Twitter user: "No Bayonetta on PS4?" Hideki Kamiya: "Ask Ninty, also ask for Mario and Zelda on PS4"

[DonFerrari]

Nautilus said:

DonFerrari said:

Because the original sales and cost of opportunity for its sales wouldn't justify the sequel being made by them paying it up. And claiming Nintendo would finance a game that would cost a lot more than their own games is quite strange if given without any source except "i guess so"

LOL

Im sorry, but this is just too funny.You say my reasons for thinking the costs are high is "I guess so", but then you go on to say that your reasons for being low is "I guess so" too.

Look, Sega is a company that wants money.If what you say its true and Bayonetta games usually costs around 10 millions, then why were they dissapointed with the first one?The first sold roughly 2 millions between 360 and PS3 and assuming that each game gave them 30 dollars in raw profit(given the discounts as the years passed by) the game would still have made 60 million dollars, 6 times more than the initial investement.Why wouldnt Sega be happy with it, at least not enough so that it wouldnt continue with the franchise?

So tell me, why do you think that Bayonetta 2 costs around 10 millions, instead of the 30 or so that usually AAA games costs?Oh, and give me actual facts or concrete data, because your childish excuse such as"Nintendo is so stupid, they dont like to spend money" dosent fly.

Edit:Oh, and Nintendo said that, for its bigger games, they usually need 2 million units sold to break even and have a small profit, so thats about 100 million dollars right there that are spent with their big first party games.Just so you know.

Nope I said they would make at most 30USD per game at full price. How many of those 2M sold at full price? And you are confunding dev cost with all the cost involved like marketing, shipping, etc. They certainly haven't made 60M on a 2M sale. And you also ignored the cost of opportunity that will dictate that even if a game can make a small profit since it will occupy a team sometimes it's better to just try another game that can give more profits.

Who said Nintendo is so stupid they don't like to spend money if not you? Nintendo don't put 30M in developing their own internal games that go and sell 10M+ but would put to Bayo a game that didn't sell a lot?

100M on development? You are totally nuts man? and 2M sold by Nintendo is like 80M revenue at most. Uncharted 4 have costed between 30 to 60M (dev to full cost).

SpokenTruth said:

DonFerrari said:

Because the original sales and cost of opportunity for its sales wouldn't justify the sequel being made by them paying it up. And claiming Nintendo would finance a game that would cost a lot more than their own games is quite strange if given without any source except "i guess so"

Don, please provide development cost figures for Bayonetta 2 and Nintendo's Wii U and Switch internally developed titles.

Or you can just go to more threads where these numbers are usually given through time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop it's Wiki, but have further links in case you want to see... it's quite clear Nautilus have no idea of gaming development cost since he thinks Nintendo games are on the realm of 100M to develop.

curl-6 said:

For reference, Platinum said they would rate the first Bayonetta as "a C, or even a D" in the sales department

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-17-platinum-games-president-rates-its-sales-as-a-c-or-even-a-d

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