Did you play it before or after the patch?  I shouldn't say unplayable but it was very, very annoying and the definition of a bad port.  The lag from using the menu was ridiculous.

Or before the launch of the PS4 and Xbox One with the rumors that all systems were going to have graphics only slightly better than the PS360 because more powerful PCs haven't pushed anything too far above what we saw at the time.  Nintendo fans were all saying how powerful the Wii U was.  Then when the PS4 was announced in February.  Nintendo fans were then like.  Graphics don't matter, it's all about the games.

Then when X showed at E3 last year.  Nintendo fans praised its graphics how it was far better than PS3 graphics.  Well.  With the launch of the newest Nintendo direct, the graphics actually being worse, Nintendo fans now have to latch onto something else.  Bayonetta 2 has a gameplay video which looks better than X graphically, but is the graphics really better than the best looking PS3 game?  That's debatable.  I don't think it looks that great overall.  But one thing that I do notice and I really hate the effect, is how everything has that metallic texture on it.  Nintendo did this first with Metroid Prime on the Gamecube and it worked because well, Samus' suit is metal.  Because of the shiny reflective look, they then do it on most of their Wii games and now they're probably telling Platinum to do it as well.  It's a really ugly effect in my opinion, but I think they do it because they think it makes everything look better.  It makes everything look extremely unrealistic to me.  Platinum did it on Wonderful 101, now Bayonetta 2.  I think they're doing it because of Nintendo influence.

Sony fans did exactly the same flip; when the PS2 had inferior graphics to the competition, it was all about the games, then with PS3 and PS4 it suddenly became all about teh garphix.

Gonna enjoy playing this on the PS4. Can't wait.

I actualy never heard this because everyone I knew who owned an Xbox or a Gamecube also owned a PS2.  But there's one difference.  The PS2 wasn't a whole generation behind in graphics.  Also, most developers usually developed for PS2 then ported it to Xbox afterwards, so there was rarely a difference between graphical quality of games so being a bit weaker didn't matter.  It was only a few games like Just Cause, Resident Evil 4, or certain Xbox exclusives that were better looking than the PS2 versions. 

So what you're saying really isn't true.  Sony fans didn't have the need to say it was all about the games, because most PS2 games looked identical to other multiplatform games on other systems, and if they didn't, it was close enough.  Just Cause was the only really far and away better looking title.  Resident Evil 4 was better looking, but not a night and day difference like Just Cause.

So X actually has a gameplay video and it's a huge drop in quality from that initial E3 video, Nintendo fans jump over to Bayonetta 2 saying it's better looking than Bayonetta on PS3 to prove that the system is more powerful than last gen consoles.  Not only is Bayonetta not even close to the best looking game on the PS3, but it's well known how bad of a port the PS3 version is to the 360 version. 

Everyone knows that the Wii U is more powerful than the PS360 and while there hasn't yet been a game that shows it, one will eventually come out.  Bayonetta 2 isn't that game though.  If it's all about the games, then Nintendo fans should stop trying to constantly state how Nintendo has one upped two last gen systems with a game that might actually look better.  Just worry about the games, because specs already tell us the Wii U is more powerful.  When a game comes out that looks noticeably better, then hey, it looks noticeably better.  Bragging about it looks pretty bad when you have to compare it to consoles that are over seven years old though.