Platinum soothes Bayonetta PS3 worries Related content
Bayonetta game info
£29.75
RRP: £49.99
In stock
Buy Online
Order before 5.30pm and receive your order the next working day!
Advertisement
Platinum soothes Bayonetta PS3 worries News
PlayStation 3 Xbox 360 News by Robert Purchese
PlatinumGames boss Tatsuya Minami has attempted to ease fears that the PS3 version of Bayonetta won't match up.
Writing on PlatinumGames' website, he put eventual differences between PS3 and Xbox 360 down to console "peculiarities", and said demos of both versions will do the talking at the Tokyo Game Show next week.
"With Bayonetta, we created the Xbox 360 version of the game first, and then handed off all the data and other assets to SEGA so they could begin the process of porting Bayonetta to the PS3, giving them advice regarding the porting process along the way and overseeing the progress to ensure that the PS3 version would be the best it could be," wrote Minami.
"The goal was to release the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions to gamers day and date, and even though there have been trials and tribulations along the way, we are incredibly pleased to be able to present two playable versions of the game on the Tokyo Game Show floor."
Concerns arose after PlatinumGames showed the PS3 version for the first time in Japan last month. Eye-witnesses - like 1UP - reported a clear difference between console demos, calling the PS3 game "very blurry" with an unstable framerate.
"As the developers of Bayonetta, we have overseen both versions, and I would like to make one thing clear. The Xbox 360 and PS3, as hardware platforms, both have their own distinct differences and peculiarities, and these characteristics will naturally give birth to differences in the final product," Minami explained.
"However, all involved endeavoured to exploit the specific traits of each console to create an enjoyable experience. We feel the best way to evaluate this is by actually playing the game for yourself and coming to your own conclusions.
"Bringing Bayonetta to users of both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 is something we feel to be very important, and I feel passionately that we have fulfilled our responsibility in that regard," he added.
Bayonetta launches on PS3 and 360 in late October across Japan, although the West won't see the action game until early next year. And look good Bayonetta does, as recent media and hands-on impressions will testify.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Bayonetta on PlayStation 3/Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Bayonetta
Latest News
-
Euro Bayonetta install patch now live [4]
-
PS3 Bayonetta gets HDD install option [15]
-
PlatinumGames reveal this week [16]
-
UK charts: MW2 beats Bayonetta [52]
-
Bayonetta demo due next Tuesday [34]
Latest Screenshots
24 September, 2009 [1]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
muscleblade
18/09/09 @ 13:02
-6
I have no worries. I have a 360.
This game looks fantastic from the trailers btw. |
|
Vertical Stand
18/09/09 @ 13:05
+10
@cian Why is the game going to be shit? Its from the former Clover crew who were some of Capcom's most talented game designers, who were responsible for Devil May Cry before the series was handed off to another team, that gives the game a fighting chance of turning out well, though I admit this response about the PS3 version isn't going to resolve peoples concerns, we'll soon see how it fares at TGS.
|
|
-3
"The number of third-party devs who treat the PS3 with the respect it deserves (equal respect, IMO) is a shame"
Or maybe Sony should treat the devs with some respect instead of saying they "made it hard" on purpose. If you build it (properly) they will come.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 14:07
|
|
muscleblade
18/09/09 @ 13:08
-5
@ps3owner
Oh - never heard that one before. You must be really intelligent.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 14:10
|
|
JohnnyWashnGo
18/09/09 @ 13:08
+12
Do developers actually care about the PS3?
Seems from what I hear that devs are keen to get their software working well on Xbox and then see the PS3 port as something else that has to be done but something that is not too important. Am I wrong? |
|
Vertical Stand
18/09/09 @ 13:14
+2
@JahB You don't find a young anime Sarah Palin with deadly foot guns attractive!?
If Sega are smart they'll do an ad of her mimicking one of Palin's legendary interviews. @cian But you said the game would be shit anyway, I took it you meant regardless of whether it turned out well on PS3 it wouldn't matter.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 14:15
|
|
cianchristopher
18/09/09 @ 13:20
-5
@Vertical Stand: Well, I take your point, and my statement wasn't meant like that! If it turns out to be a masterpiece on the Xbox 360 (cos let's face it, it won't be a masterpiece on the PS3 for sure) I'll adit that much! But i'm not expecting it to (and yes, I don't think all games need to be "masterpieces" to be worthy).....
But, whatever console you own, I think we can all agree that this sounds more like 2007 standards of porting, not 2009! And that is not just unacceptable! It's an outrage! These guys are Japanese too! Don't they even give a shit about the PS3? And they better not tell me it can't be done (other, better, devs than them have achieved cross-platform parity in their releases)! |
|
Vertical Stand
18/09/09 @ 13:26
+1
We'll just have to wait and see how it fares at TGS, but I admit like I did in my first post it doesn't inspire confidence to say its been given to another team, gamers, rightly or wrongly will associate that with ports like Half Life 2 Orange Box.
Even if it doesn't turn out great can still hope that Sega are not just going to sit on the game between the October release in Japan and the new year date here but will try to do something to improve performance. |
|
+3
So these "distinct" differences between the two consoles amount to the PS3 version looking blurry and running with an uneven framerate? The article doesn't actually say that this won't be the case for the final version, does it? I don't see why such differences should exist in the first place really, after all Bayonetta is a very similar game to Devil May Cry 4 from what I've seen of it and both versions of that game were remarkably similar.
|
|
GundamJehutyKai
18/09/09 @ 13:38
+3
It's all nice and well for them to blame console "quirks" for the problems, but correct me if I'm wrong, but the article doesn't actually say if they've resolved the issues seen with the last PS3 demo and have it up to a stage where it can al least be fairly compared to the 360 version.
Given that it's supposed to be released next month, I really hope so... |
|
MaliceMajorE15
18/09/09 @ 13:42
+4
it obviously makes me more worried that the developer handed it over to another team, no good can come of that. look at quake wars. despite what they say as usual-
the 360 version WILL be the optimal version, there will be NO benefit to getting the ps3 version aside from the controller, and possibly there will be a mandatory install which will as usual bring no benefits to the table. of course none of this means that it wont be a very good game on the ps3 and it will probably greatly outsell the 360 version in its native Japan. but if it irritates you greatly that you are not playing the game the with the same visual fidelity as the devs intended for it to have then you will have to get the 360 version as for me i know from dmc4 that for these style of games the 360 controller is not where its at and it could slightly impair my playing performance so i will get the ps3 version with its lamentable graphical weakness by comparison |
|
cianchristopher
18/09/09 @ 14:00
-3
@JahB: I'll tell you what I *do* know, I know that other teams have pulled it off, but these guys can't. They're second-rate! Not up to scratch! Not quite good enough! The B team! etc. etc. etc.
|
|
Watkins381
18/09/09 @ 14:08
+3
Cue PS3 owners getting pre-emptively angry and pessismistic about a game precisely none of them have played yet
|
|
Kenshin001
18/09/09 @ 14:24
+3
PS3 version will be shit then. One consolation I guess is that PS3 owners can get NGS2 or later God of War 3 for their fix instead. Ironic if it gets decimated by NGS2 in Japan.
|
|
Collymilad
18/09/09 @ 15:08
-1
It never fails to astound me how people apologise for the PS3.
It's difficult to develop for, this has come straight from the horses mouth (Sony) It's nothing to do with "lazy" or "shit" devs, Valve's stance is testament to that. Sony made the PS3 needlesly complex to develop for, accept it and get over it. @cianchristopher The devs you mentioned were probably heavily helped by Sony (above the normal level) - this shouldn't be a requirement to have equal performance across platforms.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 16:10
|
|
+3
If Sony had got its act together sooner this wouldn't happen so often. Cost and time didn't stop everyone and their mum from making ps2 lead platform last gen.
@Topkatt - give him an hour then we better call the police. Edit: someone stole my ' key :)
Edited 3 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 16:42
|
|
Machiavellian
18/09/09 @ 15:38
+1
@JahB: I'll tell you what I *do* know, I know that other teams have pulled it off, but these guys can't. They're second-rate! Not up to scratch! Not quite good enough! The B team! etc. etc. etc.
Or have you even considered that Clover is a small developer with limited resources where concentration on one Platform is all they can do at this point. If you do not have a huge team to devote to the PS3 or have 3 years to just get your engine up to snuff on the PS3 sometimes you have to make concessions. Have you considered that they may have their own custom engine and did not have the time or resources to spend developing for the PS3 since we all know that it does take a lot of time and resources to get a proper running PS3 engine working. Have you forgotten the trouble other developers have had with the PS3 in getting it up to speed. Even for big time developers, they have needed to devote entire teams to get the PS3 code in proper shape. For smaller developers you have do what you can and sometimes its best to have someone else handle the port if they have experience PS3 coders. Last but not least, it always seem easy to blame the Developers but maybe you should think about putting some if not the majority of that blame on Sony. Piss poor support, crappy if not noexistant tools and library's to use and just plain disrespect for developers when giving them the tools they need to harness the power from their hardware which would reduce development time and give smaller developers a chance to put out a PS3 game without having to go through a bunch of crap. |
|
Chazmeister
18/09/09 @ 15:39
+2
What always gets me about the whole PS3 being difficult to develop for debacle, is that Sony had the same issues with the PSone and 2. You would have thought that Sony would have learnt from past experiences by the time of their third console, and produced a more dev friendly machine. In that sense MS have had the right idea from the get go, ie just create a PC in a box and make it simple as possible, and of course they have the benifit of all their software experience.
It always reads to me like Sony's primary concerns were to make a technically powerfull console and blu-ray machine first and foremost, with scant consideration given to the interpolation of it's software. You only have to look at Sony's problematic piece meal intergration of the PSN to see evidence of that. I suppose Sony's problems stem from it's legacy of strictly being an electronics manufacturer, without the benifit of any software development experience to back it up. Maybe they'll get things right for PS4, and hopefully they'll do the right thing and farm out software development to a dedicated third party that knows what it's doing. |
|
Machiavellian
18/09/09 @ 15:56
+4
I do not remember the PS1 being all that difficult but the PS2 definitely. The difference would be that that the PS2 was first to market by a whole year or better. It also had the much better install base which continued to grow over the competition each year so it was the lead system and any ports after the PS2 game were afterthoughs.
Today, the PS3 install base is smaller than the competition. The 360 came out a year ahead, is the lead system for the majority 3rd party developers. Its ease of use and support from MS is top notch. So what you can take from this is that if you are not the first console out of the gate and you have a very complex development for the hardware, you best make it easy for developers to code for your platform. Coming out a year later than your competition with the most complex hardware to get the same performance as your competitor is not a smart move. Piss poor support and resources is also not the best way to make developers happy. |
|
+5
Thats just crazy. The best results come when the game is made at the same time for both consoles (cod, burnout etc), these guys made the ps3 version COMPLETELY AFTER the 360 version. Thats just fked up. The harder to code for version... and they make it last. It would be easier to port an average game to the 360 wouldnt it?
|
|
EvilBob_leeds
18/09/09 @ 17:54
+1
"Valve's stance is testament to that"
I agree that the PS3 is difficult to code for, and that Sony's development tools have been put to shame by MSs. But, in fairness, Valves stance is in no small part testament to a fat tosser called Gabe Newell's long standing ties with MS; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabe_Newell Surprising that an ex-Microsoft employee should be by far the most vocal decryer of the development process on the PS3 in the game development community. No, hold on, not surprising. Really fucking predictable.
Edited 5 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 19:04
|
|
Lord_Gremlin
18/09/09 @ 19:39
+4
Well, I don't buy PS3 game if it's not the superior version. So they'll most likely won't get my money. Jesus, an inferior version on PS3 in 2009, when others make games exactly same (Batman) on both consoles or even better on PS3 (Prototype, Burnout)? Shame on them. Lazybones.
|
|
-1
Third parties wont be wasting their resources, literally "trying" to create the same title on te PS3 and "trying" to make it perform as good.Since its been admitted from developers that they dont get help as much from Sony as they do from MS ( was in an article again on EG yesterday or the day before ) specially whne it comes to even a timed exclusive and thn the simple fact of how much easier and cheaperr it is itsellf to develop for the 360, would you pay extra staff or spend more resources and money without income from your final product trying to work extra an the PS3?
Me as a consumer and gamer I can see your point 100% but you can NOT blame the developers cauethey simply dont force you to buy their product. If you dont like the fact they look worst and they always will ( crossplatform ) in this gen since its been going that way for about 3-4 years, buy the damn titles for the 360 or dont pay for them. Or simply go buy them pretending you bought a console that was worth its money if you bought it before the slim/pricedrop, cause not only wasnt worth but also had less quality tittles and had and always will have worstcrossplatform. Wanna be mad at the developers? For all they care you dont buy their games till youget bored of not playing and buy it on the console you prefer. One way or the other you will end up paying for it if you like it. To me this game still looks weird. Its the kind of game that takes a lot to get me interested. If its fun and needs some skill and not too gneric I miht as well buy it. |
|
SeesThroughAll
18/09/09 @ 20:25
+1
This was a bad call on SEGA's part, as surely with more development time, the PS3 version could have come closer to the 360 one. I really don't think it would be smart to postpone the release further, but maybe if the engine development had been outsourced simultaneously alongside the development of the 360 version, there might have been a chance that the PS3 couterpart would benefit from better quality.
Now, one of the versions is probably going to sell poorly as a result. Then again, maybe not.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 21:35
|
|
Machiavellian
18/09/09 @ 21:06
+2
Personally I still blame Sony more than I can blame any developer. It's Sony Attitude towards developers is what causes problems like this instead of developers commitment to their product. How many years does it take for Sony to understand the developers are their friend and they should give them all the support then can to produce the best product on their system. When you really think about it, Sony was shone up last Gen with the PS2 but the fact that everyone pretty much had to put out a PS2 product if they wanted any decent money was one of the keys to the PS2 success.
This Gen you see that Sony just put together hardware and throw it out their for the developers to figure out how to code for it. When big time engine developers like Epic says "WTF" they send in a team of IBM engineers to help them get their code up to snuff and thus we have a game like Batman which have few faults between the PS3 and 360. The question to ask is how many developers get this type of support. If you are a small developer and you started your project 2 years ago, how much support did Sony provide. The situation is gamers do not know anything besides the little piece of information they read from sites like EG but they are quick to judge and even when they are found wrong they look for something else so they can feel justified in supporting their favorite platform. Personally I wish people would stop trying to blame the developers all the time and understand there are a lot of things that go into the development of a game and it's not always the most obvious choice that is at fault when something goes wrong. |
|
captainrentboy
18/09/09 @ 21:46
0
I played this for half an hour or so earlier this week and it was pretty bloody awesome. It basically plays like DMC, but there's a lot more explosions, destruction, naked chicks and basic shit goin' down than any of the DMC games. The graphics were freakin' lovely, the part I played had a gigantic porcelain faced boss smashing up a huge bridge, that I was previously fighting standard enemies on, and then swinging said bridge around like it was a twig, all whilst I was tring to kick it's ass.
The next level had you fighting on the walls and ceiling of a huge Chapel, all in all it was quite mental. :) |
|
0
@evilBob:
So . . . you agree with Gabe Newell's criticisms ("I agree that the PS3 is difficult to code for, and that Sony's development tools have been put to shame by MSs"). You agree that the PS3 has, of the 3 consoles, the smallest installed base (meaning statistically there's a greater chance of fewer sales, and therefore smaller profits). You acknowledge that he his factually accurate . . . then you imply that as an ex-Microsoft employee it is "predictable" that he would make those statements, implying that he is biased toward MS and therefore untrustworthy and should be discredited. You know what else is fucking predictable? An ex-Microsoft employee saying "2 plus 2 equals 4". Also, "the sun is hot" and "water is wet". Fucking predictable biased MS people, making accurate statements you agree with. Do you realize how stupid that sounds? |
|
SeesThroughAll
18/09/09 @ 22:00
+2
Gabe Newell's criticisms ("I agree that the PS3 is difficult to code for, and that Sony's development tools have been put to shame by MSs")
That was not Gabe Newell's criticism. He dismissed the hardware design altogether as useless, and used a far more arrogant tone. If anything, all he accomplished was to feed the image of the "lazy developer". |
|
EvilBob_leeds
18/09/09 @ 22:19
+4
^^ What he said.
To quote the wikipedia article on the subject Newell was once quoted as claiming that developing processes for the console in general was "a waste of everybody's time" and "a disaster on many levels ... I'd say, even at this late date, they should just cancel it and do a do over. Just say, 'This was a horrible disaster and we're sorry and we're going to stop selling this and stop trying to convince people to develop for it'." A bit overboard, no? Other developers could have come out in support of what he was saying. None did. Do I agree that the PS3 is difficult to code for? Yup. Do I agree with this whingy diatribe? Nooooooo! So ultimately you didn't bother to have a look into what he said before forming an opinion on it. Pretty fucking predictable :-P
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 18/09/09 @ 23:55
|
|
+3
Yeah, his loyalty chip is obviously working perfectly...!
/Rolls eyes Also, his 'arrogant' tone changes from interview to interview, article to article. Almost as if he was just getting sick and tired of answering the same question - "Why don't you support the PS3?" - over and over again. He's obviously a massive MS fanboy seeing how Half Life saw console release on Dreamcast (it was finished, I've played it) and PS2, not Xbox. Good god, people can't hold personal opinions on their own job without being fanboys of some description according to some people. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
