Gamers Rage About Bayonetta 2 on Wii U

[ToastiestZombie]

I think the main issue is how little sense it makes compared with the nintendo of today. The nintendo of today has a family friendly, even cutesy image, and it doesn't seem to make sense for such a game, a fairly violent game with an undeniably sexual lead, to become exclusive to the new nintendo console.

That said, Wii u's lineup is shaping up to be varied, providing kid/granny friendly entertainment and action titles in equal measure, but to counter that point, we've seen this before. Wii also promised a mix, which nintendo almost purposely failed at.

So, a lot of bitterness, feelings of betrayal and distrust=this reaction.

Of course, however, they're free to do as they please. Any company is. We're equally entitled to feel displeased and express that displeasure, but these threats go a little far, to say the least.

Nintendo actually does seem to be trying very hard to get rid of that image, whilst still keeping the more casual gamers who bought the Wii. It is weird seeing stuff like Assassin's Creed 3 and Arkham City on a Nintendo console, but everyone has been asking that Nintendo sheds its kiddy image and they're trying to do exactly that.

 

[Sean951]

> Nintendo now has Bayonetta.
> Miyamoto wants to make an FPS.
> Nintendo appears to have an Eternal Darkness sequel in the works.
> There's the possibility that Nintendo might be thinking about buying the Banjo-Kazooie and Conker IPs from Microsoft.

Not all of RareWare, just the aforementioned franchises. Though, I'm not 100% certain if they're actually doing this or not.

Nintendo learned from their first annual loss. They admitted their mistake of being so laser-focused on the "Kiddie" and "Casual" crowd, who never even cared about Nintendo anyway, leaving the rest of us behind. So, they're trying to make it up to us by focusing more on mature titles than they ever have before.

No, that would be a terrible lesson to learn. When did they pick us up? As children who played games casually. That's the best demographic to pick up. What they learned is that launching the 3DS was hard and didn't quite go as planned, though it later outsold the DS in it's first year.

But the WiiU does seem to have more "mature" titles, and that does make me happy. Nintendo has had a rocky past with 3rd party developer and I hope this patches things up.

 

[GrimHeaper]

Love the uninformed opinions going around.
Thinking the wii U is only as powerful as the 360 and ps3.
(it's especially more powerful than that mess of a ps3)

Snip

ONCE again. PUTTING words in capitals DOESN'T improve your POINT! IT just makes YOU sound ANGRY!

The Wii U is an improvement over the PS3 and the Xbox 360, therefore it is next gen. It has a better GPU, a better proccesor, more RAM and a faster disc read speed. Just because Nintendo haven't done the incredibly stupid, and risky thing of making there next console extremely powerful and high-end doesn't mean it's not next gen.

He's right you know.

 

[GrimHeaper]

I think the main issue is how little sense it makes compared with the nintendo of today. The nintendo of today has a family friendly, even cutesy image, and it doesn't seem to make sense for such a game, a fairly violent game with an undeniably sexual lead, to become exclusive to the new nintendo console.

That said, Wii u's lineup is shaping up to be varied, providing kid/granny friendly entertainment and action titles in equal measure, but to counter that point, we've seen this before. Wii also promised a mix, which nintendo almost purposely failed at.

So, a lot of bitterness, feelings of betrayal and distrust=this reaction.

Of course, however, they're free to do as they please. Any company is. We're equally entitled to feel displeased and express that displeasure, but these threats go a little far, to say the least.

Cute, Really cutesy.

Madworld is also made by platinum games.
Even the SNES has games that could be considered rated M.

 

[Mikeyfell]

No reason? You haven't heard that Sega had dropped the project, and nobody else wanted it because of it's crappy reception the first time so Nintendo picked the dying game up and gave them the funding and publishing to get it going again. So either this or no Bayonetta 2 at all, make your choice. Also, Kotor 1 and 2 were on the PC, and the MMO was an MMO, which have never worked on consoles especially a WoW type MMO like SW: TOR.

To be honest, I didn't know that Bayonetta was canned, but I did say "Just take solace in the knowledge that it's probably going to suck." So that cover's that. And I'm fully aware that the KotORs were available on the PC, I didn't play them on the PC and feel ripped that I can't play the new one. Same with Agarest 2 and Heavy Rain and now Bayonetta 2 I would pay $60 to play any of those games, not $360.

And if every game was released for every system then what incentive would one have to buy another console?

That is the stupidest thing anyone's ever said.
If every game was compatible on every system then no one would need more than one console. that's the point. If I could buy a game I wanted to play and play it that is the better alternative to there being a game that I wanted to play but can't because it only works on proprietary hardware.
It's inefficient and developers lose a lot of business because the hardware manufacturer wants to make a quick buck at the content provider's expense.

 

[DTH1337]

You know, it's over-reactions like this that Jim Sterling has talked about on a number of videos, as well as this week. Bayonetta 2 on the Wii U is not a negative on the gaming industry.

This is a game that at first wasn't going to be released because Sega decided to abandon it due to financial issues. Thanks to Nintendo however, we can now rest assured that Bayonetta 2 will finally be released and we can finally kick and shoot more angels with the many weapons of Bayonetta, as well as be happy about the game (if it is any good, that is).

But of course, this is the internet, which has to overreact to announcements like this and make pathetic statements such as saying they will commit suicide because of the fact that this game is coming to the Wii U.

A sequel that many gamers have wanted is finally announced and the gamers aren't happy about it because it is on a console that they have likely not even played yet. That is simply what the haters are saying, and I have to ask "What the hell do you want, gamers?"

If Mirrors Edge 2 or Beyond Good & Evil 2 (sequels that gamers want to see made) were announced for the Wii U, and the gamers made this kind of over-reaction simply because it's on the Wii U, then I can guarantee you that they would get the backlash of the gaming community for being idiots.

People are complaining that a game that wouldn't be made will be made, only under the conditions that SATAN (Nintendo) will only get the game. If Mirror's Edge 2 was only made for the Wii U just because EA feels like it and not because SATAN was willing to buy exclusivity, the outrage would be a little bit more justified. It's still less stupid when compared to the Devil May Cry 4, Final Fantasy 13 and Terraria situation.

And yet I still don't see the harm or the negative side of releasing Bayonetta 2 on a console that likely no-one on this forum has even tried out.

Also, when the hell did Nintendo suddenly become satan just because of this one announcement?! Sure, they've released one too many samey Mario games, but at least they've decided to make an effort to make amends by releasing Bayonetta 2 on the Wii U, unlike Square Enix who decided to slap gamers in the face and give people an inferior version of TWEWY for the iOS platform rather than make a sequel for the 3DS.

If there are any companies that can be classed as satan, it would be companies like Activision, EA, Capcom, Square Enix, Sony, and Microsoft (the last 2 are to a lesser extent, but slowly reaching it).

 

[Epicspoon]

Motion controls don't really translate well to a fighting game like Bayonetta.

Which is why it'll be using the gamepad controller.

The giant touchscreen one? Still makes for a little difficult transition.

If you're talking about the classic controller, fine, but I still say that is the least comfortable controller to use in this generation.

actually the controller isn't as big as you think it is. it's about the size of one screen of an XL. and anyways there's going to be more than just that tablet as a controller.

 

[GrimHeaper]

So much nintendo hate for no reason.
I can takes bathes in the stuff.

 

[ex275w]

You know, it's over-reactions like this that Jim Sterling has talked about on a number of videos, as well as this week. Bayonetta 2 on the Wii U is not a negative on the gaming industry.

This is a game that at first wasn't going to be released because Sega decided to abandon it due to financial issues. Thanks to Nintendo however, we can now rest assured that Bayonetta 2 will finally be released and we can finally kick and shoot more angels with the many weapons of Bayonetta, as well as be happy about the game (if it is any good, that is).

But of course, this is the internet, which has to overreact to announcements like this and make pathetic statements such as saying they will commit suicide because of the fact that this game is coming to the Wii U.

A sequel that many gamers have wanted is finally announced and the gamers aren't happy about it because it is on a console that they have likely not even played yet. That is simply what the haters are saying, and I have to ask "What the hell do you want, gamers?"

If Mirrors Edge 2 or Beyond Good & Evil 2 (sequels that gamers want to see made) were announced for the Wii U, and the gamers made this kind of over-reaction simply because it's on the Wii U, then I can guarantee you that they would get the backlash of the gaming community for being idiots.

People are complaining that a game that wouldn't be made will be made, only under the conditions that SATAN (Nintendo) will only get the game. If Mirror's Edge 2 was only made for the Wii U just because EA feels like it and not because SATAN was willing to buy exclusivity, the outrage would be a little bit more justified. It's still less stupid when compared to the Devil May Cry 4, Final Fantasy 13 and Terraria situation.

And yet I still don't see the harm or the negative side of releasing Bayonetta 2 on a console that likely no-one on this forum has even tried out.

Also, when the hell did Nintendo suddenly become satan just because of this one announcement?! Sure, they've released one too many samey Mario games, but at least they've decided to make an effort to make amends by releasing Bayonetta 2 on the Wii U, unlike Square Enix who decided to slap gamers in the face and give people an inferior version of TWEWY for the iOS platform rather than make a sequel for the 3DS.

If there are any companies that can be classed as satan, it would be companies like Activision, EA, Capcom, Square Enix, Sony, and Microsoft (the last 2 are to a lesser extent, but slowly reaching it).

Oh I was making fun of people hating Nintendo obsessively with the SATAN thingy. Also, there is no downside to saving a game and producing it. Buying IPs and assuring exclusives is an important part of the console business, if not, there would be no competition and thus, no innovation.
The only problem is when a game is exclusive for no reason, like Mass Effect 1 (unless Microsoft had paid to keep it exclusive) or a franchise changing consoles suddenly, like Kingodm Hearts which is in every portable console for no reason. Still, if the console producers pay for the game to be exclusive or pay for it for it not to be exclusive, gamers should put up with it. That's how business works, gaining advantages over competitors.

Also doesn't the IOS TWEWY tease a new game?

 

[Terramax]

It's never pleasant when a game you want comes out for a console you don't own, but the degree of this backlash is kind of surprising. If it was a choice between a Wii U exclusive Bayonetta 2 and no Bayonetta 2 at all, wouldn't the console exclusive be the better option?

No. Nothing more angering than knowing a game you want exists, but you have to pay £200+ for a new console, for which is likely to play differently to how you'd prefer it to.

That being said, the comments are made to the wrong company. Platinum ultimately made the decision to make exclusive.

I'm not surprised at the kinds of tweets posted either. People write that stuff all the time. It's just people being typically human and over-exaggerating their feelings.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

To all those people who say "Well,if it wasn't for Nintendo, Bayonetta 2 wouldn't have been made!": First of all, fuck you. Second of all, if they game didn't exist, then they couldn't get mad about not being able to play it.

It's a case of "What's better: Nobody getting to play it, or only a few people?"

 

[Teacakes]

Few people ***** about Terraria going to consoles.
Escapist: "OMG PCGAMERS ARE WHINY DICKS!"
Few people ***** about Bayonetta going to WiiU.
Escapist: " Oh, how terribly ignorant of those people."

And I just generalized the same way because Im also part of Escapist and so balance of the universe has been kept.

I noticed my reactions were the opposite.
"Terraria going to consoles? Who cares."
"Bayonetta going to WiiU? Nintendo consoles that aren't handhelds are going to be stupid for the forseeable future."

I guess I don't really belong here...

 

[Doclector]

I think the main issue is how little sense it makes compared with the nintendo of today. The nintendo of today has a family friendly, even cutesy image, and it doesn't seem to make sense for such a game, a fairly violent game with an undeniably sexual lead, to become exclusive to the new nintendo console.

That said, Wii u's lineup is shaping up to be varied, providing kid/granny friendly entertainment and action titles in equal measure, but to counter that point, we've seen this before. Wii also promised a mix, which nintendo almost purposely failed at.

So, a lot of bitterness, feelings of betrayal and distrust=this reaction.

Of course, however, they're free to do as they please. Any company is. We're equally entitled to feel displeased and express that displeasure, but these threats go a little far, to say the least.

Cute, Really cutesy.

Madworld is also made by platinum games.
Even the SNES has games that could be considered rated M.

Yes, but that's one of a handful of mature games on the wii. It's simply not what nintendo is now known for. In the past, sure, nintendo consoles were known for having variety alongside their own, largely kid friendly, classics, but after the wii, that changed a lot.

Of course, they can change. I hope they do. But this sort of lineup has happened before, and it'll take more convincing to make me believe they won't just switch out that variety for more family games like before.

SNIP

Nintendo actually does seem to be trying very hard to get rid of that image, whilst still keeping the more casual gamers who bought the Wii. It is weird seeing stuff like Assassin's Creed 3 and Arkham City on a Nintendo console, but everyone has been asking that Nintendo sheds its kiddy image and they're trying to do exactly that.

More or less the same response as the one in the second part of the post above. They seem to be trying, but personally, I'm waiting a while to see if they don't pull the ol' bait and switch. Should be said though, whether they will or not is of little importance to this discussion. They point is, they kind of did with the wii (intentionally or otherwise), and thus this could in part explain the reaction.

 

[Joccaren]

Better 2x AA than none at all. Wii has a SERIOUS lack of it for games that really really need it.

Eh, debatable. To my eyes there is little difference between the Wii and the Xbox's AA. One doesn't have it, the other's doesn't work. Of course if one is used to only low levels of AA they can probably spot the differences better.

That's a very convenient opinion for you to hold that AA isn't important... but PC gamers who have the choice to turn it on or off it's considered a WORTHLESS BENCHMARK to bbenchmark (test a game's performance) without AA set reasonably high as so many CHOOSE to have it on.

Of course you're going to benchmark with it on - it does have a minimal effect on FPS [Like a 1-2 FPS variance at worst most of the time], which is important to hardcore benchmarkers - and if you can handle it of course you're going to put it up to max - it does make it look that tiny bit better.
However, it is by far the least important aspect of graphics that you'll come across. Texture resolution, lighting, model detail, Depth of Field and such provide a much better variance in look, and is something your argument would be better focused on. AA is the fly of the graphics world. If it gets all up in your face it can be, at worst, annoying. Otherwise its pretty much unnoticeable.

Anti-aliasing is a HUGE problem with the low-resolution (480p) resolution of Wii games when upscaled the Anti-aliasing jagges get doubly deep. Wii games with a generally brighter and broader colour pallet the aliasing is more visible on "grimdark" games.

I'm going to take it that last sentence was meant to have an additional "Than" in it, as in "...broader colour pallet the aliasing is more visible than on "grimdark" games", otherwise you're saying its less noticeable on the Wii.
I'm going to be honest here, thanks to the art style most Wii games follow, I barely notice the aliasing in them. They don't try to be realistic, or even good. They go for extremely cartoony most of the time, and sometimes only mostly cartoony. When that's the case, aliasing really doesn't bother me. For the art style, its not important. When there's really bad aliasing in something like Halo, I'll notice, as it tries to look good, and somewhat realistic, and in contrast to the rest of what the game is showing such things can stand out. However, that usually takes me to be standing infront of a diagonal line, with it taking up half my screen for me to notice. Otherwise I'm too focused on the other things the game has to show me instead of the small line off to the side.

"If the WiiU has the graphics power to display 1080p with 30 or higher FPS with as many if not more objects on screen than a PS3 or X360, then it is superior."

Big "if".

Really, I don't think so. Sure, its an important if, but thanks to how crap the Xbox and PS3's graphics capabilities are you'd almost pay more to get the sort of card that goes into them as its 'Vintage' or something than you would to get something like a 9800GTX only smaller, which would handle such things easily.

And behold:

-snip-

1080x1920 NATIVE resolution and 60-frames per second.

Framerate and native-res alone is not enough as PS3 could do this back in 2008.

WiiU has had it's chance to prove it's next-gen it hasn't. It's a dumb bet to bet on WiiU being a generational leap over Xbox 360.

I don't think that quite proves a point, considering that video is in 720p. Acknowledged it does run at 1080p and 60FPS, however the rest of its graphics capabilities suffer for it. From what I see it does not look as detailed as other games, has fewer models on screen, occasionally has some pretty bland textures and other such things. I never said it was impossible for a game to run 1080p native on a current gen console at 60FPS, only that most don't because it means sacrificing other more important graphical aspects to do so.

 

[Gizmo1990]

Super Sinp

While I think it is a good thing that Nintendo are getting games like Ass Creed 3 and Batman, as anyone who only had a Wii and wil get the WiiU can play them, I am not sure how it is ment to tempt people like me. Batman is a year old now and I already have it. Mass Effect 3 is 7 months old now and I already have it. Getting Ass Creed 3 for £35 for my PS3 or 360 is much better than paying for a new console and the game.

Of couse part of me want to buy one, find one of the retard haters, who hate it because it's Nintendo, and beat them over the head with it. What happened to people hating something for a good reason?

 

[Nikolas Murphy]

Get over it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYPIDJnN4zY&feature=plcp

 

[Kroxile]

Wii U is at least twice as powerful as current consoles. Its ridiculous to claim otherwise... unless you're too stupid to read tech specs, I guess.

 

[I.Muir]

Ive always disliked games exclusive to only one console but that's the way things are
It's odd to see it with Nintendo of all places but perhaps it won't be bad and I would have probably gotten a wii u anyway

 

[NoeL]

Hardcore game becomes exclusive to a casual console and gamers become upset.

"We never saw it coming."
Said absolutely no one ever.

How is the Wii U a "casual console"? When it hits stores it'll have more beef than any other console on the market (obviously not including PCs) and, if you've seen ANY Nintendo press releases (in other words, if you didn't have your head up your arse) you'd know that the hardcore market is one of the primary targets for the console. Of course they're still going to sell to the casual crowd - they'd be batshit insane NOT to given the massive consumer base they scored with the Wii - but to declare the Wii U a "casual console" because a) it's by Nintendo, and b) the standard controller you've yet to touch is too different and scary for you (hey, you can always pick up the Pro controller if that's what you need to sleep at night) only highlights your own prejudice.

 

[Stripes]

Why can they not release it on multiple consoles? Why are people ok with exclusives? How is it somehow fine for a game to be actively denied to people for no other reason than to force them to buy another console? This is just another casuality to a seriously anti consumer practice.

Oh and to those who think they are somehow mighty for belittling people who cant play the sequel to a game they liked: You arent being clever, you're being dickheads. Why on earth should people be forced to buy a console for games which clearly are not specific to the console in question?

Because the people who make the console are paying the bill to get the game made? Why should they use their money to make a sequel to a game everyone else gave up on, then make it for competitors consoles so other companies can have it, so you can avoid giving them your money for a console they've made and a game they have paid to publish? Not to mention it's WiiU so likely it WILL be exclusive to the console, and you expect Nintendo to foot the bill so it can ported to the X-Box 720 and the PS4? That sounds reasonable to you?

Seriously, it's pretty much entirely how the big three compete by who has the best exclusives, no-one would be saying shit if it was an X-box exclusive. Hell, there are people on this forum who still don't think Bethesda's handling of Dawnguard was f*cking shoddy by releasing it for X-box 2 months ahead of PS3 and PC, and that's a legitimate issue as it isn't hard to port DLC.

More OT: We don't ***** about Halo being only on X-Box or God of War only being on Playstation, it just so happens Bayonetta is now only going to be on WiiU. And? If you want to play the game I guess you're going to have to give WiiU a try, if you don't then give Platinum Games the money it needs out of your own pocket to buy back full publishing rights and make a game for the X-box or whatever. It'll only cost you something like 15 million dollars (conservative f*cking estimate there).

It's like Nintendo want us to buy their products or something crazy like that!

Get off your high horse, you arent as smart as you think you are. Nintendo is publishing the game, great! That doesnt mean its good for gaming to have that game be denied to other gamers purely to sell a console. I dont agree with exclusives, I think anyone who supports exclusives that are exclusive because one company wants to get an edge by denying the game to other consoles is retarded.

I can see why keeping the game exclusive to the Wii U is smart for Nintendo, I cant see how thats good for us. I dont want to buy a Wii U, not out of malice but because I cant afford to buy a Wii U and and Xbox 720 (if indeed I get another generation of console, depends on my circumstances. The 360 seems to be the strongest of the 3 consoles, going with that im gonna go to the next iteration of it. Plus I like the exclusives and all my freinds are getting it, though it having exclusives is no more ok than the Wii U or PS3 having exclusives purely for competition). Im not "avoiding giving them money for a console they've made", which somehow insinuates Im at fault for not buying it at all because they spent money making it, I just cant buy it in my circumstances because they are denying it on platforms I play on.

I dont know the full situation with Dawngaurd, if Microsoft paid for some sort of exclusivity then non-xbox gamers should not be denied the DLC. It isnt fair on gamers, even if the devs are better off. Halo should be on PS3 and God of War should be on xbox. Gamers are not benefiting from this competition, theres no good reason for us to support it.

I would love nothing more than for Bayonetta 2 to be available to everyone, unfortunately Platinum games decided they couldnt self publish (though they could publish the abysmal 'Vanquish') it and Nintendo is now publishing. That isnt my fault. Why is it somehow fine for Nintendo to act against our interests but not Activision or EA? They both go against our interests and are hated for it, why is it ok here?

Right, for clarity, you're immediately saying you won't buy the Wii U, instead you're going for the next X-Box. Why is that? Because it has better business practices? No, in your own words because of the exclusives (and some bonus reasons like familiarty or your friends had it but at some point down the line you bought it for the games, because that's why all of us choose one console or other, either we played Mario and enjoyed it or a good round of Halo, it's just how they're distinguished). My big issue with this thread in general is that nobody is complaining about Epic, Bungie, Sucker Punch, Nintendo bought a studio to make a game and because it's not on THEIR console there's outrage. It's just a touch hypocritical.

I agree that console exclusives aren't fantastic when you lack the console, but Bayonetta 2 wouldn't even exist unless Nintendo footed the bill and if the price to pay is it's only on their console well... Zelda isn't on X-Box either. Your comparison to Activision and EA is also a poor analogue, since those companies do go across all consoles they just happen to be douchebags to gamers in general. I'm not saying it's your fault that Platinum weren't going to release Bayonetta 2 or develop it but Nintendo have also sunk a HUGE amount of money in getting a 'grown up' exclusive. If Microsoft spent huge amounts of money to buy Sucker Punch away from Sony and make inFamous 3 I'd probably be annoyed since I prefer Playstation, but I'm admitting to it and I also get that the only reason they're DOING it is to sell their product and since I like the game I might consider switching.

You can be pissed off that a game you'd like to play is going to be on a console you've decided you don't want but Nintendo isn't doing anything malicious or intentionally to screw gamers which is why I'm defending them. Microsoft could have bought Platinum, Sony could have done it, they didn't. I don't ***** out Microsoft for buying out Rare and killing them (no matter how heinous that sin was) so I tend to get snarky when someone does the reverse.

I understand why Nintendo is doing what it does, however im saying its all artificial competition and we shouldnt support the practice of buying exclusives for one particular console in order to deny it on others. We dont benefit at all from it. It exists because the console manufactuers are producing pretty much the same product for the same games, theres little difference between the PS3 and the xbox to the consumer. I own an xbox, therefore I got to play Mass Effect 1. PS3 owners got denied that game because Microsoft didnt want them to have it. Not because the consoles were different in any way but because the consoles were not different so the manufactures had to create a difference. It might be smart business but it doesnt make it good for us.

Theres nothing stopping Nintendo from releasing it on xbox and PS3, they wont because they want to deny it to those people who dont own a Wii U. Yeah, they can do that its great for them and its great its getting a sequel. But its bad for us as gamers, we do not benefit. If it doesnt benefit us and gaming in any way then we shouldnt support it. I have never liked exclusives when they are exclusive because a console maker doesnt want them on other consoles, im not going to start liking them now when they make me worse off. Again.