Bayonetta 2 Discussion Mega Thread

[pirovash88]

What makes Captain Toad so lame?  Is it because you've perceived it as juvenile?  Are you the kind of person that needs violence or photorealistic graphics in his/her games in order to feel like an adult?  Never mind that Captain Toad looks like a smartly made and charming puzzle game that I will probably buy.  Get off your high horse.

Yeah, i'm one of those dudes that prefers babes, guns, and gore..

Seriously, no. I've stated on here many times that i am a Nintendo fan, but some of their games are ridiculous. I don't see how a game like Captain Toad warrants a $40 pricetag. It just seems like a quick buck game to me, a complete afterthought.

[Radrappy]

Yeah, i'm one of those dudes that prefers babes, guns, and gore..

Seriously, no. I've stated on here many times that i am a Nintendo fan, but some of their games are ridiculous. I don't see how a game like Captain Toad warrants a $40 pricetag. It just seems like a quick buck game to me, a complete afterthought.

forgive me for jumping on you like that.  You wouldn't believe how many people I've met who actually believe that kind of nonsense.

About Capt. Toad, it's obviously a title made to fill a gap, I won't argue that.  However, a lot of the levels I've seen (and even played at e3) are extremely well crafted and fun to navigate through.  I agree that a 20-30$ price tag might be more fair though. 

[ROJM]

Are you kidding me?  Ass kissing?  PG have been quoted numerous times saying how grateful they are to Nintendo and the support given during the development of B2.  Sega and PG had a falling out of some variety, and Nintendo was there to pick up the pieces.  How is pointing that out ass kissery?  We all think PG is a fantastic developer; but the way you and others are desperately trying to discredit/blame Nintendo for nonexistent villainy is just sad.  The game is on Wiiu, probably won't sell very many copies, but is supposedly still a fantastic game.  Why not just enjoy the game and celebrate its existence? 

You people left your brains in the 90's apparently. 

PG is doing PR like they always do when they release a game. And if it wasn't for Sega Nintendo WOULDN'T have been able to pick it up in the first place. Again people will believe any fantasy about the games industry especially where Nintendo is concerned. Sheez...

And i haven't blamed Nintendo for anything in this thread. I state the facts on the good and the bad. So i dunno where that came from. People in the nineties have more brains to lose than people in the noughties who simply don't have the capacity of using logic.

[ROJM]

That's Racist!
(I assume Joe is black)

No. I'm not. You americans do have a big problem about race..you can't discuss a game or anything else in a american dominated forum before some moron goes on a bout it.

[ROJM]

No thought it was a 5 game deal and 1st refusal on any new Platinum game . The deal didn't do much for SEGA at all and  most prob cost SEGA more money than they made for the deal , so its little wonder SEGA didn't want to continue, much less fund Bay II

Thought isn't FACT TA...
Again i have the facts to back me up on this..as usual..you don't.

Nice to see somebody gets it . Bayonetta is Platinum game and all this talk of SEGA or Nintendo references makes it somehow their games is just a bit silly . 

You mean an IP Sega has sole rights to...yes that's a SEGA game if ever by definition...

And when Nintendo drop them like a stone, watch Platinum games praise their paymasters and make out they're corp they love always wanted to work with 

You obviously have an issue with PG. PG isn't doing anything different to what other superstar dev studios say when they work with a big games publisher like Nintendo or Sega...Look what GBX Randy said when they began working with Sega..."its a dream come true".... and look what happened there.

[ROJM]

Lol,

We've all gotta admit that a lot of gamer's do kiss Nintendo's ass. I mean, let's be real for one second. If Sony or MS created a lame ass game like Captain Toad, they would get thrown into a pit of shit, but because it's Nintendo, you get a completely different reaction. "Oooh soo cute, look at how Toad holds his breathe while under water"..

Exactly. The truth hurts..but its true nonethe less...Would WONDERFUL 101 get the same scores had Sega published the game?

[Team Andromeda]

Thought isn't FACT TA..

Never said it was , Just that I thought it was.

You mean an IP Sega has sole rights to...yes that's a SEGA game if ever by definition

By definition . It doesn't mean they developed the title or had much input to the title though. SEGA may well own the IP rights to the likes of of Ecco or Red Dog  but we all know SEGA had little to do with their development input much like with EA and them owning the rights to Syndicate. And just because a game as some sort of old references means little, other than you've got a decent development team behind the title

You obviously have an issue with PG.

No I'm just making the point that developers will always speak highly of their publisher when they are funding and publishing their games (more so if their dream games). I mean to see Itagaki-san talk highly of Nintendo is a bit laughable after what he said about them in the past , but money talks

 


 

[ROJM]

Never said it was , Just that I thought it was.

Then stop going about it then...

By definition . It doesn't mean they developed the title or had much input to the title though. SEGA may well own the IP rights to the likes of of Ecco or Red Dog  but we all know SEGA had little to do with their development input much like with EA and them owning the rights to Syndicate. And just because a game as some sort of old references means little, other than you've got a decent development team behind the title

Never said they did..but for someone experienced in Sega you should know there are these type of Sega games around...since the MS really and the second third wave of Sega arcade games. Sega second party titles..which are just as much as Sega as the core Sega games. You should be used to that way by now. So you saying its not a Sega title doesn't hold water. Its a Sega IP. A Sega second party game. That's it.

No I'm just making the point that developers will always speak highly of their publisher when they are funding and publishing their games (more so if their dream games). I mean to see Itagaki-san talk highly of Nintendo is a bit laughable after what he said about them in the past , but money talks

Seems you were picking on PG specifically. We all know the BS goes on..and will carry on as long as the industry will carry on. It not something i would criticise them for. They are not going to say "I'm working with guys i detest because the money is good." Itagaki oddly enough is someone i'd imagine would have ended making a Sega title since he was an admirer and fan boy of the Saturn and model 2 games....

[Team Andromeda]

but for someone experienced in Sega you should know there are these type of Sega games

Games not made by SEGA but with SEGA references ? Yes I know that  but I'll not class them as SEGA titles and then for the titles that SEGA owns the IP rights and Published (but did not develope)  I'll always  not class them as SEGA 'developed' titles either for the likes of Gunstar Heroes, Guardian Heroes and give the credit to Treasure for those or to Climax for Dark Saviour and the like.

Seems you were picking on PG specifically

No there's many other classic examples not least Gable Newell falling back in love with SONY . Money will alway talk

[CrazyT]

Reading your conversations I think you're probably right about any dev will speak highly of the publisher, which kind of passed me by.

Anyway I think its silly to think nintendo games get better scores because their nintendo, especially when ive been arguing the contrary in past. That outlets have been extra harsh towards nintendo. I guess this proves that both sides of the extremes are wrong and things in general just are the way they are without some conspiracies. Nin games get good scores for no other reasons then the reviewers genuinly enjoying them

itagaki's devils third looked rough as hell when it was shown. I guess that game could be the ultimate proof of my theory about publisher's contribution or influence.

[ROJM]

Games not made by SEGA but with SEGA references ? Yes I know that  but I'll not class them as SEGA titles and then for the titles that SEGA owns the IP rights and Published (but did not develope)  I'll always  not class them as SEGA 'developed' titles either for the likes of Gunstar Heroes, Guardian Heroes and give the credit to Treasure for those or to Climax for Dark Saviour and the like

.

There we go twisting again. I never said they were Sega developed titles. I said Sega games. I also specifically stated where they fit in in the sega echelon when i said Second party sega titles. Which anyone knows are companies working for Sega who are making games specifically for them that Sega owns. So in that context they are Sega titles. So keep using semantics on something that was established way before you played a sega title. Sega has always had a second party system. They are part of the sega family as anything AM2 produces. Don't act like a hardcore saying this is sega and this is not..because its BS when Sega has ALWAYS used this system way before you and I were born.

. 

No there's many other classic examples not least Gable Newell falling back in love with SONY . Money will alway talk

Why do you repeat the exact same thing that i said but using you're own words? I said that at the beginning about PG. I just won't pick on them for doing it which you were clearly doing.

[Team Andromeda]

. I never said they were Sega developed titles. I said Sega games

Not twisting anything . I don't see the likes of Bay as SEGA developed game or a game where SEGA had much input . Sure there own the IP rights , but like with Ecco, Red Dog Guardian Heroes Seaman  and the like. All SEGA really did was to sign the games up and make sure to own the IP rights. To turn its on its head I give SEGA  AV and  AM#1full credit for the likes of F-Zero GX and Vampire Night even though SEGA don't own the IP rights  to those games in question

Sega has always had a second party system. They are part of the sega family as anything AM2 produces.

Sigh... Every major software house will have a 2nd party or a company that will have a close working relationship with them , sometimes exclusives to one corp in question . Core made have been a great 2nd party developer for  SEGA on the Mega CD, but I still class the likes of BattleCorps and BC Racers as Core developed titles and not SEGA ones . 

[ROJM]

Not twisting anything . I don't see the likes of Bay as SEGA developed game or a game where SEGA had much input . Sure there own the IP rights , but like with Ecco, Red Dog Guardian Heroes Seaman  and the like. All SEGA really did was to sign the games up and make sure to own the IP rights. To turn its on its head I give SEGA  AV and  AM#1full credit for the likes of F-Zero GX and Vampire Night even though SEGA don't own the IP rights  to those games in question



Sigh... Every major software house will have a 2nd party or a company that will have a close working relationship with them , sometimes exclusives to one corp in question . Core made have been a great 2nd party developer for  SEGA on the Mega CD, but I still class the likes of BattleCorps and BC Racers as Core developed titles and not SEGA ones . 

You are twisting it. No one said they were developed by Sega. They are sega games because they are owned..funded...marketed by Sega and created and developed for Sega. End of. Stop acting like this is something knew when Sega has an extensive history on this field.

[Team Andromeda]

They are sega games because they are owned..funded...marketed by Sega and created and developed for Sega.

Yes but too many here are making that out to mean they're like a SEGA In-House game and its getting a bit silly with Bayonetta II where SEGA had little to do with the title and couldn't be assed to publish it , but some here love to class it as a SEGA title  . Look at the likes of  Chromehounds I'll give credit too Fromsoftware everyday of the week for that , not matter if SEGA part own the IP rights and published pushed the game .


And also people overplayed the SEGA references in Bayonetta too imo.

[ROJM]

Yes but too many here are making that out to mean they're like a SEGA In-House game and its getting a bit silly with Bayonetta II where SEGA had little to do with the title and couldn't be assed to publish it , but some here love to class it as a SEGA title  . Look at the likes of  Chromehounds I'll give credit too Fromsoftware everyday of the week for that , not matter if SEGA part own the IP rights and published pushed the game .


And also people overplayed the SEGA references in Bayonetta too imo.

Come off it Sega friggin funded half of the development and brought it to Nintendo in the first place..that's hardly anything to do with it. Look you obviously don't see it as a TRUE Sega game whether they published it or not..which is fair enough as that really belongs to the titles developed by the main studios in Japan. But Sega is more than just a developer of titles as well so in that context its Sega.
As for people overplaying it...matter of opinion...but that is to be expected i guess because the title really came at a time where it seemed sega was getting its act together. But i'm sure you will tell them that titles like that are really second party games and not true Sega titles.