Platinum wants to self publish Bayonetta TSHBR

[Remij 4,680]

2 hours ago, jehurey said:

So that is interesting.

 

Nintendo officially owns half of the Bayo IP?

 

I thought Sega still had total ownership and Nintendo merely had an exclusive licensing agreement for Bayo 2 and Bayo 3 since they paid for the development of the game.

 

But this means that Nintendo is firmly entrenched even more than I thought. That's great.

That would mean that Nintendo is allowing Bayonetta 1 Remaster to launch on PS4 and XO...  

 

That would mean that Bayo 2 will happen too  

[jehurey 3,231]

4 hours ago, Remij_ said:

That would mean that Nintendo is allowing Bayonetta 1 Remaster to launch on PS4 and XO...  

 

That would mean that Bayo 2 will happen too  

Nah, that's a hilarious stretch, because Sega pre-existing agreement with Bayo 1 supersedes any agreement they would've made with Bayo 2. And would only apply to Bayo 1.

 

Keep hoping, tho. I'm not gonna stop the source of laughter.

Edited February 8, 2020 by jehurey

[Remij 4,680]

41 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Nah, that's a hilarious stretch, because Sega pre-existing agreement with Bayo 1 supersedes any agreement they would've made with Bayo 2. And would only apply to Bayo 1.

 

Keep hoping, tho. I'm not gonna stop the source of laughter.

Yea, you're right.  Nintendo probably only has 1/2 rights to Bayo 2 and 3... and after that Sega can do what they want... because they are the sole owner of the IP.

[jehurey 3,231]

5 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

Yea, you're right.  Nintendo probably only has 1/2 rights to Bayo 2 and 3... and after that Sega can do what they want... because they are the sole owner of the IP.

Well, they probably can.

 

There's probably always been a provision that if Sega wants to pay 100% of development of a next Bayo sequel, they can initiate that and it probably serves as a end to the agreement (although Nintendo will always hold the titles that they paid for).

 

Nintendo probably has a "first right of refusal" clause in that they MUST create a Bayo sequel, typically within X amount of years of the previous Bayo sequel, and if they do pay 100% of development (and marketing), they have a clause in which to keep a hold of future Bayo sequels.

 

This is very common with movie companies and comic book properties. Warner Bros had to make a Superman movie by a certain year, or else they'd lose the rights and they revert back to DC Comics. Same thing applies with Sony and Spiderman and the Fantastic Four.

Edited February 8, 2020 by jehurey

[lynux3 2,092]

More Nintendo IP on PlayStation? 

[Remij 4,680]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

Well, they probably can.

 

There's probably always been a provision that if Sega wants to pay 100% of development of a next Bayo sequel, they can initiate that and it probably serves as a end to the agreement.

 

Nintendo probably has a "first right of refusal" clause in that they MUST create a Bayo sequel, typically within X amount of years of the previous Bayo sequel, and if they do pay 100% of development (and marketing), they have a clause in which to keep a hold of future Bayo sequels.

 

This is very common with movie companies and comic book properties. Warner Bros had to make a Superman movie by a certain year, or else they'd lose the rights and they revert back to DC Comics. Same thing applies with Sony and Spiderman and the Fantastic Four.

Sounds right.

 

I think Nintendo and Platinum are going to work something out.  It might sound ridiculous, but I have a feeling that Platinum developed Astral Chain as a way of potentially making this happen.  I feel like Nintendo knows how important Bayonetta is to Platinum Games, and in return of giving them some control over ports of the older Bayo games, they're working together to build up another Nintendo/PG only franchise.  Bayo 3 will be the new hotness anyway, and a port of that could come some time later as well. 

 

As for future games, Nintendo and Sega could stand a lot to gain by releasing future Bayo games across all platforms.

 

This whole business of even bringing this stuff up feels to me like they either have something planned, or is a way of putting pressure on Nintendo.  Why just throw statements out there like that if you're not working towards that goal?

[jehurey 3,231]

Think of it this way:

 

You ever see MGS Twin Snakes show up anywhere?  That's a Konami franchise.

 

You ever see Rogue Squadron and Rogue Leader show up anywhere? Those are two games that are partially controlled by LucasArts.

 

Notice how neither of them have ever been able to do anything with those games outside of Nintendo's systems?

 

You guys forget, that since the NES and SNES era, Nintendo has a history of locking shit down.

[Remij 4,680]

5 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Think of it this way:

 

You ever see MGS Twin Snakes show up anywhere?  That's a Konami franchise.

 

You ever see Rogue Squadron and Rogue Leader show up anywhere? Those are two games that are partially controlled by LucasArts.

 

Notice how neither of them have ever been able to do anything with those games outside of Nintendo's systems?

 

You guys forget, that since the NES and SNES era, Nintendo has a history of locking shit down.

We just got a game announcement that proves otherwise though...

 

Rogue Squadron is on PC.  Twinsnakes was a garbage game and a favor from Kojima.

 

Times are changing.

Edited February 8, 2020 by Remij_

[jehurey 3,231]

2 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

We just got a game announcement that proves otherwise though...

 

Rogue Squadron is on PC.  Twinsnakes was a garbage game and a favor from Kojima.

 

Times are changing.

No, I meant the two Gamecube Star Wars games.

 

Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader and Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike.

 

Absolutely locked down on the Gamecube.

 

And sorry, Konami would release Twin Snakes multiple times on any platform they could, if given the chance.  Has nothing to do with the game quality.

 

Konami doesn't, because they can't.

 

You can try making the exception LOOK LIKE the rule............it simply isn't.

[Remij 4,680]

Just now, jehurey said:

No, I meant the two Gamecube Star Wars games.

 

Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader and Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike.

 

Absolutely locked down on the Gamecube.

 

And sorry, Konami would release Twin Snakes multiple times on any platform they could, if given the chance.  Has nothing to do with the game quality.

 

Konami doesn't, because they can't.

 

You can try making the exception LOOK LIKE the rule............it simply isn't.

Konami absolutely wouldn't release Twin Snakes.  That game is complete garbage.  Konami doesn't rerelease games like that often regardless.  They're only now beginning to do anything.  It's going to be forever exclusive to Nintendo... because it was a favor specifically for Nintendo.  Konami hasn't done shit with MG since Kojima left.  What makes you think they'd be rushing out to put TS on anything? lmao... it's a known terrible version of MGS.. even Konami knows that the vast majority of people would prefer the PS version.

 

Rogue Squadron games are probably just as much of an issue because of Disney now and LucasArts going under than anything Nintendo specific..  Those are bad examples... and they're ancient games.

 

I'll stick to my point that we LITERALLY just got an announcement of a Nintendo/Plat co-owned title coming to other platforms with TW101.  Platinum are OBVIOUSLY working towards this goal of getting their games into the hands of more people... and Nintendo is playing ball so far.  I absolutely wouldn't rule it out.  

[jehurey 3,231]

2 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

Konami absolutely wouldn't release Twin Snakes.  That game is complete garbage.  Konami doesn't rerelease games like that often regardless.  They're only now beginning to do anything.  It's going to be forever exclusive to Nintendo... because it was a favor specifically for Nintendo.  Konami hasn't done shit with MG since Kojima left.  What makes you think they'd be rushing out to put TS on anything? lmao... it's a known terrible version of MGS.. even Konami knows that the vast majority of people would prefer the PS version.

 

Rogue Squadron games are probably just as much of an issue because of Disney now and LucasArts going under than anything Nintendo specific..  Those are bad examples... and they're ancient games.

 

I'll stick to my point that we LITERALLY just got an announcement of a Nintendo/Plat co-owned title coming to other platforms with TW101.  Platinum are OBVIOUSLY working towards this goal of getting their games into the hands of more people... and Nintendo is playing ball so far.  I absolutely wouldn't rule it out.  

No, they would release it.

 

There have been multiple re-releases of the MGS collection on PS2 and PS3, and they would've definitely included Twin Snakes in that. or as a separate add-on.

 

Its very similar to Bayo. Konami and Nintendo make an agreement, but the developer is a separate entity that Nintendo pays them to develop it (Silicon Knights). Konami would have to go through alot of hoops to get full ownership back.

 

Same thing with the Rogue Squadron Games. LucasArts deals with Nintendo, but Nintendo chose to go with developer Factor 5.

 

Once again............you're trying to "sell" this as a rule.

 

It isn't, its an exception. There is nothing there that indicates that this is now the rule.

 

W101 is an IP created by Kamiya, and Platinum Games dealt only with Nintendo. There is no other business entity to complicate things. The game is 7 years old.

 

The trademark of the game was expiring this year. Nintendo chose to not renew the trademark. The sales indicate that Nintendo probably released this game back to Platinum as a sign of good faith.

 

You're trying to tell me that this is now a "policy" of Nintendo...............no one is believing it.

[Remij 4,680]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

No, they would release it.

 

There have been multiple re-releases of the MGS collection on PS2 and PS3, and they would've definitely included Twin Snakes in that. or as a separate add-on.

 

Its very similar to Bayo. Konami and Nintendo make an agreement, but the developer is a separate entity that Nintendo pays them to develop it (Silicon Knights). Konami would have to go through alot of hoops to get full ownership back.

 

Same thing with the Rogue Squadron Games. LucasArts deals with Nintendo, but Nintendo chose to go with developer Factor 5.

 

Once again............you're trying to "sell" this as a rule.

 

It isn't, its an exception. There is nothing there that indicates that this is now the rule.

 

W101 is an IP created by Kamiya, and Platinum Games dealt only with Nintendo. There is no other business entity to complicate things. The game is 7 years old.

 

The trademark of the game was expiring this year. Nintendo chose to not renew the trademark. The sales indicate that Nintendo probably released this game back to Platinum as a sign of good faith.

 

You're trying to tell me that this is now a "policy" of Nintendo...............no one is believing it.

I'm not telling you it's a fucking policy... lmao just stop right there.

 

I'm saying that it's possible.

 

I'm also saying that I think it's very PROBABLE.

 

I like how you're trying to insinuate that SEGA would be the ones complicating this thing... lmao.

And we all KNOW... that it's what Platinum wants.  If Nintendo wants any more Platinum Games Bayonetta titles after the 3rd one... they better be ready to play ball.. PG has that Tencent money now, and suddenly Nintendo's not as necessary as they once were  

[jehurey 3,231]

3 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

I'm not telling you it's a fucking policy... lmao just stop right there.

 

I'm saying that it's possible.

 

I'm also saying that I think it's very PROBABLE.

 

I like how you're trying to insinuate that SEGA would be the ones complicating this thing... lmao.

And we all KNOW... that it's what Platinum wants.  If Nintendo wants any more Platinum Games Bayonetta titles after the 3rd one... they better be ready to play ball.. PG has that Tencent money now, and suddenly Nintendo's not as necessary as they once were  

No. Nintendo would have an agreement in which they can have first right of refusal for sequels.

 

Why are you implying that Platinum Games has ANY LEVERAGE in this situation. PG cannot stop or block either Nintendo or SEGA.

 

The only thing Platinum Games could do is simply not accept the contract to develop the game.

 

And they're not going to do that, because Nintendo pays their sub-contractors well. They've never had any falling out with a second-party subcontractor because of the way Nintendo treated them.

 

Now compare that to the how Scalebound went down...........you CAN SEE Platinum Games clearly doesn't appear to have a positive relationship with Microsoft. Just by looking at that Kickstarter and the donation tiers.

 

That's not going to happen between PG and Nintendo. Bayo 3 was supposed to come out in 2019. It got announced in December 2018.  PG wants to take their time on the game, Nintendo quietly lets them do it.

 

Kamiya has praised Nintendo since the beginning. They called Sony. They called Microsoft. to help SAVE Bayo 2.

 

They didn't do shit. Nintendo stepped up. I have no concerns of that relationship between PG and Nintendo.

[Remij 4,680]

9 minutes ago, jehurey said:

The only thing Platinum Games could do is simply not accept the contract to develop the game.

That's right... because they're going to be busy making multiplat games of IPs that they own which have a chance to sell much more.

 

It's very simple... PG is gaining leverage.  This Tencent deal gave them much more leverage than they would normally have.  And Nintendo knows it.  They have a great relationship... which is why it's in Nintendo's interest to set up an IP that they have 100% control over... which was Astral Chain.  Bayonetta and Sega is more complicated and if Sega hasn't sold the entire rights to Nintendo yet... they're not going to.  You're forgetting the Sega side of the equation.  Without Sega agreeing to anything, nothing is going to happen.  Nintendo doesn't have complete control over future Bayo titles... I don't believe they own half the IP.. but rather half the rights to Bayo 2 and 3.

 

I have a strong suspicion that Astral Chain was made as a way of continuing the Plat/Nintendo partnership with an exclusive IP, and allowing Bayo 2 to come to other platforms.  We KNOW Platinum's goal is to gain control over Bayonetta... and the IP is worthless without PG developing it.  Sega and PG will put pressure on Nintendo to allow it to happen.  Future games will be multiplat.

Edited February 8, 2020 by Remij_

[jehurey 3,231]

2 minutes ago, Remij_ said:

That's right... because they're going to be busy making multiplat games of IPs that they own which have a chance to sell much more.

 

It's very simple... PG is gaining leverage.  This Tencent deal gave them much more leverage than they would normally have.  And Nintendo knows it.  They have a great relationship... which is why it's in Nintendo's interest to set up an IP that they have 100% control over... which was Astral Chain.  Bayonetta and Sega is more complicated and if Sega hasn't sold the entire rights to Nintendo yet... they're not going to.  You're forgetting the Sega side of the equation.  

 

I have a strong suspicion that Astral Chain was made as a way of continuing the Plat/Nintendo partnership with an exclusive IP, and allowing Bayo 2 to come to other platforms.  We KNOW Platinum's goal is to gain control over Bayonetta... and the IP is worthless without PG developing it.  Sega and PG will put pressure on Nintendo to allow it to happen.  Future games will be multiplat.

Except Platinum Games is known for Bayonetta.

 

Its a prestige title. It bring Platinum Games fame and attention.

 

No..............they're not leaving. And Nintendo is probably paying them well, so PG ends up having profit to pay back their business loan.

 

LOL, your theory regarding Astral Chain is just absolutely laughable.

 

"Trade you Astral Chain for Bayo, straight-up"

Platinum Games would probably have to give Nintendo 3 unique IPs, personally approved by Nintendo, and lifetime exclusivity to develop sequels to those IPs, in order to have Nintendo AND SEGA to give Platinum Games the rights back.

[Remij 4,680]

Just now, jehurey said:

Except Platinum Games is known for Bayonetta.

 

Its a prestige title. It bring Platinum Games fame and attention.

 

No..............they're not leaving. And Nintendo is probably paying them well, so PG ends up having profit to pay back their business loan.

 

LOL, your theory regarding Astral Chain is just absolutely laughable.

 

"Trade you Astral Chain for Bayo, straight-up"

Platinum Games would probably have to give Nintendo 3 unique IPs, personally approved by Nintendo, and lifetime exclusivity to develop sequels to those IPs, in order to have Nintendo AND SEGA to give Platinum Games the rights back.

LMAO.. dude..  Bayo 2 and 3 are the only RIGHTS Nintendo has to the IP.  They down own the IP... they aren't in charge of it.  They payed to complete Bayo 2 and funded Bayo 3.  Sega still owns the rights.

 

lmao.. you laugh at my theory... but then state afterwards... "it would have to be 3 games, and for life  "

 

Sega owns this shit... and either Nintendo is on board, or they gettin off the train.. TW101 was the first stop... 3 more to go  

 

WE COMIN FOR THAT ASSSSSSS BOOOOOYYYIIIIEEEEE  

[jehurey 3,231]

Just now, Remij_ said:

LMAO.. dude..  Bayo 2 and 3 are the only RIGHTS Nintendo has to the IP.  They down own the IP... they aren't in charge of it.  They payed to complete Bayo 2 and funded Bayo 3.  Sega still owns the rights.

 

lmao.. you laugh at my theory... but then state afterwards... "it would have to be 3 games, and for life  "

 

Sega owns this shit... and either Nintendo is on board, or they gettin off the train.. TW101 was the first stop... 3 more to go  

 

WE COMIN FOR THAT ASSSSSSS BOOOOOYYYIIIIEEEEE  

Again..........unless Nintendo has a first right of refusal clause, and they can keep on funding more Bayo sequels.

 

SEGA, doesn't appear willing to pay for real AAA quality action games.

 

You just insinuated that Astral Chain is an equal replacement for the Bayo franchise. You have no right to laugh at anybody.

 

Nobody would trade Astral Chain for Bayo, 1 to 1. Nobody.

 

You tried to dress up your fanboy dream as something that sounds mature and logical.............it fell apart the moment you TRIED to explain the "sequence" of events.

 

Astral Chain for Bayo. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

You turned into a 13 year old the moment you typed that.

[Remij 4,680]

1 minute ago, jehurey said:

Again..........unless Nintendo has a first right of refusal clause, and they can keep on funding more Bayo sequels.

 

SEGA, doesn't appear willing to pay for real AAA quality action games.

 

You just insinuated that Astral Chain is an equal replacement for the Bayo franchise. You have no right to laugh at anybody.

 

Nobody would trade Astral Chain for Bayo, 1 to 1. Nobody.

 

You tried to dress up your fanboy dream as something that sounds mature and logical.............it fell apart the moment you TRIED to explain the "sequence" of events.

 

Astral Chain for Bayo. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

You turned into a 13 year old the moment you typed that.

Astral Chain as a wholly Nintendo owned IP certainly could be a replacement for Bayo in Nintendo's eyes.  Nintendo probably knows that they'll NEVER own full rights to Bayo... so they're gonna make the money off of it they can.

 

This is gonna come back to you little dude.  I'm gonna enjoy it.. like I will with Horizon ZD  

[jehurey 3,231]

Just now, Remij_ said:

Astral Chain as a wholly Nintendo owned IP certainly could be a replacement for Bayo in Nintendo's eyes.  Nintendo probably knows that they'll NEVER own full rights to Bayo... so they're gonna make the money off of it they can.

 

This is gonna come back to you little dude.  I'm gonna enjoy it.. like I will with Horizon ZD  

Now you're trying to slink out of this, since I made fun of your absolute child-like argument.

 

Too late for that.

 

Keep saying Astral Chain for Bayo, 1 for 1 trade.

 

People will keep laughing.

 

Platinum Games will keep on making Astral Chain and Bayo for Nintendo, because Nintendo pays well for development.

 

For all you know..........Astral Chain was the business negotiation tot GETTING W101!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOLY SHIT.

 

And the best part is...........after your idiotic theory, you're going to try so hard to pretend Astral Chain for W101 Full Ownership is a crazy idea. [grabs popcorn]

[Remij 4,680]

Just now, jehurey said:

Now you're trying to slink out of this, since I made fun of your absolute child-like argument.

 

Too late for that.

 

Keep saying Astral Chain for Bayo, 1 for 1 trade.

 

People will keep laughing.

 

Platinum Games will keep on making Astral Chain and Bayo for Nintendo, because Nintendo pays well for development.

 

For all you know..........Astral Chain was the business negotiation tot GETTING W101!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOLY SHIT.

 

And the best part is...........after your idiotic theory, you're going to try so hard to pretend Astral Chain for W101 Full Ownership is a crazy idea. [grabs popcorn]

lmao... bubut Nintendo pays well  

 

Tencent pays better...  

 

And it's not child-like..   It's quite probable.  I'm sticking by it.  Bayo 2's days are numbered.  Platinum isn't just bringing this shit up for nothing.

 

But yea dude... keep thinking that in a world where MS games are on Switch, PS games are coming to PC, and Nintendo just allowed Platinum to bring a game they co-own to other platforms........................ that Nintendo allowing Bayo ports on other platforms.... is out of the question  

 

*screenshot*