Hideki Kamiya, director of Bayonetta 1 and producer of 2, has developed a reputation for a certain abrasiveness and IDGAF attitude on Twitter, especially when asked about ports of his games. Looks like that remains the case. 

IF NINTY SAY YES, IT'S YES. SO ASK NINTY. ALSO ASK ABOUT MARIO AND ZELDA FOR PS4. GET LOST. RT @Danvertuan: no more bayonetta on ps4?

— 無職 神谷英樹 Unemployed Hideki Kamiya (@HidekiKamiya_X) January 31, 2018

Nope man, Bayoneta is a best seller on WiiU, and that is why Nintendo paid for its dev

Does Nintendo own PlatinumGames?
Does Nintendo own the IP Bayonetta?

If no, serious question.... but why cant it come to the PS4?
If yes, then okay understandable.

Wasnt the first game on Xb360, PS3? as well.

Nintendo gets a bigger cut than third party developers, because they dont have to pay the royalties of the platform, since they own it.So you are looking at something closer to 45 to 50 dollars of profit per copy.And a 100% profit cut from digital sales.So that gets the game costs to something very close to 100 millions.I dont know why you are trying to argue your way out of this one.Hell, its not even against me you are arguing.Its against Nintendo themselves.

Just to point out, the Zelda example was just to demonstrate that Nintendo dosent go "cheap" on their game budgets, just that they dont overboard as the other developers.But you are already deflecting the point by saying that Nintendo is just breaking even and not making a profit.Yeah, and?That was not the point.

Another thing that dosent make sense, at least as far as games that are funded by their own developers and/or publishers, is that "marketing dosent count in the development cost".If you want to be technical, then yeah, sure.But if you dont market your game enough, you simply wont sell the game, not in enough units anyway.Thats why Nintendo, Sony, MS and other companies spend millions building their booths at E3, making conferences that have a live orchestra and so on.So not counting in the costs of marketing in the overall expense of a game is not wise, to put it lightly.Thats why you see Nintendo doing the directs, which is one way to maximize exposure and minimize costs(Another reason why Nintendo games tends to be cheaper to make and get a profit out of)

And my final point is that all those examples you gave me are useless.Should I say then that, since Destiny had costed 140 million dollars to make(source is in the most expensive games to make), then Uncharted 4 or God of War 4 mjust have costed more to make then because they look more pretty and/or are better games?See how useless that comparison is?Sometimes games cost more because of mismanagement.Sometimes it costs more because the planning time took longer.Sometimes it costs more because of X reasons.So saying that Bayo must have costed 10 millions to make because Heavy Rain costed 52 millions, instead of the usual 30 or so millions that usually AAA games tend to cost(As stated by the link the other user gave and you simply ignored because it didnt fit your narrative), reaching the conclusion that Bayonetta budget was 20% of that is stupid.This is not providing a source.This is providing nonsense.

Plus your Uncharted 4 link is broken.

So I ask you a third time:Where is your source?And if you dont manage to give one next time, and just make the usual horrible argumentation that you do when you are either losing or lost the argument, we are done here.

Guys, can we take the Pokemon discussion elsewhere, it's kinda derailing the topic.

Nintendo paid for its development because it fills a vacant niche in their lineup and gives them some street cred for having a 90+ rated "hardcore" exclusive. They knew when they bought it that it wasn't a multi-million selling cash cow. It's purchase was always about improving their image and countering the "Nintendo is just for kids" perception.

That really didn't answer what I requested. 

I'm pretty certain Bayo 2 cost more to develop than all but Nintendo top IPs.  Dev time x # of staff x average salary = a very crude guesstimate of development costs.  Bayo 2 was 3 years and nearly 100 employees.  That puts it above most 2nd tier Nintendo developments.  And by the way, average industry salary is ~$70k.  That puts Bayo 2 at ~$21 million.  Give or take $5 million. 

This developer really needs to grow up, telling fans of his game to get lost is childish.

Heh, more like fans of Sony only

Most assuredly it did not cost $100 million to develop.  Certainly not even half of that. Marketing may have pushed it near that but I really have no idea. I didn't pay much attention to their marketing campaign for it.

Uncharted 3 was somewhat cheap to make.  They developed it in just 2 years with a little more than 100 people.  Naughty Dog also uses a dual role staff model that allows them to do a wider range of work with fewer people.  Their games will never reach the budgets of a GTA or CoD unless they triple their employee count.