A while ago, Bayonetta's PS3 port was shown. It did not look good, and fanboys all around the Internet(but thankfully, not many Giantbombers) didn't hesitate to call Team Little Angels "lazy", "horrible" and "incompetent". As it turns out, Platinum Games aren't porting the game -- SEGA are.
The issues will hopefully be ironed out before the game's release(if not for the Japanese one, then perhaps for the Western one), but if they aren't, Platinum Games aren't the ones you should hate. SEGA are(Well, you really shouldn't hate anyone. Love and peace dude, love and peace!).
Bayonetta
Game » consists of 27 releases. Released Oct 29, 2009
- Xbox 360
- PlayStation 3
- PlayStation Network (PS3)
- Wii U
- + 4 more
- PC
- Nintendo Switch
- PlayStation 4
- Xbox One
Bayonetta is a "non-stop action game" from PlatinumGames. The titular character is a witch who can use hair-based magic, as well as firearms attached to her feet, to battle fallen angels and other foes.
Platinum Games Not Responsible For Bayonetta's PS3 port.
If the PS3 version is no good, I will be seriously annoyed. I really don't care which company is technically responsible for porting it. Its just lazy and unacceptable at this stage in this generation's console lifespan if big companies can't handle multiple versions. Its not like there aren't a ton of older multiplatform games that look fantastic on both systems.
It's odd for a Japanese developer to focus on the 360, specially when you consider what kind of game Bayonetta is (mad Japanese). Are they putting all their eggs in the Western market's baskets? I hope not, because I don't think Bayonetta is gonna sell well in the West.
" @AgentJ: Because they'd rather spend the time and effort required for porting(especially when it comes to the PS3, which is the hardest console to port to) on the actual game. If I was a developer and had the option to either spend a couple of months porting, or spend those months working on and polishing gameplay, art, music etc. I know what I'd choose. And it's not the porting. "Except the people who do the gameplay, art, music, etc. are not involved in porting anyway. Porting is something the coders do. So you need more coders and QA, but that higher-level stuff is not affected. Porting to the PS3 is not the smart way to develop anyway. It's much easier to start on PS3 and port to Xbox 360 according to several developers I've heard from.
and the last time i checked shitty sales = bad for buisness
Not to mention doing a half assed port for the PS3 would sour business relations with sony
" @Icemael said:While it isn't done by the same people, it still costs money. Money that can be spent on gameplay, art, music etc." @AgentJ: Because they'd rather spend the time and effort required for porting(especially when it comes to the PS3, which is the hardest console to port to) on the actual game. If I was a developer and had the option to either spend a couple of months porting, or spend those months working on and polishing gameplay, art, music etc. I know what I'd choose. And it's not the porting. "Except the people who do the gameplay, art, music, etc. are not involved in porting anyway. Porting is something the coders do. So you need more coders and QA, but that higher-level stuff is not affected. Porting to the PS3 is not the smart way to develop anyway. It's much easier to start on PS3 and port to Xbox 360 according to several developers I've heard from. "
PG seem to be making every attempt to distance themselves for the PS3 port..,
From the PS3 Demo:
They have also asked Famitsu to highlight the fact in all title boxes for the game:
On another note, those above videos are crap when uploaded.
They can both be downloaded here for your own assessment:
http://esegk.com/bayon/ps3mini.avi
http://esegk.com/bayon/360mini.avi
....
" They look pretty much the same. So, that's the damn problem. "The "problem" was blogs like Kotaku learning that the PS3 version supposedly looked so much worse than the 360 version based on hearsay and then ran with it, fueling the fire. Of course, the disparity is hardly noticeable in reality and should only matter if you're just that anal about your graphics.
" @Gump said:
The "problem" was blogs like Kotaku learning that the PS3 version supposedly looked so much worse than the 360 version based on hearsay and then ran with it, fueling the fire. Of course, the disparity is hardly noticeable in reality and should only matter if you're just that anal about your graphics. "" They look pretty much the same. So, that's the damn problem. "
They only went with what they saw on the demo's in Japan, and that did show the PS3 version to be notably weaker. Apparently, the PS3's Falling Clock Tower level looked really bad, and not just in comparison to the 360 version, it was just bad. Many believe It's why it was removed from the PS3 demo, why else would SEGA remove it?
The fact is the 360 is better overall, it has a rock solid framerate and a colour palette as intended. The PS3 version on the other hand doesn't have the rock solid framerate, Japanese reviews have said it cuts up pretty bad in places. It also sees a change in the colours from the original product on 360, which was developed by PG.
If you have both consoles, it would be better to opt for the 360 version.
edit:
PS: I removed those videos because they were bad examples for comparison.
...
" I had no problem with the PS3 demo so I don't understand what all the talk about frame rate drops came from. Both run equally smooth. "
Have you played both demo's/both games?
Gamers will be inclined to trust in what reviewers have said so far in Japan. There's a reason why the PS3 version didn't get the full marks in Famitsu - 38/40, while the American console's version got 40/40. The reviewers point out how “unfortunate” it is that the PS3 version enjoys noticeably less gorgeous visuals than the Xbox 360 version.
So because Paltinum didnt want to take the effort and money to get it the same, we shouldnt blame them? than who should we blame? SONY? SEGA? All Platinum did was throw sega under the bus and use them as a scapegoat. I realize that they dont have alot of money, but they should still try to get them the same so there not doing a disservice to one of their fanbases.
" @AgentJ: Because they'd rather spend the time and effort required for porting(especially when it comes to the PS3, which is the hardest console to port to) on the actual game. If I was a developer and had the option to either spend a couple of months porting, or spend those months working on and polishing gameplay, art, music etc. I know what I'd choose. And it's not the porting. "Well maybe they should be building for PS3 and porting that to 360. I know it doesn't make sense from a development standpoint, just wishful thinking.
If they wanted it to be cheaper, they shoudl have devloped on PS3 first. Much easier compared to doing it on 360 first, than going to PS3. I really have no sympathy for them.
well than, thats horse shit. Are all multiplatform releases like this, or is this a rare case? I was under the impression they made great strides since 2007.
Platinum developed the game. SEGA ported it. The game is good. The port is not." So because Paltinum didnt want to take the effort and money to get it the same, we shouldnt blame them? than who should we blame? SONY? SEGA? All Platinum did was throw sega under the bus and use them as a scapegoat. I realize that they dont have alot of money, but they should still try to get them the same so there not doing a disservice to one of their fanbases. "
Gee, I wonder who I should blame.
We can't know whether or not Platinum "didn't want to take the effort". Perhaps they simply didn't have any programmers who had experience with the PS3, and SEGA offered to take care of the port? If that's the case, you can hardly blame them for letting SEGA do the job. It would only have ended up worse if they had attempted to do it themselves.
@Raven_Sword said:
Money isn't everything -- there are many other factors that could've made them choose the 360 as lead platform. Who knows, maybe the game was planned as a 360 exclusive at first? Maybe they just didn't have any experience with the PS3 -- if that was the case, it would hardly have made sense to choose PS3 as lead platform." If they wanted it to be cheaper, they shoudl have devloped on PS3 first. Much easier compared to doing it on 360 first, than going to PS3. I really have no sympathy for them. "
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment