And to add to this, wasn't SoulCalibur 2's arcade board supposedly based on PS2 hardware? The PS2 port ended up being the worst of all the three console ports. Not trying to start a console war, but I think there's misinformation and misconceptions being floated around regarding multi-platform development.
That's always the case, and my goal in posting was simply to point out that it's not as simple as "this is PS3 arcade hardware, so PS3 version will be better".
Re: SC2 - According to Wikipedia, here's the scoop.
Namco System 246 (Arcade SC2) is a 128-bit 300mhz "Emotion Engine", 32 MB of RAM, and the graphics clock at 150 mhz.
The PS2 is a 64-bit Emotion Engine running at 294 mhz (299 if it's a new slim system), 32 MB of RAM, and graphics clock at 147 mhz.
I think the death knell for SC2 on PS2 was the shared RAM the PS2 uses. I have no technical data to back this up, but considering both the arcade and PS2 use the exact same amount of RAM, but the PS2 shares it's RAM between all functions, I would guess the slowdown came from this (the 6 mhz difference on the core, and 3 mhz difference on graphics probably didn't help either).
On another note, it's impossible to compare PS3 to 360 in the way that is being done. 360 is a triple-core Intel system with a custom dual-core ATI graphics chip. The PS3 is an 8 core (debatable) Sony architecture, with a modified NV47 (GeForce 7800) graphics chip. The two simply cannot be compared.