E3 New Bayonetta 2 footage at 60fps - Online Co op confirmed

[Team Andromeda]

Its a Sega second party game.

Its a game published by SEGA and where they hold the IP rights , just like MSR .

And anyone knows the proper WB games was made with Sega which is why Adventure Islands is hardly a footnote in gaming history.

They weren't made by SEGA but by Westmore . SEGA just holds the trademark to the name 'Wonderboy' .

So again your argument about Sega not being involved as well as it not being a Sega game when you yourself have used Sakura Taisen

SEGA had its own internal staff working on the SW games on it's own consoles and my god funding a game hardly makes it your own . MS money helped to pay for the likes of Ninja Gaiden 2 or the likes of Blue Dragon but I'll hardly class them as MS games .

Not really. Ferrari, Sega had worldwide rights arcade wise.

And EA had the rights to Nascar , but I'll still class Nascar in the Arcades as a SEGA Rosso title and not a EA one .

And really use a better example than Strider 2 for gods sake

No its a great example really . No one credits Strider II on the MD has a Capcom developed game at all .

[ROJM]

 

Its a game published by SEGA and where they hold the IP rights , just like MSR .

No its a Sega second party game. Not a game Sega happened to publish. Sega contracted THEM to make the game. There's a difference. Now stop spinning your garbage just because you have some twisted elitist view on what is and what isn't.

They weren't made by SEGA but by Westmore . SEGA just holds the trademark to the name 'Wonderboy' .

Oh so Sega never funded the game? It wasn't made specifically using the master system mark 3 in mind? Yes keep on to that fantasy...with Sega is the correct word....

SEGA had its own internal staff working on the SW games on it's own consoles and my god funding a game hardly makes it your own . MS money helped to pay for the likes of Ninja Gaiden 2 or the likes of Blue Dragon but I'll hardly class them as MS games .

Yawn, SAKURA TAISEN is co owned by Red and Sega. If Sega fully owned it then you'd have seen MORE ST games by now since it was one of their biggest brands in Japan. Do some education for gods sake.

And EA had the rights to Nascar , but I'll still class Nascar in the Arcades as a SEGA Rosso title and not a EA one .

Good for you.

No its a great example really . No one credits Strider II on the MD has a Capcom developed game at all .

No its a bad example because Capcom never released the game. So its a bad example. But try again. I already established what i meant. All you keep doing is using lousy examples to prove its the defacto case. Gimme a break.

Now i want to talk about Bay 2 if you don't mind.

[Team Andromeda]

Sega contracted THEM to make the game.

Just like with MSR. But everyone knows that MSR was a Bizarre Creations title and the IP is doing a fat lot of good to SEGA . 

Oh so Sega never funded the game

Most games published by a corp will be funded by the corp in question . I don't consider Grandia to be a ESP developed title but a Game Arts one, Just like I don't Radiant SilverGun to be a ESP title but a Treasure developed game.

If Sega fully owned it then you'd have seen MORE ST games by now since it was one of their biggest brands in Japan

We would if the last one sold , but it was bit of flop and Sammy don't like flops or taking any sort of risks .

No its a bad example because Capcom never released the game

They hold the IP and just like SEGA name will be on the Bay II box, so was Capcom's on the Strider II box for the Mega Drive . That's my point with the IP . Capcom had nothing at all to do with Strider II on the MD and SEGA have nothing at all to do with Bay II on the Wii U , other than both corps holding the IP rights .








 

[ROJM]

Just like with MSR. But everyone knows that MSR was a Bizarre Creations title and the IP is doing a fat lot of good to SEGA . 

Yawn a lot of good Project Gotham is doing for Microsoft too....

Most games published by a corp will be funded by the corp in question . I don't consider Grandia to be a ESP developed title but a Game Arts one, Just like I don't Radiant SilverGun to be a ESP title but a Treasure developed game.

That's you but in the tradition of Sega especially when they were a console maker it is. Sega second party covers that spectrum. Me saying its a Sega title isn't off the mark.

We would if the last one sold , but it was bit of flop and Sammy don't like flops or taking any sort of risks .

Then i guess you should have told Sega Sammy that when they gave Red the go ahead to make that online game. Or when they decided to do those motion comics or what other merc they did in the last two years.
Lots of game flops from specific strong series. That doesn't mean they will give up on it for good. ST can't get done straight away like a title that Sega fully owns. That's always been the reality.

They hold the IP and just like SEGA name will be on the Bay II box, so was Capcom's on the Strider II box for the Mega Drive . That's my point with the IP . Capcom had nothing at all to do with Strider II on the MD and SEGA have nothing at all to do with Bay II on the Wii U , other than both corps holding the IP rights .

WRONG! Sega initially put money into Bay 2 then canned it. You can't cancel a title if it was never on the drawing board. Second Sega will have some credit on the game because they are actually involved in a limited capacity during the beginning of development. Third, Sega helped Platinum get Bay2 off the ground with Nintendo in the first place.
Four, Sega let Platinum have access of the original title which was only added later in the development.And Sega OWNS the first game code.
So keep spinning your bull on the game about Sega's non involvement.

Nothing like the situation with Strider 2.








 

[Team Andromeda]

Yawn a lot of good Project Gotham is doing for Microsoft too

It just sold millions of copies than's all . But like most IP it will have it day .

That's you but in the tradition of Sega especially when they were a console maker it is.

No it just the way it works for most .

Then i guess you should have told Sega Sammy that when they gave Red the go ahead to make that online game.

Yep SEGA had to give it the old clear as they hold the IP rights and in typical Sammy fashion they do it on the cheap too.

WRONG! Sega initially put money into Bay 2 then canned it

Try they backed out of funding and publishing the title that's all

[ROJM]

It just sold millions of copies than's all . But like most IP it will have it day .

Not millions mate.

No it just the way it works for most .

No it doesn't and you know it. Its different when a game is made for a console provider than it is third party.
That's why the terms first second and third party exists . For god sake your ignorance is astounding....

Yep SEGA had to give it the old clear as they hold the IP rights and in typical Sammy fashion they do it on the cheap too.

?Cheap? Nintendo would had to pay Segasammy the privilage of using the IP. Dunno how that makes them cheap.

Try they backed out of funding and publishing the title that's all

Which they did on a lot of games not just Bay 2. But they are involved. And why are you complaining about it? You were going on how expensive the deal was and how it was taking food from the mouths of Sega first party developers. Now you are accusing them of backing out of a deal and leaving PG in the lurch. Talk about changing your tone when it suits you....

[MadeManG74]

Do you think Bayonetta 2 will start off with most of her abilities from 1 unlocked from the start? Like Yakuza 3 has most of Kiryu's 2 moves unlocked?

I wouldn't like to go from Bayonetta in 'climax mode' from 1 to a gimped Bayonetta in 2. Stuff like the butterfly and panther transformation should be in from the start in my opinion.

[ROJM]

Do you think Bayonetta 2 will start off with most of her abilities from 1 unlocked from the start? Like Yakuza 3 has most of Kiryu's 2 moves unlocked?

I wouldn't like to go from Bayonetta in 'climax mode' from 1 to a gimped Bayonetta in 2. Stuff like the butterfly and panther transformation should be in from the start in my opinion.

Depends. I'd like to see a variation of her powers so Bay 2 is slightly different to Bay 1. And then somehow transfer Bay2 into the Bay 1 game and vice versa.

[Team Andromeda]

Not millions mate

Dear God you're all over the shop . PGR on the XBox sells more than 2 million copies and both the likes of PGR 2 and PGR 3 sell over half million copies each . MS made way more from it than SEGA ever did with MSR .

Its different when a game is made for a console provider than it is third party

No it isn't

?Cheap? Nintendo would had to pay Segasammy the privilage of using the IP

No for Bay II . Sukura Wars Online was done on the cheap .

Which they did on a lot of games not just Bay 2

No trouble with that at all. Just laughing at people still trying to make out that SEGA are involved in developing the game , when other than the IP they've done nothing at all with the games development

[ROJM]

Dear God you're all over the shop . PGR on the XBox sells more than 2 million copies and both the likes of PGR 2 and PGR 3 sell over half million copies each . MS made way more from it than SEGA ever did with MSR .

Since when is half a million a million copies. You're the one all over the shop mate not me...

No it isn't

Yes it is and always has been. First Second and third party. That's always been the description certain games fall into. And you keep saying you're an expert and you don't even know that....

No for Bay II . Sukura Wars Online was done on the cheap .

So what? SAKURA TAISEN MMO was done with Sega's permission and Red went ahead with a chinese developer. That's the point a point you were disputing. And make it clear exactly what you're talking about next time.

No trouble with that at all. Just laughing at people still trying to make out that SEGA are involved in developing the game , when other than the IP they've done nothing at all with the games development

Many are laughing at you.
No one said they were developing the game. Sega has been involved during the process of development. Its funny how i have given examples of Sega's involvement and yet you haven't been able to provide examples of them not being involved despite the evidence out there to the contrary.


Anyway this is the final word i'm having with you. I really don't have the time to continue silly epic posts anymore as Work won't permit it which is the reason i haven't visited here for a while. So please stick to the topic or create a topic on what is or isn't a Sega game where it will be better suited. Thank you and good bye..

[MadeManG74]

Depends. I'd like to see a variation of her powers so Bay 2 is slightly different to Bay 1. And then somehow transfer Bay2 into the Bay 1 game and vice versa.

You mean have the new abilities from B2 be transferred into B1? That would be awesome,

[ROJM]

You mean have the new abilities from B2 be transferred into B1? That would be awesome,

Exactly. Having the Bay 2 sprite in Bay 1 and the Bay 1 sprite in Bay 2 both with their abilities from their respective games. Knowing PG they may do something like that with the first game included. Or what's the point of having the title in with Bay2 other to remind people how good it was.

[MadeManG74]

^I think they probably realised a big chunk of the Wii-U owning audience never played the original because it was only PS3/360. That was my thinking behind it at least.


I wonder if it's a big job to do what you are suggesting with character model swaps? I think changing the look is easy (hence the Nintendo themed costumes) but movesets and weapons might be tougher. If they did include more weapons in Bayo 1 that would be pretty unreal.

[inthesky]

A nice short read on that note:

Bayonetta 1 Wii U and the porting studio advised by Platinum

[MadeManG74]

A nice short read on that note:

Bayonetta 1 Wii U and the porting studio advised by Platinum

shutupandtakemymoney.jpg