• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Platinum says it’s proud of Bayonetta 3 and wants to show it, but the decision is up to publisher Nintendo

May 9, 2019
4,582
10,340
1,070


The Nintendo-published action sequel was first announced via a brief teaser at The Game Awards in December 2017, but nothing has been seen of it since.

Earlier this year series creator Hideki Kamiya appeared to tease a reveal for the game sometime this year. But with three months of 2021 now remaining, he remained coy when asked by VGC this week about a potential showing before Christmas.

He said: “It was more of a not definitely ‘something will come out this year’, but if there is a year, then something should happen, right?

“If you remember last time, I said that even though everyone was asking about Bayonetta 3, maybe you should tell everyone to forget about it for a while. I kind of need to keep to that stance for now because ultimately, it’s not our decision what to say and when to say it.”

PlatinumGames’ studio head Atsushi Inaba added: “There’s no need to worry. Don’t worry about it at this time. Everything’s OK.”

With nearly four years having passed since Bayonetta 3’s 2017 announcement, Nintendo was forced to insist in June that the game is still in development and making good progress.

Kamiya told VGC that the game’s development team is as eager as its fans to show Bayonetta 3 publicly, but stressed that the decision is up to publisher Nintendo.

“As much as everyone is clamouring to see it, we are really, really waiting to release it too,” he said. “Everyone who is working on the project is of course very proud of what we’re doing and wants everyone to see what we’re doing.

“As much as fans are waiting for it, we are waiting for the day when we can show it. We want everyone to cheer us on as we run to the final stretch. We want to show it too!”

Asked in 2019 if the lengthy silence surrounding Bayonetta 3 was indicative of Platinum’s grand ambitions for it, studio head Atsushi Inaba told VGC: “Yes, it’s going to be a high quality title and we’re putting our all into it,” Inaba said. “That is what you’re seeing [with the silence].”

Inaba previously revealed that Platinum was trying to move away from “an orthodox development process” with Bayonetta 3.

In addition to Bayonetta 3, Platinum is working on Project G.G., the action game featuring a giant hero described as the “climax” to Kamiya’s superhero trilogy, following Viewtiful Joe and The Wonderful 101.

 
Last edited:

Porcile

Member
Oct 23, 2012
5,606
2,026
770
Was the Switch still the NX when this thing got announced? I can't understand how a game like this, on Switch only, can possibly be this far behind.

No need to spread fud. A simple Google search could of told you when the game was announced. And considering we are only just getting Shin Megami Tensei V why is it surprising this game is going to be released after that?
 
Feb 27, 2021
470
373
280
better to show it close to release with a single good trailer, than doing what Deathloop does with it's 500 trailers and gameplay presentations every other week.
Best use of trailers is to show them close to release so it has a major impact on initial sales.
 

BPX

Member
Nov 10, 2018
3,359
9,294
600
Nintendo waiting on the woke crowd to cooldown so they can release an XXX rated Bayo 3.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: jaysius

Mowcno

Neo Member
Jun 25, 2016
29
60
260
Never would have thought when it was announced in 2017 that it would be over 4 years away. People think Spider-Man 2 is an early announcement but damn, has nothing on this and Metroid Prime 4.
 

Robb

Member
Feb 12, 2021
391
439
305
Sounds like it should have a decent chance of showing up in any upcoming Nintendo Direct at least.
 
Oct 16, 2017
1,808
2,963
445
I thought Sega was the publisher for Bayo. When/why did that change?
Sega was not interested in making Bayo 2. So Nintendo bankrolled Bayo 2 and bought the IP outright.

And it is a good fit; an action adult oriented title that Nintendo doesn't make themselves. So it plugs a hole in their lineup. Bayonetta is effectively a 2nd party game now, in that Nintendo are the ones paying for it but they hire Platinum to make it.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: RodyaRaskolnikov

Speedwagon

Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel. Yabuki turned off voice chat in Mario Kart races. True artists of their time.
Nov 14, 2012
3,460
410
805
Walnut, CA
I forgot they were even making this.
 
Jul 22, 2021
167
180
240
Sega was not interested in making Bayo 2. So Nintendo bankrolled Bayo 2 and bought the IP outright.

And it is a good fit; an action adult oriented title that Nintendo doesn't make themselves. So it plugs a hole in their lineup. Bayonetta is effectively a 2nd party game now, in that Nintendo are the ones paying for it but they hire Platinum to make it.
Thank you
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGrayson

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
13,801
5,781
1,745
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
4 years after the announcement teaser I think it's time to release the game. This and BoTW2 are the only two Switch games that get me really hyped.

Sega was not interested in making Bayo 2. So Nintendo bankrolled Bayo 2 and bought the IP outright.

Not true, Bayo continues being a Sega IP. Nintendo simply moneyhatted Sega to fund and publish themselves Bayo 2 because Sega wasn't interested on this sequel, I assume because the first one didn't have great sales. Then they did the same for Bayo 3.
 
Last edited:
Oct 16, 2017
1,808
2,963
445
4 years after the announcement teaser I think it's time to release the game. This and BoTW2 are the only two Switch games that get me really hyped.



Not true, Bayo continues being a Sega IP. Nintendo simply moneyhatted Sega to fund and publish themselves Bayo 2 because Sega wasn't interested on this sequel, I assume because the first one didn't have great sales. Then they did the same for Bayo 3.
You can't call Bayo 2 a moneyhat. Not unless the entire game was a hat.

You call it a money hat when you give a studio money when the game is already mostly done. At least use the right term.

Technically Bayo 1 is still SEGA's. But so far Bayo 2 and future Bayo 3 are Nintendo's. The one who pays the salary calls the shots.
 

stn

Member
Jun 15, 2012
6,673
416
830
I can wait. Bayo 2 was great so I am fine with them taking their time with this one.
 

Aldric

Member
Feb 15, 2016
1,211
653
495
4 years after the announcement teaser I think it's time to release the game. This and BoTW2 are the only two Switch games that get me really hyped.



Not true, Bayo continues being a Sega IP. Nintendo simply moneyhatted Sega to fund and publish themselves Bayo 2 because Sega wasn't interested on this sequel, I assume because the first one didn't have great sales. Then they did the same for Bayo 3.
If Bayo 3 is successful and I don't see why it wouldn't given how every significant Switch game sells well I think Nintendo will buy the IP. It wouldn't make sense for them to invest in two Bayonetta games as exclusives for their ecosystem only to let the franchise become multiplatform again after resurrecting it.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
13,801
5,781
1,745
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
You can't call Bayo 2 a moneyhat. Not unless the entire game was a hat.

You call it a money hat when you give a studio money when the game is already mostly done. At least use the right term.

Technically Bayo 1 is still SEGA's. But so far Bayo 2 and future Bayo 3 are Nintendo's. The one who pays the salary calls the shots.
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 2 as exclusive, so it's a money hat.
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 3 as exclusive, so it's another money hat.

When a first party pays a third party to get an exclusive for them (game that otherwise would have been multi, would have been made later or woulndn't have existed) it's a money hat. Nintendo, Sony and MS moneyhat 3rd parties all the time. Same goes with Epic to get PC store exclusives, or even the same Sega back when they were a first party.

If Bayo 3 is successful and I don't see why it wouldn't given how every significant Switch game sells well I think Nintendo will buy the IP. It wouldn't make sense for them to invest in two Bayonetta games as exclusives for their ecosystem only to let the franchise become multiplatform again after resurrecting it.
Bayonetta 1 and 2 didn't have great sales in WiiU or Switch. I don't expect Bayonetta 3 to get great sales. DMC5 sold 4.5 units, GoW 2018 sold over 10 millions in a year or so. I expect Bayonetta 3 to sell maybe 3 millions maximum.
 
Last edited:

Aldric

Member
Feb 15, 2016
1,211
653
495
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 2 as exclusive, so it's a money hat.
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 3 as exclusive, so it's another money hat.

When a first party pays a third party to get an exclusive for them (game that otherwise would have been multi, would have been made later or woulndn't have existed) it's a money hat. Nintendo, Sony and MS moneyhat 3rd parties all the time. Same goes with Epic to get PC store exclusives, or even the same Sega back when they were a first party.


Bayonetta 1 and 2 didn't have great sales in WiiU or Switch. I don't expect Bayonetta 3 to get great sales. DMC5 sold 4.5 units, GoW 2018 sold over 10 millions in a year or so. I expect Bayonetta 3 to sell maybe 3 millions maximum.
3 millions would be a huge success, DMC5 is the most successful entry in the genre on multiple platforms and it did 4.5 millions.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,201
5,727
750
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 2 as exclusive, so it's a money hat.
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 3 as exclusive, so it's another money hat.

When a first party pays a third party to get an exclusive for them (game that otherwise would have been multi, would have been made later or woulndn't have existed) it's a money hat. Nintendo, Sony and MS moneyhat 3rd parties all the time. Same goes with Epic to get PC store exclusives, or even the same Sega back when they were a first party.
Being a bit disingenuous here, aren't you.

Nintendo stepped in with additional money to not get the game shelved since Sony, MS and even Sega weren't interested. Bayonetta 2 only saw the light of day because of Nintendo. Of course they then get to decide exclusivity rights.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Member
Jun 1, 2014
9,088
8,647
770
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 2 as exclusive, so it's a money hat.
Nintendo paid Sega to get Bayo 3 as exclusive, so it's another money hat.
They funded these sequels. They would have not existed otherwise. Unlike Street Fighter V.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zannegan

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
13,801
5,781
1,745
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
They funded these sequels. They would have not existed otherwise. Unlike Street Fighter V.
Sony paid Capcom to get Street Fighter V as their exclusive, so it's also a moneyhat too. To moneyhat is to pay someone to get an exclusive for them, independently if that game was going to exist or not.

In the case of Street Fighter V, Capcom had financial issues so without Sony's money they would have needed to wait a couple of years or so to save money to make it. Sony appeared, funded the game and on top of that funded and published the USFIV PS4 port, and put half a Billion dollars on the table for SFV eSports prizes.

And yes, back then Sega, MS or Sony didn't want to pay for these games probably because they saw the sales of the first one and thought they were too bad for them. So wouldn't have existed until some of them or Nintendo would have paid it. Maybe the sales of the first one were enough for Nintendo compared to their 3rd party games, counting both exclusives and multis.
 
Last edited:

Marty-McFly

Member
Jul 2, 2021
1,373
3,509
465
Hopefully Nintendo is waiting for Switch Pro for BotW 2, Prime 4 and this.

Ah who are we kidding, we will get these at 720p and 30fps.
Yeah because we would rather wait years extra to play some of the best games ever for the chance of better performance when even if that were to happen people would still be complaining they're not 4k and 60 fps.

 
Last edited:

coffinbirth

Member
Apr 13, 2021
355
390
280
Yes, as I said Nintendo moneyhatted them for Bayonetta 2 and 3.
Lol, doubling down here, eh?
Bayo 2 isn't a moneyhat. Bayo 3 isn't a moneyhat.
These games would not exist if Nintendo wouldn't have taken over publishing. Full stop.

You clearly don't understand the term, please stop using it erroneously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zannegan

Kdad

Member
Sep 20, 2018
2,015
3,735
480
Nin is just getting the Brazzers spin off prepped so they can do a proper movie + game double launch.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
13,801
5,781
1,745
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Lol, doubling down here, eh?
Bayo 2 isn't a moneyhat. Bayo 3 isn't a moneyhat.
These games would not exist if Nintendo wouldn't have taken over publishing. Full stop.

You clearly don't understand the term, please stop using it erroneously.
Lol! You're the one who doesn't understand it. Nintendo paid to get these games as exclusives, which is the definition of a money hat, full stop:

If not moneyhatted by Nintendo, that team would be making a multiplatform game, or another money hatted game for this or another 1st party as it was the case of Scalebound or Babylon's Fall.

The concept of a game/dev/publisher being moneyhatted isn't related at all to if the game would have existed or not without that money. It is only related to a platform holder paying a 3rd party publisher/dev who also makes games for other platforms to get an exclusive game from them.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Member
Dec 4, 2018
7,539
11,714
620
Lol! You're the one who doesn't understand it. Nintendo paid to get these games as exclusives, which is the definition of a money hat, full stop:

If not moneyhatted by Nintendo, that team would be making a multiplatform game, or another money hatted game for this or another 1st party as it was the case of Scalebound or Babylon's Fall.

The concept of a game/dev/publisher being moneyhatted isn't related at all to if the game would have existed or not without that money. It is only related to a platform holder paying a 3rd party publisher/dev who also makes games for other platforms to get an exclusive game from them.

an early concept for a sequel to Bayonetta was originally dismissed by Sega, meaning Bayonetta was basically dead at that point because Sega didn't see it as profitable enough.

if Nintendo wasn't desperate for Wii U exclusives we would have never seen Wonderful 101 or Bayonetta 2.

Nintendo reanimated the IP due to desperation, it's that easy... Sega threw the IP in the trash, Nintendo pulled it out... very easy concept.

and platinum can't make a Bayonetta game without Sega's OK either, because Sega owns the rights to the IP, as you can see by the fact that they are credited in Bayo 2 and 3 with the small print: "Licensed by SEGA"
 
Last edited: