I think that is the problem, right there. Nintendo didn't try to sell it hard enough. If there had been a "Mario Kart"-level campaign, "Bayo 2" would be looking at 750k-1m copies as of Christmas. The issue of contention would be: if they had spent the money, would those sales numbers justify the campaign. 

If Nintendo were really deadset on creating a Mature audience on the Wii U, they could have done so to some extent with a "Bayonetta 2" campaign and bundle. They're number one priority this season was a healthy profit, and they new that they could generate some on "Smash" and "Pokemon" with minimal advertising - thus more profit. 

Considering it flopped since the first installment, nobody should have expected to do better on Wii U...

Bayonetta 2 will probably go down as a flop.

By the way, what's with the nonsensical excuses? "It's not a flop because it did as well as the first game on the 360 OR the PS3." Doesn't matter in the slightest. Only factors that matter are the total cost versus the total revenue. "It's not a flop because it has a high attach rate." Does not matter in the slightest. Only factors that matter are the total cost versus the total revenue.

You get the idea.

It's also important to note that I said "probably" regarding the game's floppy status. That's because it might very well depend on which perspective you're talking about, which might very well depend on the contractual terms between Nintendo, Sega, and Platinum. Who paid for what? Who makes what percentage of the revenue? Who is protected from losses? That's information that we will probably never have access to. If I had to guess, though, I'd say that Nintendo did not foot the entire bill for the game. I would guess that Sega was just trying to get some kind of ROI off what they'd already funded. If that's the case, then what would constitute a financial flop for Nintendo would be less than we might otherwise assume.

But is it still a flop relative to what they wanted from the title? Maybe and maybe not. You've got to figure that when they made the deal, they expected the Wii U to be more of a success. In that regard, you could say that the Wii U flopping is the important point and that the console let the game down, not vice versa.

That's probably good news if you want a Bayonetta 3. It's always possible that someone else could fund such a venture, even if it's not Nintendo. However, it also would not surprise me to see Nintendo fund Bayonetta 3, only not on the Wii U, but on their next console after that. That would make the most sense. Even if the Wii U is a lost cause, they'll still want to move forward, they'll still want to attract as many gamers as possible. Assuming they believe the Wii U's successor will perform better than the Wii U--and they have to believe that--then they'll undoubtedly attempt to line up more M-rated content.

Knock it off, you two. You're just importing NeoGAF drama.

I don't think it flopped, or at least it will flop on the long run. I mean look at the sales Bayo1 had for each consoles or all DMCs after PS2 era. The highest selling is 1.5M on 80M userbase and was released in 2008 (6 years on the market). I say let's wait some more time until we got some real figures for the sales and judge then.
And also, as said before, comercial and critical success are two different things, usually related, but two different things nonetheless.

As for it being niche, well it depends on what people consider being nice. Outside of the usual heavy hitters, Marios, CoDs, ACs, FIFAs, Uncharteds, Halos, etc, everything else seems to be niche according to some people definition. I wouldn't cal for sure a +1M seller niche for sure, so I wouldn't also call it to some games that sell less than that...

Bayo 2 sold VERY well given the install base.

If there is anything to blame than it is the LACK LUSTER BAYONETTA GAMEPLAY.

Yep - You've read it right. Playing the original Bayo right after Bayo 2 shows its deficienties without mercy.

First of all its difficulty settings lack any balance: everything other than "Normal" is to easy to satisfy

Second: it caters - albeit being sold as an "M" title - only teenagers.

So many did wonder why Nintendo choose to publish Bayonetta first hand. And they can't even imagine what WONDERS NINTENDO DOES when financing and overseeing the game development.

I didn't buy Bayonetta 2. It just didn't quite catch me. I played the demo. It's ok, but it didn't leave me feeling that I had to play the game. When faced with the choice of button mashers - Hyrule Warriors or Bayonetta 2, despite the latter's superior reviews the choice seemed pretty obvious to me in the other direction. I think I made the right decision.

Bayonetta 2 like X seem to be titles that seem developer pushed rather than actually desirable for the wii u catalogue. Xenoblade Chronicles didn't sell that well. Too many niche games like this keep the wii u a niche console. Bayonetta 2 is not a game I would ever want but I am looking forward to 'X' even though at this point I don't know if the gameplay will be compelling for me. I was amazed by Xenoblade initially but then found I didn't enjoy playing it.

I just feel the wii u is better served by games that appeal to younger gamers as well as older gamers at the same time. These seem to be the games that get fantastic sales numbers on Nintendo systems. For example Mario kart, Mario 3D etc. Colourful fun games.

Nintendo themselves do types of games that have a certain magic but now we have two generations of Nintendo home console that are technically very weak. Trying to sell mature titles on such weak hardware is not successful.

Define mature, just once.

Because of the most successful games, none really is mature, though the one that comes next to it might be GTA.

Just cant read that 'mature' anymore when 90%+ of those games are made more for teens than actual adults.

I don't consider 500k a flop at all.