Sega didn't cancel Bayonneta 2, because they couldn't, they were only the publisher at that time and they didn't even come out and make any officiel statement confirming that had happened.

Bayonetta couldn't have been a huge AAA budget project, due to the size of Platinum Games, how they portion up resources and how many projects they make at once. When a studio like From Software uses more staff to make a Souls game and similar sales to Bayonetta, but continues to make these games it's doubtful they'd do that if they weren't making money.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/sega-sammy-posts-profits-bayonetta-platinum/1100-6262538/

That article states specifically that Bayonetta was Sega's only hit that year, it's well known that Sega had to undergo a restructure at the time, which is why they didn't publish Bayonetta and why the game was placed on hold.

A few million units are fine sales for games that have way bigger budgets than Bayonetta did, it makes no sense to say that those sales for a sequel wouldn't have been desireable and to say that taking a chance on making the game for one unproven platform is more desireable by itself, instead of a proven level of sales across two platforms is not very logical from a business perspective.

As I keep saying Nintendo have partnered for way more than a single exclusive, in fact it's 6 exclusives being made by Platinum Games, vs one on XB1 and one on PS4. Most likely Nintendo and Platinum Games had made an agreement for multiple projects, with one of those games being Bayonetta 2.

Businesses think of the wider view, not just about one game in a vacuum.

Why would PG get any % of the profit? their job was to develop it.

That article never technically confirmed that Bayonetta was profitable, just that sales passed a million. Again, games have sold better than Bayonetta and lost money. Profits in the gaming sector could just as easily have come from the ongoing sales of the hugely popular Mario & Sonic at the Winter Olympics on Wii and DS, which the article cites as passing the 6 million mark that year.

If PS3/360 were such a lucrative market for Bayonetta, that's where the second would have gone. Instead, they had to turn to Nintendo to get the second game made at all.

In the end, Platinum's official word carries more weight than unproven speculation to the contrary.

It doesn't make sense, not when other, larger studios are dedicating larger teams to making a AAA project, selling similar numbers and continuing to fund those projects that sell like that. I'm speaking about From Software and Souls.

An unproven IP is always a greater risk than a multi million selling franchise.

I'll say it again simply, Nintendo has partnered with Platinum Games on 6 exclusive projects, yet Sony and Microsoft have only got one each. Nintendo have given Platinum Games more money, Bayonetta 2 is a part of a larger deal.

Your Sony example only proves my previous point that Sony are fine investing in projects, even if they aren't going to make money. Playstation as a platform wants a diverse line-up of titles, whether they're exclusive or otherwise, it's precisely why Playstation consoles traditionally dominate in sales, because they have the widest range of software, that appeals to the majority of the console audience.

I doubt Sony or Microsoft were given the option to publish Bayonetta 2, despite Platinum's statements about them offering the game around. Nintendo and PG have a tighter relationship, across more exclusives, in fact Sony and MS hadn't had any with PG until Nier Automata and Scalebound came into effect.

There's no logic in thinking Sony or MS wouldn't have jumped on getting Bayonetta 2 as an exclusive or a multiplat. Hell Square are publishing Nier Automata, they would have been fine with publishing Bayonetta 2 as a multiplat and they likely would have also been fine including Wii U.

FYI Shenmue didn't sell better than Bayonetta, it's doubtful a PS4 and XB1 Bayonetta release wouldn't have sold better than Shenmue.

The article specifically stated that Bayonetta was Sega's best seller that year, ergo it's biggest money maker. Games selling better than Bayonetta had larger budgets, because they require more development resources.

As I keep saying Platinum Games spread themselve thinner than other companies do.

Platinum's word, with no logical basis isn't very believable. Them having a long standing partnership with Nintendo and not so much with the other platform holders isn't speculation, it's observable fact. Sony and MS investing in way less proven entities shows Platinum's comment about them being turned down by either of those companies to make no sense.

Sony doesn't care about every game being lucrative, but as I've said before more expensive investments have sold similar units and they've been fine to continue investing. Namco has too, same goes for Microsoft. Publishers make huge risks all the time, a game that doesn't require huge scale AAA development and moves a few million units is profitable.

This whole narrative of Platinum being turned down and Nintendo being the saviour makes no sense, nothing from any angle supports Platinum's statement. What doesn't make sense is Platinum having more business from Nintendo and a stronger business relationship, them beginning life as a company making exclusives for Nintendo, then continuing to have a longer relationship and Bayonetta being part of a bigger business picture is the most logical conclusion.

But again, I was only contending that PG could easily have lost income.

That still doesn't explain why a cover up. Why lie about it, in the first place? It doesn't gain the companies anything. MS trying to lie about Tomb Raider made sense. Here, no.

I doubt it, not a big franchise and Bayo 2 was already exclusive

Seems pretty obvious too me. It's a part of the exclusivity deal, to make Nintendo look like they were the saviours.

It makes sense for Platinum Games to be loyal to Nintendo over the others since they basically got started as a studio making Nintendo exclusives. Sony and MS weren't a part of that. Saying that Sony and MS weren't willing to invest or that some other publisher wasn't interested doesn't make sense either. Not when you see many invest in more risky projects than a proven IP, that could have sold even more than the first game, had it been on even more platforms.

Anyway, I've made my case on this issue.

As I said before if Bayonetta 3 was a Nintendo exclusive on NX it's not that big of a deal from the perspective of causing a stir, because the damage of turning a multiplat into an exclusive is already done. The biggest issue would be if Bayonetta 3 was a multiplat and Bayonetta 2 stayed Nintendo exclusive, since there would be a gap in the game's canon for non-wii u owners or people that never played the last game.

TBH if Bayonetta 3 is going to happen it kinda has to stay an exclusive on Nintendo's platforms now, unless Nintendo allows for Bayonetta 2 to be released on rival platforms.

Well the game selling close to 1 mil, knowing and knowing that the Wii U has sold poorly is very great! It's about the publicity. Bayo 2 got people talking like mad when it got announced so I'm sure it pushed console sales which we all know, the games sell the console. That's exactly what Nintendo wants with the NX