SEGA to sort out Bayonetta PS3 load times

By Robert Purchese Published 18 November, 2009

Fans report waits of around 25 seconds.

SEGA has admitted Bayonetta PS3 load times are "overwhelming" but says a patch is "under consideration" to iron the problems out.

"I can speak on [the developer's] behalf in saying that a patch to correct this issue is under consideration through development to address the matter of the overwhelming load times with Bayonetta," wrote a SEGA rep on the PlatinumGames forum (via 1UP).

"Something I cannot address directly is when this will occur. However, I will be tracking this directly on all sides (the Japanese, North American, and European versions) to ensure that we know exactly the status of each one. Provided that I am given full disclosure on this, I will be sure to keep you posted on what to expect."

SEGA and not PlatinumGames built the PS3 version of the game, and there has been a clear difference in pre-release code between PS3 and 360 builds.

There are reports on the forum of 25-second load-times for stages, 10 second waits for cut-scenes and five-second delays for menus.

Both PS3 and Xbox 360 versions are due out here on 8th January 2010.

We have, however, imported the Japanese (released late October) to review. Look out for our thoughts on the game today.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (41) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • GamerG #1 2 years ago

    Does anyone else remember when PS3 fanboys made such a big deal of the 1 second extra load times on the 360 version of Devil May Cry 4??

    Somehow I doubt it will be such a deal breaker this time.....

  • wizlon #2 2 years ago

    I'm still not excited about this in the slightest, is this normal?

  • menage #3 2 years ago

    @wizlon

    Played the demo?

    I am, it's great.

  • green_nifta #4 2 years ago


    25 seconds? Luxury!!

    I used to have to get up at crack of dawn t'start t'tape of Street Fighter II on mah Spectrum and game might be loaded by time I got back from down pit! And that were just for menu! Then we had to gouge our own eyes out during t'multi-load for each fighter. And then if we lost fight we'd haff t'start all over again!

    And we thought we were lucky!

  • OnlyMe #5 2 years ago

    Haha, I remember when it sometimes took 25 MINUTES to load a game. Today, 25 seconds is much more than I could stomach.

    EDIT: LOL at all us oldies always commenting on how much worse things were back then. :p
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 10:26

  • TopKatt #6 2 years ago

    Kids today don't know they're born, etc, etc.

    When I were a lad, a patch was something that your mum sewed onto your jeans.
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 10:29

  • cianchristopher #7 2 years ago

    The PS3 version of this game just keeps getting better and better!

  • TopKatt #8 2 years ago

    Actually, I feel sorry for you Xbox owners playing this game with your minimal loading times. I can picture you now desperately gulping down your beer while I take my time supping on my pint. :)

  • green_nifta #9 2 years ago

    Forget the longest SINGLE loading time! At least games pretty much always load first time these days. I remember spending a whole afternoon trying to get an awkward copy of Amaurote to load at varying volume/tone combinations.... sitting there praying, hoping to avoid the unspeakable terror of "R Tape loading error, 0:1"

  • OnlyMe #10 2 years ago

    BuckoA51 said: "Which game was that exactly? even Trashman with it's blue screen slow loader never took that long :) "

    There were (original) C65 games on tape that took really long. Can't think of any examples, but some games came on tapes with 30 minutes on each side, that took the whole side to load a game. The game was was also on both sides, so you didn't have to rewind the next time you wanted to load the game, just turn the tape.

  • des #11 2 years ago

    Just make a sandwich while you wait.

  • rotmm #12 2 years ago

    @TopKatt "Actually, I feel sorry for you Xbox owners playing this game with your minimal loading times. I can picture you now desperately gulping down your beer while I take my time supping on my pint. :)"

    Well, that's why Microsoft now include http://im g405.imageshack.us/img405/205/3... with all 360's in the box.

  • schnide #13 2 years ago

    "SEGA and not PlatinumGames built the PS3 version of the game."

    Further proof that everything SEGA touches turns to shit.

  • madgerald Verified Studio Head of PR & Marketing, Colossal Games LTD #14 2 years ago

    I recall The Hobbit on the C64 taking something like 15minutes to load - an arse if it crashed near the end of loading. Thank the lord for the Azimuth cassette alignment kit!

  • TopKatt #15 2 years ago

    @Rotmm

    Dammit! I hope Sony include one in the next update.

  • Retroid #16 2 years ago

    I would've thought load times were one of the lower priorities for fixing in this port.

    Can't be worse than the load times on the 360 version of Splinter Cell: Double Agent; I remember it taking about a minute to reach the "Save Game" screen...

  • Retroid #17 2 years ago

    I became sooooo familiar with the Ocean Loader music I noticed every time they altered it :)

  • NorUraeus #18 2 years ago

    Sega should call Naughty Dog and ask them about this "new" invention called hard drive caching. No install needed, no load times.

    "Sega: Naugthy Dog, hello this is Sega calling. We heard you used this technique called caching to solve the issue of slow load times. ND: Yes, since every PS3 comes with a harddrive you can actually use that to temporarily store game data, thus you can continuously push data from the blu-ray onto the harddrive, to ensure the user a good experience. Sega: Oh, every PS3 got a hard drive, why didn't anyone tell us this. And using the hard drive for caching, who came up with that incredible idea? ND: Actually everyone knows about the HD and caching has been around for a very long time, this is probably just a case of incompetence on your part."
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 11:06

  • schnide #19 2 years ago

    Oh and incidentally, in case anyone in any realm of power is reading this, load times on the PS3 are one of several reasons why I'm still not buying one.

  • Sunyavadin #20 2 years ago

    I know Blu-ray has slower access speeds but this is really just ridiculous. Is this even occuring on HD installs?

  • HermitArcader #21 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • mkreku #22 2 years ago

    I know a game which took at least 25 minutes to load! The Movie Monster Game on my Commodore 64! First it took like five minutes to load the intro (which was completely pointless), then you had a ten minute wait for the monster choice menu to pop up. After you've picked your monster of choice (Mothra sucked), it continued loading.. and loading.. until you had to turn the tape over and continue loading.

    Once in the game, you'd probably survive for like a minute because the game was so damn difficult and then you'd have to start the procedure over again :p

  • andromeda #23 2 years ago

    i remember the mesmeric load sequence fcr Technician Ted on the speccy-a JSW knock off but a very accomplished and surreal one. If i remember correctly the loading took the form of about 10(?) Teds of varying speeds racing in lengths of the screen. Can never remember how many lengths the winner did or if the slowest even made it across the screen once.
    Now that was entertainment !

    [link url=http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=TQIBWuW_YEU
    ]http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=TQIBWuW_YEU
    [/link]
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 11:32

  • Cappy #24 2 years ago

    They can't delay the PS3 release now.

    If they are talking about patches it confirms that discs have already been manufactured. After all the game was ready to go for Worldwide release and got delayed for Europe and America at the last minute, Bayonetta is sitting in warehouses right now waiting for Sega's new launch window.

    I know people have been hoping otherwise but it's going to be exactly the same as the Japanese version.

  • DeAd_H0miE #25 2 years ago

    Playing through the Japanese version at the minute on ps3 , although the load times are pretty long , it only bothers me when trying to navigate the menus to equip an item or concuct, it will get marked down for it in reviews as it takes to long and breaks the gameplay up which is pretty frantic . awesome game though

  • Retroid #26 2 years ago

    @mkreku: Real Men bought 1541 (or clone) floppy drives for their multi-load C64 games ^___^

  • Bigglesworth #27 2 years ago

    Dear Mr Sega,

    Will this patch also fix the shonky code that cripples all other aspects of the PS3 version?

    Yours,
    Timmy Bigglesworth,
    age 6.

  • Darren #28 2 years ago

    The PS3 demo of Bayonetta was a mess technically with tearing aplenty, a blurry look and a framerate that was all over the place... it doesn't surprise that it needs a patch but perhaps they should fix those issues at the same time as the loading times? The 360 demo was much more competent IMO and actually felt finished!

    As for the gameplay, well it didn't do anything for me either, it felt like Devil May Cry played with a weirdly proportioned female character so I have no plans to buy the game anyway. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it as such, it plays fine (the 360 version anyway), it just seems like a game I've already played half a dozen times already.

  • Cappy #29 2 years ago

    A patch won't fix all the problems with the PS3 version.

    The problems are due to Platinum and Sega leaving the PS3 version till after the 360 version was done. With a small porting team and very little time that was the result.

    To fix Bayonetta they would need to write code tailored for the PS3 rather than just porting what they did for the 360. Sega don't really care, it's sold more than the 360 version so far, even if the PS3 version had flopped they still would have made a fortune since they spent very little on the PS3 version.

  • mkreku #30 2 years ago

    @Retroid: 1541? Weak! I actually had a Commodore 128 with the MUCH SUPERIOR 1571 myself :p

    But I bought cassette tapes too, for some unexplainable reason.

  • GamerG #31 2 years ago

    what I dont understand is that if the PS3 is more powerfull how come it struglles so much with 360 graphics etc but when you go the other way the 360 handles PS3 ports with ease??

    Surely this means the 360 is in the real world the more poweful beast?
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/09 @ 13:58

  • freakzilla #32 2 years ago

    I guess I'm kinda lucky that I'm not interested in bayonetta. That woman is just creepy.

  • Quak #33 2 years ago

    "Sega" and "loading times" brings Sonic to mind.

  • GrumpyLlama #34 2 years ago

    @GamerG

    I think the point is that they both do things differently. So if the game developed for the 360 then ported to the PS3 then it will often not be as good. For example if Uncharted was ported to the 360 it probably wouldn't look as good and may have longer loading times etc, because not all 360s have a HDD. I don't think anyone really knows which is more powerful.

  • dominalien #35 2 years ago

    NorUraeus you do realize that uncharted 2 does load but during the cutscenes... right ?

    I'm not so sure about that. I remember starting the game again the other day, getting through the first snow mission, skipping the getting-to-istanbul cutscene after maybe 3 seconds and getting immediately dumped into the sewer level. Impressive stuff.

  • Cappy #36 2 years ago

    The 'difficulty' of coding for the PS3 is an often deployed smokescreen.

    Easier to say that than, it's worse because we didn't spend much time and money on it. With the bulk of development resources going into the 360 versions what do you expect?

    Bayonetta on the PS3 was done in just a few months by less than 10 people, compare that to the massive staff that spent years on the 360 version.
    Edited by 2 at 18/11/09 @ 15:57

  • Badassbab #37 2 years ago

    Kind of sucks for PS3, I mean if you don't buy it out of protest then it will serve Sega right but then again it might backfire

  • vegard #38 2 years ago

    so...were they hoping PS3 owners wouldn't notice?

  • drumbaby #39 2 years ago

    Can they patch my total refusal to buy a sloppy port?

  • Collymilad #40 2 years ago

    "The 'difficulty' of coding for the PS3 is an often deployed smokescreen.

    Easier to say that than, it's worse because we didn't spend much time and money on it. With the bulk of development resources going into the 360 versions what do you expect?

    Bayonetta on the PS3 was done in just a few months by less than 10 people, compare that to the massive staff that spent years on the 360 version."

    Sony said it was harder to develop for...so...yeah.

  • Lazlo_w #41 2 years ago

    Best course of action will be to not buy the ps3 version of Bayonetta, and not to reward SEGA/P* for sub-par work.
    Played the western demo and the screen tearing was hideous.