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

Forums - Nintendo - Do you think there would be a second meltdown if Bayonetta 3 was announced NX exclusive?

Tagged games:

 

Would their be a Bayonetta 3 meltdown if exclusive to NX?

Yes 68 30.49%
 
No 129 57.85%
 
See Results 26 11.66%
 
Total:223

I think it's already in early development for NX and will ramp up once Star Fox Zero wraps in a couple of months.

And no it won't be much of a shock, the brand has become associated with Nintendo.

Even though it didn't sell that great on the Wii U ... it has an out in that the Wii U was such a low selling console that software sales of games were bound to suffer.

Wonderful 102 though ... I wouldn't count on that one. But we'll see Fatal Frame and Bayonetta return next time, simply because Nintendo does need to greenlight some projects and some of them need to be aimed at building a broader userbase, so it can't all be cartoony mascot games. 



Around the Network

Probably not. Those who wanted to play it bought a Wii U, those who didn't buy it just don't care anymore. Maybe in some forums people will argue a little, but that's about it. 99% of gamers don't even care about the game.



Soundwave said:

I think it's already in early development for NX and will ramp up once Star Fox Zero wraps in a couple of months.

And no it won't be much of a shock, the brand has become associated with Nintendo.

Even though it didn't sell that great on the Wii U ... it has an out in that the Wii U was such a low selling console that software sales of games were bound to suffer.

Wonderful 102 though ... I wouldn't count on that one. But we'll see Fatal Frame and Bayonetta return next time, simply because Nintendo does need to greenlight some projects and some of them need to be aimed at building a broader userbase, so it can't all be cartoony mascot games. 

I definitely see your points, but if it is an early NX title, doesn't it potentially face a lot of the same problems? Hopefully they will announce it thoug, along with Xeno X-2. Really I'd be fine with a repeat (granted the games sequels) of the Jan 2013 Direct as the Jan 2018 (or 2017 depending on when you think the NX will release) Direct. Though, I think Monolith Soft is currently working on a 3ds game (another besides X Zone 2) according to their urgent job listing for a 3d cg animator and the fact that Project X Zone 2 has already released in Japan.





bigtakilla said:
JustBeingReal said:

That doesn't apply to Bayonetta, not when it sold over 2 million copies across PS3 and 360. That kind of logic doesn't fall apart in this instance, it's still very logical from a business perspective. Mosty likely Bayonetta going to Wii U was the result of Platinum and Sega's relationship with Nintendo and the fact that Nintendo had more than just Bayonetta 2 for PG to develop and Sega to distribute.

We also have W101 and for Star Fox to be developed, maybe Project Guard too or any other potential PG developed Wii U or future Nintendo console exclusives.

The comments made by PG, regarding B2 not existing without Nintendo assumes that no one else was willing to invest in the game, yet we see Sony and Microsoft, along with many publishers investing in potential loss leaders.

Nier: Automata is one example that comes to mind, but that game as a franchise sold more on PS3, so it would make sense for it to be a Playstation exclusive, since the last game sold more on Playstation.

Bayonetta isn't a niche franchise, in fact it's sold less since it became a Wii U exclusive, which makes little sense, unless you consider more than just one franchise and Platinum Games or their partners thinking about more than just one game to make their money.

 

IMO Bayonetta 2 being exclusive is because of PG's relationship with Nintendo or more likely a business arrangement.

When you look at the fact that Nintendo have had 6 PG exclusives developed by the studio, next to only one for each rival platform it seems pretty clear that PG statement of B2 not getting made without Nintendo is pretty falacious. They're thinking of the wider picture and they sold Bayonetta 2 as a part of a bigger business deal.

I wouldn't be shocked if that continues to be the case.

That could be true... Or the developers could be telling the truth and the game wouldn't have been made without Nintendo.

Just added a source to your claim.

http://www.tssznews.com/2015/12/29/source-ms-sony-passed-on-bayonetta-2/



bigtakilla said:
JustBeingReal said:
curl-6 said:
JustBeingReal said:
I think people who played the original on PS3 or 360 being annoyed at Bayonetta 2 not being a multiplat were pretty justified in feeling that way, especially when those platforms had the larger install base and those gamers had supported the original game.

The damage is kinda done now though, what would be more annoying to those people is if Bayonetta 3 was released as a multiplat for current gen, including NX, PS4 and XBox (maybe PC too), but Bayonetta 2 didn't get a mulitplat release, because people couldn't play all 3 games unless they owned a Wii U.

It makes sense for a multiplat to go exclusive, if the platform it's exclusive on is the most dominant system and it's where that game's audience is, but to just go exclusive to attempt to entice people onto a platform they had no interest in is just BS, it's an anti-consumer practice.

Where this logic falls apart is that sometimes a game needs to be exclusive to get funded at all.

Platinum have been pretty clear that Bayonetta 2 wouldn't even have gotten made if not for Nintendo.

 

That doesn't apply to Bayonetta, not when it sold over 2 million copies across PS3 and 360. That kind of logic doesn't fall apart in this instance, it's still very logical from a business perspective. Mosty likely Bayonetta going to Wii U was the result of Platinum and Sega's relationship with Nintendo and the fact that Nintendo had more than just Bayonetta 2 for PG to develop and Sega to distribute.

We also have W101 and for Star Fox to be developed, maybe Project Guard too or any other potential PG developed Wii U or future Nintendo console exclusives.

The comments made by PG, regarding B2 not existing without Nintendo assumes that no one else was willing to invest in the game, yet we see Sony and Microsoft, along with many publishers investing in potential loss leaders.

Nier: Automata is one example that comes to mind, but that game as a franchise sold more on PS3, so it would make sense for it to be a Playstation exclusive, since the last game sold more on Playstation.

Bayonetta isn't a niche franchise, in fact it's sold less since it became a Wii U exclusive, which makes little sense, unless you consider more than just one franchise and Platinum Games or their partners thinking about more than just one game to make their money.

 

IMO Bayonetta 2 being exclusive is because of PG's relationship with Nintendo or more likely a business arrangement.

When you look at the fact that Nintendo have had 6 PG exclusives developed by the studio, next to only one for each rival platform it seems pretty clear that PG statement of B2 not getting made without Nintendo is pretty falacious. They're thinking of the wider picture and they sold Bayonetta 2 as a part of a bigger business deal.

I wouldn't be shocked if that continues to be the case.

That could be true... Or the developers could be telling the truth and the game wouldn't have been made without Nintendo.



 

I don't buy it, not when Nintendo has partnered on so many other projects and Bayonetta was a reasonable seller, which moved the most units of either platform it was on. Sony are fine with investing in unproven new IPs, on the AAA level, same goes for MS, I see no legitimate proof or reason why the opposite would happen, especially with a game like Bayonetta.



Around the Network
JustBeingReal said:
curl-6 said:
JustBeingReal said:
I think people who played the original on PS3 or 360 being annoyed at Bayonetta 2 not being a multiplat were pretty justified in feeling that way, especially when those platforms had the larger install base and those gamers had supported the original game.

The damage is kinda done now though, what would be more annoying to those people is if Bayonetta 3 was released as a multiplat for current gen, including NX, PS4 and XBox (maybe PC too), but Bayonetta 2 didn't get a mulitplat release, because people couldn't play all 3 games unless they owned a Wii U.

It makes sense for a multiplat to go exclusive, if the platform it's exclusive on is the most dominant system and it's where that game's audience is, but to just go exclusive to attempt to entice people onto a platform they had no interest in is just BS, it's an anti-consumer practice.

Where this logic falls apart is that sometimes a game needs to be exclusive to get funded at all.

Platinum have been pretty clear that Bayonetta 2 wouldn't even have gotten made if not for Nintendo.

 

That doesn't apply to Bayonetta, not when it sold over 2 million copies across PS3 and 360. That kind of logic doesn't fall apart in this instance, it's still very logical from a business perspective. Mosty likely Bayonetta going to Wii U was the result of Platinum and Sega's relationship with Nintendo and the fact that Nintendo had more than just Bayonetta 2 for PG to develop and Sega to distribute.

We also have W101 and for Star Fox to be developed, maybe Project Guard too or any other potential PG developed Wii U or future Nintendo console exclusives.

The comments made by PG, regarding B2 not existing without Nintendo assumes that no one else was willing to invest in the game, yet we see Sony and Microsoft, along with many publishers investing in potential loss leaders.

Nier: Automata is one example that comes to mind, but that game as a franchise sold more on PS3, so it would make sense for it to be a Playstation exclusive, since the last game sold more on Playstation.

Bayonetta isn't a niche franchise, in fact it's sold less since it became a Wii U exclusive, which makes little sense, unless you consider more than just one franchise and Platinum Games or their partners thinking about more than just one game to make their money.

 

IMO Bayonetta 2 being exclusive is because of PG's relationship with Nintendo or more likely a business arrangement.

When you look at the fact that Nintendo have had 6 PG exclusives developed by the studio, next to only one for each rival platform it seems pretty clear that PG statement of B2 not getting made without Nintendo is pretty falacious. They're thinking of the wider picture and they sold Bayonetta 2 as a part of a bigger business deal.

I wouldn't be shocked if that continues to be the case.

Actually, Platinum themselves have confirmed the game would not exist without Nintendo:

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/22/3371474/bayonetta-2-would-not-exist-without-nintendo-platinum-games-wii-u



hentai_11 said:
bigtakilla said:

That could be true... Or the developers could be telling the truth and the game wouldn't have been made without Nintendo.

Just added a source to your claim.

http://www.tssznews.com/2015/12/29/source-ms-sony-passed-on-bayonetta-2/

 

I've never heard of this website, their source means nothing. PG wouldn't be able to talk about what really happened in this situation if Nintendo had a multi game deal with them and any partners to make a bunch of titles and Bayonetta 2 was one title Nintendo wanted.

Sony and MS have been fine investing in unproven projects, while Bayonetta 1 sold well over 2 million units when you combine the sales of 360 and PS3, so to say that it wasn't feasible to make the game without Nintendo makes little sense.

Platinum Games develops their titles with a portion of their studio's resources, they're only 200 strong and they work on a few projects simultaneously. Budgets for games this size would only be on the lower end of AAA scale, not huge and given the sales of the original it wouldn't have been that much of a risk.



I hope not because i don't want buy a console for one game.



curl-6 said:
JustBeingReal said:
curl-6 said:
JustBeingReal said:
I think people who played the original on PS3 or 360 being annoyed at Bayonetta 2 not being a multiplat were pretty justified in feeling that way, especially when those platforms had the larger install base and those gamers had supported the original game.

The damage is kinda done now though, what would be more annoying to those people is if Bayonetta 3 was released as a multiplat for current gen, including NX, PS4 and XBox (maybe PC too), but Bayonetta 2 didn't get a mulitplat release, because people couldn't play all 3 games unless they owned a Wii U.

It makes sense for a multiplat to go exclusive, if the platform it's exclusive on is the most dominant system and it's where that game's audience is, but to just go exclusive to attempt to entice people onto a platform they had no interest in is just BS, it's an anti-consumer practice.

Where this logic falls apart is that sometimes a game needs to be exclusive to get funded at all.

Platinum have been pretty clear that Bayonetta 2 wouldn't even have gotten made if not for Nintendo.

 

That doesn't apply to Bayonetta, not when it sold over 2 million copies across PS3 and 360. That kind of logic doesn't fall apart in this instance, it's still very logical from a business perspective. Mosty likely Bayonetta going to Wii U was the result of Platinum and Sega's relationship with Nintendo and the fact that Nintendo had more than just Bayonetta 2 for PG to develop and Sega to distribute.

We also have W101 and for Star Fox to be developed, maybe Project Guard too or any other potential PG developed Wii U or future Nintendo console exclusives.

The comments made by PG, regarding B2 not existing without Nintendo assumes that no one else was willing to invest in the game, yet we see Sony and Microsoft, along with many publishers investing in potential loss leaders.

Nier: Automata is one example that comes to mind, but that game as a franchise sold more on PS3, so it would make sense for it to be a Playstation exclusive, since the last game sold more on Playstation.

Bayonetta isn't a niche franchise, in fact it's sold less since it became a Wii U exclusive, which makes little sense, unless you consider more than just one franchise and Platinum Games or their partners thinking about more than just one game to make their money.

 

IMO Bayonetta 2 being exclusive is because of PG's relationship with Nintendo or more likely a business arrangement.

When you look at the fact that Nintendo have had 6 PG exclusives developed by the studio, next to only one for each rival platform it seems pretty clear that PG statement of B2 not getting made without Nintendo is pretty falacious. They're thinking of the wider picture and they sold Bayonetta 2 as a part of a bigger business deal.

I wouldn't be shocked if that continues to be the case.

Actually, Platinum themselves have confirmed the game would not exist without Nintendo:

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/22/3371474/bayonetta-2-would-not-exist-without-nintendo-platinum-games-wii-u


So they claim, but what else were they going to say when they've partnered on so many other projects.

It makes no sense, because of how bayonetta sold across 360 and PS3, along with the fact that both companies are happy to invest in unproven projects. Bayonetta 2 simply wasn't that big of a risk, for either platform holder or for an external publisher to help invest in.

Shenmue 3 is getting help, Nier Automata. Deals for a bunch of new exclusives, investments in unproven projects on both Sony and MS's side show why this makes zero sense.



JustBeingReal said:
curl-6 said:

Actually, Platinum themselves have confirmed the game would not exist without Nintendo:

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/22/3371474/bayonetta-2-would-not-exist-without-nintendo-platinum-games-wii-u


So they claim, but what else were they going to say when they've partnered on so many other projects.

It makes no sense, because of how bayonetta sold across 360 and PS3, along with the fact that both companies are happy to invest in unproven projects. Bayonetta 2 simply wasn't that big of a risk, for either platform holder or for an external publisher to help invest in.

Shenmue 3 is getting help, Nier Automata. Deals for a bunch of new exclusives, investments in unproven projects on both Sony and MS's side show why this makes zero sense.

Bayonetta's sales are no guarantee at all that it made any money. Games have sold better than that and still been unprofitable.

If Bayonetta was really such a moneymaker on PS3/360, that's where the sequel would have gone. Instead, Sega reportedly cancelled the game, (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-05-01-sega-cancels-bayonetta-2-report) before Nintendo stepped in and revived it.