By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Bayonetta 2 sold less than 135K in the US

curl-6 said:

Can you prove it would have? Platinum have gone on record saying the second game would not exist without Nintendo. There would be no reason for it to be picked up by anyone else later, as interest would diminish with time, not increase. 

Half a million lifetime is an absurd prediction that will be proven wrong.

What I'm going to say are just thoughts, but why wouldn't have Microsoft funded the game?  Is it possible that Nintendo quickly stepped in and Sega gave them the rights to the game before MS did?  I mean, why would MS fund Scalebound, a new IP when all they've been doing is buying up things?  Look at Tomb Raider, god knows how much that cost them.  Money which could have been used to fund new games from their first parties.  So why give Platinum money for a new IP (Which Microsoft is apparently afraid of) when they could have bought a known IP that was initially supposed to be a 360 exclusive?  Is what I'm saying the case?  Probably not, I just find it suspicious that Nintendo would have funded the game over Microsoft.  And yes, I'm aware of what Kamiya said



Around the Network
darkknightkryta said:
curl-6 said:

Can you prove it would have? Platinum have gone on record saying the second game would not exist without Nintendo. There would be no reason for it to be picked up by anyone else later, as interest would diminish with time, not increase. 

Half a million lifetime is an absurd prediction that will be proven wrong.

What I'm going to say are just thoughts, but why wouldn't have Microsoft funded the game?  Is it possible that Nintendo quickly stepped in and Sega gave them the rights to the game before MS did?  I mean, why would MS fund Scalebound, a new IP when all they've been doing is buying up things?  Look at Tomb Raider, god knows how much that cost them.  Money which could have been used to fund new games from their first parties.  So why give Platinum money for a new IP (Which Microsoft is apparently afraid of) when they could have bought a known IP that was initially supposed to be a 360 exclusive?  Is what I'm saying the case?  Probably not, I just find it suspicious that Nintendo would have funded the game over Microsoft.  And yes, I'm aware of what Kamiya said

The implication is that PG did go to other publishers first. Though likely we'll never know for certain.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
darkknightkryta said:

What I'm going to say are just thoughts, but why wouldn't have Microsoft funded the game?  Is it possible that Nintendo quickly stepped in and Sega gave them the rights to the game before MS did?  I mean, why would MS fund Scalebound, a new IP when all they've been doing is buying up things?  Look at Tomb Raider, god knows how much that cost them.  Money which could have been used to fund new games from their first parties.  So why give Platinum money for a new IP (Which Microsoft is apparently afraid of) when they could have bought a known IP that was initially supposed to be a 360 exclusive?  Is what I'm saying the case?  Probably not, I just find it suspicious that Nintendo would have funded the game over Microsoft.  And yes, I'm aware of what Kamiya said

The implication is that PG did go to other publishers first. Though likely we'll never know for certain.

I'm sure they did, my thoughts are that Nintendo's "yes" came back first or Sega trusted Nintendo.  But I agree, we'll never know.



GOW as a series has way broader appeal than Bayo, worldwide. Its just the way it is.



S.T.A.G.E. said:


LOL The DMC syndrome. Bad story, charismatic yet mysterious chracter. There isnt much left to say. Good talk.

No offence but DMC and Bayonetta's stories are leagues ahead of GoW.  They are not great but they are original and they work great with the games.

GoW story wise is a joke. Kratos is the single most retarded hero I've seen in some time. Dark Souls does a better job at delivering a proper myth. The first flame is the fire prometheus brought to the humans. The everlasting dragons are the Titans Zeus defeated. Lake Ash is Gaia, mother of the Titans. GoW, is a sad excuse for the use of Greek mythology.

S.T.A.G.E. said:

God of War is the total package in a hack n slash/action game.

 

Press square for revenge.

 



Around the Network
mofili said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


LOL The DMC syndrome. Bad story, charismatic yet mysterious chracter. There isnt much left to say. Good talk.


So the same as GoW then. Good to know and indeed good talk



There is nothing charismatic about Kratos. The overall story from god of war 1-3 is a single thread. The story is bigger than the actual character. In Greek Mythology the formula of success for a hero story, is a human or demi-god who goes on an epic adventure. Gods cannot be heroes. By todays standard of what makes a hero, Kratos would be considered an anti-hero.

Look up any Greek mythology resource. Outside of facing ones fears and gaining a lesson, Kratos meets the standards of a hero. Once again he'd be considered an anti-hero by todays standards like Wolverine or the Punisher.



DigitalDevilSummoner said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


LOL The DMC syndrome. Bad story, charismatic yet mysterious chracter. There isnt much left to say. Good talk.

No offence but DMC and Bayonetta's stories are leagues ahead of GoW.  They are not great but they are original and they work great with the games.

GoW story wise is a joke. Kratos is the single most retarded hero I've seen in some time. Dark Souls does a better job at delivering a proper myth. The first flame is the fire prometheus brought to the humans. The everlasting dragons are the Titans Zeus defeated. Lake Ash is Gaia, mother of the Titans. GoW, is a sad excuse for the use of Greek mythology.

 

S.T.A.G.E. said:

God of War is the total package in a hack n slash/action game.

 

Press square for revenge.

 

To your first response:

I've played DMC. It survived solely off of the gameplay and a charismatic character (same for bayonetta). The game had a decent backstory, but the had no proper story arch for the game (itself) outside of motivation. 

Do not compare god of War to Dark Souls. Dark Souls is an ARPG based upon survival. God of War, DMC, Bayonetta are on the same branch of the action genre. Dark Souls is not akin nor does it play like typical hack n slash action games. They are meterbased arcade style hack n slash games that allow for outrageous combos and you are rewarded for filling up meter. You can also mix and match your combos (more in God of War than the others) but in the others you have auto lock features and other things to have a combo with more possible depth. As the game progresses so does your comboing abilities.

To your second response:

As I told someone before, God of Wars story is not the greatest, but it works equally amongst the production value and gameplay. Greek mythology isnt about having likable characters (this isnt a disney movie), its about telling a story. Not one part outdoes the other. God of War was influenced by DMC and Rygar and Bayonetta took notes from God of War by implementing their mini-game  system in their game as well. Unlike DMC, God of War in the main series did not have an ebb and flow of quality. It remained consistent. The only questionable games were the side quests or what others call fillers. DMC had an ebb and flow of quality in the main franchise. The first game was great, then the second game sucked, then the third game was great and then the fourth game was passable. There is a reason why Capcom called for a reboot.

God of War is responsible for relevance of story to the story arch of hack n slash game. Games like Star Wars the Force Unleashed. Decent story right? Thank God of War. How about Dantes Inferno. Decent story right? Thank God of War. Dantes Inferno was basically a reskinned God of War with a Christian theme.

God of War had one thread connecting three games. Every game started off storywise where the last game left off. No hack N slash has ever done that. 



oniyide said:
GOW as a series has way broader appeal than Bayo, worldwide. Its just the way it is.

exaxctly 



Bets:

(Won)Bet with TechoHobbit: He(Techno) says 10 million by January 1,2014 I say 9 million by then. Winner gets 2 weeks of sig control.

(Lost)Bet with kinisking: I say Ps4 will win April NPD while he says Xbox One will win it; winner gets 1 week of avatar control.

Raichu's First Series:

First RPG?

First Fighter?

First Racer?

First Shooter?

First MMO?

First Horror?

Official Ni No Kuni Fanboy:

Familiars Captured:37

Game Beaten: 2 times almost

Times I got teary during some scenes: 3

Mr Khan said:
darkknightkryta said:

What I'm going to say are just thoughts, but why wouldn't have Microsoft funded the game?  Is it possible that Nintendo quickly stepped in and Sega gave them the rights to the game before MS did?  I mean, why would MS fund Scalebound, a new IP when all they've been doing is buying up things?  Look at Tomb Raider, god knows how much that cost them.  Money which could have been used to fund new games from their first parties.  So why give Platinum money for a new IP (Which Microsoft is apparently afraid of) when they could have bought a known IP that was initially supposed to be a 360 exclusive?  Is what I'm saying the case?  Probably not, I just find it suspicious that Nintendo would have funded the game over Microsoft.  And yes, I'm aware of what Kamiya said

The implication is that PG did go to other publishers first. Though likely we'll never know for certain.


I am sure Platinum Scouted Microsoft. The devs for Sunset Overdrive used them as a prospect to get SO running after the deal fell out with Sony.



This why Nintendo gets no third party support. Nintendo fans only consume nostalgia.



dd if = /dev/brain | tail -f | grep games | nc -lnvvp 80

Hey Listen!

https://archive.org/details/kohina_radio_music_collection