Platinum Games Not Responsible For Bayonetta's PS3 port.

#1 Posted by Icemael (6305 posts) -

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!).

#2 Posted by AgentJ (8778 posts) -

Wonder why companies like Valve and Platinum let their parent companies do the porting for them.

#3 Posted by Icemael (6305 posts) -
@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. 
#4 Posted by Linkyshinks (9881 posts) -

Sega need to get their arse in gear.

#5 Posted by Tortoise (173 posts) -

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.

#6 Posted by c1337us (5751 posts) -

Oh well if the PS3 port turns out arse I'll just get the other version.

#7 Posted by buzz_killington (3532 posts) -

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.

#8 Posted by KamasamaK (2407 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" @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.
#9 Posted by xyzygy (9867 posts) -

Wow, I didn't even know this was happening. I'm getting the 360 version anyway, but that really sucks for PS3 owners... hopefully it will turn out good!

#10 Posted by Delta_Ass (3246 posts) -

I hear the PS3 is hard to program for.

#11 Posted by Zabant (1231 posts) -

OH ps3 and your unconventional architecture making it hard to do a port job on.
 
You would think they would start on the ps3 and then port to the much simpler 360.
 
Not the other way around

#12 Posted by AgentJ (8778 posts) -
@Zabant: Wait, so they should be taking longer and using more resources to make the same game? I thought the whole idea behind business was to make money, and if they can make the same game using fewer resources, It sounds like a pretty good idea. 
#13 Edited by Zabant (1231 posts) -
@AgentJ: no, im saying they should do it the way i suggested so the PS3 version does not look like absolute shit. Which would makes sales fall for that platorm dramatically.
 
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
#14 Posted by Icemael (6305 posts) -
@Kamasama said:
" @Icemael said:
" @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. "
While it isn't done by the same people, it still costs money. Money that can be spent on gameplay, art, music etc.
#15 Posted by KamasamaK (2407 posts) -
@Icemael: That money is still being spent on the port. The only difference is who is directly employing those developers. You're not going to get more of that stuff just because porting is not done in-house. The budget is set by the publisher for the most part, which in this case is Sega.
#16 Posted by Bucketdeth (8002 posts) -
@Delta_Ass said:
" I hear the PS3 is hard to program for. "
Thats so 2008.
#17 Edited by Linkyshinks (9881 posts) -

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 
 
 
....
#18 Posted by lightsoda (540 posts) -

I don't see much of a difference, except that someone didn't crank up the material shaders on the ps3 version.

#19 Posted by Gump (564 posts) -

They look pretty much the same. So, that's the damn problem.

#20 Posted by Kazona (3058 posts) -
@AgentJ said:
"Wonder why companies like Valve and Platinum let their parent companies do the porting for them. "
Since when does Valve have a parent company?
#21 Posted by Hailinel (23663 posts) -
@Gump said:
" 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.
#22 Edited by Linkyshinks (9881 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

" @Gump said:

" 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. "
 
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. 
 
 
...
#23 Posted by gike987 (1746 posts) -

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.

#24 Posted by Linkyshinks (9881 posts) -
@gike987 said:
" 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. 
#25 Posted by gike987 (1746 posts) -
@Linkyshinks: I have not played the xbox 360 version but from videos I haven't noticed any smoother frame rate on that version. But i have noticed that the graphics looks a lot better on the 360.
#26 Posted by AjayRaz (12416 posts) -

i have a bad feeling about this 

#27 Edited by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -

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.
#28 Posted by Griddler (3344 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" @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.
#29 Edited by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -

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.
#30 Posted by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -

BTW, what are the chances the American PS3 version will be drastically different?
#31 Posted by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -
@eckster:

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.
#32 Edited by Icemael (6305 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:

" 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. "

Platinum developed the game. SEGA ported it. The game is good. The port is not. 
 
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: 

" 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. "

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.
#33 Posted by LiquidPrince (15833 posts) -
@Raven_Sword said:
" @eckster: 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. "
It is a very rare case these days.

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.