following : "but it also has features that aren't enabled in the console versions, such as full self and soft shadowing", which is factually wrong.  Hence my complaint.
 

The ram requirements on the PC are almost irrelevant, as there is different code between the two, and I'm relatively certain that the ps3 version requires less ram than the PC version at similar quality levels, due to a lower OS overhead, more native code, etc..   This is good, because the PS3 only has 256 megs of ram, with an additional 256 of video ram.   If, however, you wanted to argue the point, you'd also find that your video card uses between 140 and 180-ish megs of vram if available, when playing the PC version.   If the ram requirements were remotely similar between the two versions, that would be a greater ram requirement than would run on the ps3.

Code differences rarely make a difference in RAM.  99.9999% of the difference, if there were one, would be in the assets.  The PC version maxed utilizes less RAM than the PS3 has available even counting background RAM processes on the PS3.  Like you said, the PC version uses 140-180MB of VRAM, the PS3 has nearly 256MB available (probably more like 220MB).  You just proved my own point very clearly.  There is no additional source of RAM required.

 Eurogamer doesn't say the PS3 version has lower resolution textures and neither does anyone else with any technical knowledge.  It's only you, honey.  It's not up to me to prove you wrong in your ridiculous claims.  You claimed you performed some procedure that's current impossible and you aren't even backing it up.

 The models topic is a tough one to debate, because at the moment, I have no way of viewing the actual model files for direct comparison, not that I kept any model files from the ps3.   When playing the game, the high quality models looked cleaner to me even without AA, and that was the source of that statement.  It was not intended to be deceptive, but must be discarded if you want proof, for I have none.  

True, again the model detail is impossible to truly compare.  However, you'll notice the PC version never lowers fidelity on the model's polygonal detail.  Clearly they'd include console equivalent settings even if they were going to go above.  The model detail setting on PC simply changes the shader effects on the models, one step down from max and it starts to look like a Wii game (looks like simple vertex lighting).  I agree at a higher resolution the models may have more visible details.

It's not a big deal to me if you don't believe me, the only reason I brought the textures and shadowing up was to illustrate that the PC version looks superior, which you've come as close to admitting as I feel I'll be able to get you, even with further evidence.    Spending further time discussing it with you only illustrates my foolishness, as each post brings us further away from the point of the thread.  

I only have a problem with people misconstruing or misinterpreting facts and evidence.  It's my personal pet peeve.  The PC version does look better as long as you have decent hardware.  The difference is relatively slight however.  Batman AA on PC for example is a larger jump, there are clear differences in assets even if PhysX is disabled.  I personally don't care as much for seeing the higher resolution graphics (as I bought the PS3 version of Batman AA for the Joker content, and it's the worst looking version) as I do for people understanding and accepting the truth about graphics as they are.

Personally me signing the petition would be dishonest.  I already own the game on 360.  I think the game is OK, but I'm not crazy over it really.  Basically I would certainly not buy it again on PC, and this would be sending a false message to the companies involved.  Furthermore I don't believe it would be in the best interest of the company to do so in a purely business sense.  Beyond all that I do believe petitions such as this are fundamentally worthless.  People can sign more than once, signing a petition is easier than putting down the money, people change minds, some people would pirate the game even if they couldn't play it online at all.  I'm sorry to disappoint you in that respect, and I do feel sorry for you that you're not able to enjoy the game you wish to. "

" @SJSchmidt93 said:

" @Milkman said:

" @Funzzo said:

" Because I want this game and don't want to buy a 360 or PS3. 65 bucks for a 360/PS3 game no thanks.  "

It would cost the same on the PC...Unless you just want it on the PC so you can pirate it and play it free....But you wouldn't do that right? "

PC games do not cost the same as console games... ever. "

Okay, maybe it's down $50 from the usual $60. Is that really all that much of a difference? "

 @Kalean said:

The 360 version's upgrade was still based on PC code, and none, repeat, none of the graphical features found on the 360 are not found on the PC version, with the exception of this dynamic AA you're mentioning, which is, of course, a performance tweak, and does not contribute graphical quality as much as say, 8 or 16 AA on the PC version.
If the PS3 has no technical advantages over the 360 version, but the PC still has all the features of the 360 version, then my statement would not be 'simply wrong', but still accurate.     
So what you're saying is that you'd get the PC version with most settings on high? Just as I claimed? And possibly more than 2x AA?  ... Not seeing the contradiction, there. 
Full self and soft shadowing implies that the console versions have limited self and soft shadowing.  Which the screenshots illustrated.  Again, I do not see the contradiction.  

You stated that the version of SFIV on the PC doesn't use more than 480 megs of ram.   Working from the assumption that it approaches 480 megs of ram, that's your ram footprint.  Most basic ram analysis involves the system RAM being used, and not the video ram.  My argument is that 450~480 ish megs of ram, plus a good 140~180 megs of VRam, equals between 590 and 660 megs of ram, more than the PS3 has.   If you'll explain how you got your ram footprint, then we'll know if this is a point of contention or not.  For example, if you checked the ram being used by the PC version utilizing windows task manager, it's known that task manager does not factor video ram into account.   If you used a more advanced ram-testing utility that does include video ram in its total calculation, then that's a different story. 

As to 'backing it up',  I luckily still had the texture comparison image I made to show people.  It wasn't good enough for you.   Reformatting and setting up my friend's PS3 HDD to do the same thing all over again would be a lot more effort than it's worth to offer further proof on a forum.  I'm fine with you disagreeing with me, since the only other alternative is basically getting Capcom to tell us they have lower resolution textures on the PS3 version.   Seth's pretty cool, he might be willing to do that, if he knew, but... I lack that motivation.  You can check the Ask Capcom forums if you are curious.   Still, as pointed out above, I'm not the only one that has come to this conclusion.

I agree that more content > higher resolution graphics.  I certainly have no intention to make an argument otherwise.   People were, earlier on, asking why one would want a fighter for PC, and stating that it would be an inferior experience to the console.   Street Fighter IV PC was my example to counter that.   I hope we have no disagreement on that point.   I believe that we have come to the conclusion that the PC possesses superior shadowing to the consoles, superior anti-aliasing potential, and superior anisotropic filtering potential.

The 360 version's upgrade was still based on PC code, and none, repeat, none of the graphical features found on the 360 are not found on the PC version, with the exception of this dynamic AA you're mentioning, which is, of course, a performance tweak, and does not contribute graphical quality as much as say, 8 or 16 AA on the PC version.
If the PS3 has no technical advantages over the 360 version, but the PC still has all the features of the 360 version, then my statement would not be 'simply wrong', but still accurate.     
So what you're saying is that you'd get the PC version with most settings on high? Just as I claimed? And possibly more than 2x AA?  ... Not seeing the contradiction, there. 
Full self and soft shadowing implies that the console versions have limited self and soft shadowing.  Which the screenshots illustrated.  Again, I do not see the contradiction.  

You're not being honest with yourself or me in this part of your response.  You're ignoring my points, and you're simply trying to be right when you're not.  You made some false statements, I have shown why you were wrong, but you aren't owning up to them.  I wouldn't have bothered with this entire derailment of this thread if I didn't feel your first comments so far off base to the point of doing everyone here a disservice (PC and console gamers alike).  Maybe you over reacted with falsehoods because of those trolling you with other fairly ridiculous claims.  I don't blame you for that.  It's pointless however for us to discuss those points if we can't discuss these things honestly.
 

In PC architecture game assets will go to system RAM before they hit video RAM.  On a 360 at least the RAM is unified, they don't have to duplicate assets.  If SF4 was extremely RAM intensive, you'd see system PC RAM being cleared out a bit, but instead as you say VRAM hits around 180MB, yet those assets are not purged from system RAM, there is no point.  You don't add the 480MB and the 180MB.  Think about it, what assets are going into system RAM that aren't graphics related?  Game code, sound data (which is a good bit)... I can't even think of anything else.  Even if you focus on the textures and they were to downgrade the textures for the PS3 version, they'd be in a situation as they say where they didn't have enough video RAM.  As we both agree, PS3 has enough.  Thus no practical need to cut the texture size.  This alone doesn't prove the PS3 & PC have different texture size, this just proves there would be no reason to reduce on PS3.

As to 'backing it up',  I luckily still had the texture comparison image I made to show people.  It wasn't good enough for you.   Reformatting and setting up my friend's PS3 HDD to do the same thing all over again would be a lot more effort than it's worth to offer further proof on a forum.  I'm fine with you disagreeing with me, since the only other alternative is basically getting Capcom to tell us they have lower resolution textures on the PS3 version.   Seth's pretty cool, he might be willing to do that, if he knew, but... I lack that motivation.  You can check the Ask Capcom forums if you are curious.   Still, as pointed out above, I'm not the only one that has come to this conclusion.

You must accept my skepticism.  It would have been far easier to extract the PC texture and downscale.  What texture formats does the PS3 version use, what tools did you use to extract them, what are the file sizes, how did you convert them to the jpg?  Once again, YOU get Capcom to tell us in an official statement.  I am not going to waste my time trying to prove a point I know is already fact to an anonymous person over the net.  I am simply trying to inform you and any other readers of this post where I can.

People were, earlier on, asking why one would want a fighter for PC, and stating that it would be an inferior experience to the console.   Street Fighter IV PC was my example to counter that.   I hope we have no disagreement on that point.  

Those people were just trolling you, let's both be above that.  Personally I don't feel the reasons for playing SF4 on PC are sufficient, but I can see why some would disagree.  You don't want Blazblue on PC for the sake of it being on PC, you want it because you simply don't own a 360 or PS3. "

Since it proves nothing, I won't argue this, but I still believe that the full assets of the PC version would not quite fit on the PS3 version. 256 megs of system ram is terribly crippling, and while windows task manager doesn't factor OS into that 480 meg footprint, PS3 would have to factor OS into that 256 megs.   To me, it doesn't seem like the PS3 could quite pull that off.  But we can disagree without any backfire.  As you say, it proves nothing. 

I do accept your skepticism.   I'm simply not motivated enough to gather evidence in support of it again for the same reasons you're not motivated to try and prove that what I did cannot be done.    Extracting the files including options to extract them in both the native format or bmp, I chose the bmp options, and after putting the two versions side by side in Paint Shop Pro, I saved them as a  JPEG.  
 
I freely admit that it would be easier to have just resized the PC version, but the only reason to do that would be if I had intent to deceive.  My intent was to discover if the PS3 version really had lower resolution textures or not.  It's rather subtle, and it's not like one would notice too much if at all during gameplay, but it is there.

Of course they were trolling me, but while some people state 'Do not feed the trolls', I prefer to crush them.   What's the appropriate comic for this feeling?  Ah, yes.  http://xkcd.com/386/ is the one.   You are correct though, arguing that SF4 was better on the PC is rather irrelevant to why I want BlazBlue on the PC.   It was simply a tangent line or argument.  But someone was wrong.  On the internet.   "

I wish.  It'll never happen, but that would be awesome.

PS3 has 2 banks of 256MB.  1 is system, the other is video RAM only.  As I said it proves that there'd be no reason at all to degrade the textures for PS3.
 

For what it's worth I'd be terribly interested to see what the actual files were on many PS3 games.  For example in the Ryu ga Gotoku series games on PS3, I wish I knew if certain cutscenes were real time or simply FMV.  I agree it'd be impossible to tell in gameplay by your supposed comparison, however I too would like to know the truth.  If the PS3 version's textures were downgraded, I'd like to know the technical reason why.

"Well many trolls act more like glue.  You try to crush them and they stick to your shoe. "

Indeed.