[Destructoid] Rumor: Beyond Good&Evil 2 funded by Nintendo for NX

Nov 12, 2011
11,545
1
675
#1
Beyond Good and Evil 2 is one of those games that has been rumored to exist for years while still staying weirdly in limbo every time it is discussed. Ubisoft insists the project has not been canned, and brings it up multiple times each year, but nothing concrete seems to surface.

According to a rumor received by Destructoid this week, the game may actually come to fruition in the not-too-distant future. If the information is to be believed, Nintendo has pulled a Bayonetta 2, securing the Beyond Good and Evil sequel as an NX exclusive for 2017.
http://www.destructoid.com/rumor-ni...9.phtml?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Let's hope that Destructoid is wrong.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
Jul 30, 2009
73,803
6
890
Western Australia
#10
Cross-post:

Seems unlikely. Nintendo has stayed mum on how Bayonetta 2 performed (even the VG CHARTZ!!! plucked-out-on-thin-air numbers has it at <1m) and given it was in development for at least two years, there's no doubt in my mind Nintendo hasn't recouped costs. Throwing money at a cult favourite was ultimately a fruitless endeavour and did nothing to change the Wii U's fortune, so why would Nintendo sign off on the very same tactic for the NX?
And:

Create an audience for it now to build on in the future?
I'd buy a system for it.
Sure, but no company greenlights the development of a game without the intention of turning that investment into a net positive, whether directly or indirectly. Despite the original Bayonetta eventually becoming something of a modest success, Bayonetta 2 launched with a whimper and sales of the Wii U continue to be dismal even in light of further software releases, which would absolutely be a factor in discussions pertaining to possible third-party exclusivity ventures for the NX and leads me to believe that Nintendo is not going to throw millions behind another dormant IP that has an even rockier history (even on Steam the original BG&E is barely at 100k after several years).
 
Jul 17, 2013
1,406
0
0
#17
Why would you hope they were wrong, we haven't gotten this game at all and if this were the case it would only be because of Nintendo we got it, but it's just a rumor
 
Jul 16, 2004
4,113
0
0
#18
Well I've already sold my Wii U in anticipation for getting an NX, so that would be sweet for launch :)

Throwing money at a cult favourite was ultimately a fruitless endeavour and did nothing to change the Wii U's fortune, so why would Nintendo sign off on the very same tactic for the NX?
To build a solid launch line-up with good first and third party exclusives. It will make it look way better, expecially amongst the ones who buy a console at launch, the passionate gamers.
 
Apr 13, 2006
6,594
0
0
#22
If it's the only way the game has to get made, I'll have to accept it. I really want that game to get done. Now, I'll have to look someone to borrow an NX from just like I did with XBO and Halo 5.
 
May 24, 2011
6,661
0
0
#26
You can make the argument that they could have done much more collaborations like that on the Wii U and thus making it a more attractive console. If they secure several deals like this on the NX, chances of such a strategy paying off increases exponentially.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Dec 5, 2005
51,660
0
0
#30
Seems unlikely. Nintendo has stayed mum on how Bayonetta 2 performed (even the VG CHARTZ!!! plucked-out-on-thin-air numbers has it at <1m) and given it was in development for at least two years, there's no doubt in my mind Nintendo hasn't recouped costs. Throwing money at a cult favourite did nothing to change the Wii U's fortune, so why would Nintendo sign off on the very same tactic for the NX?
Whether or not that tactic worked for them once before, they still need to fund exclusive third party games for their console. It's not exactly something Nintendo invented with Bayo2.

-Dead Rising 3
-Rise of the Tomb Raider
-Street Fighter 3
-etc

Console holders fund exclusives. It's just that Nintendo is only able to pick the more nichey ones.
 
May 12, 2010
22,354
0
0
#37
The way Ubisoft was treating the title with on and off again development I could see it being a title that will only exist if someone is willing to put some money down.

It was likely never a project Ubisoft was heavily invested in and they were always quick to practically kill the team and shift them to other projects as milestones on projects demanded.
If it is on NX it will be a case of Nintendo pulling the title from the grave otherwise it would have never seen the light of day
 

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
Jun 19, 2011
14,600
1
0
#40
wow, this is some rumor.

Because Nintendo have been making many decisions in the past few years that are aimed at improving their relationship with developers, not just ones favorable for mass-consumers or their bottom line. See: Xenoblade and X, The Last Story, Pandora's Tower, Metroid Other M, Sin & Punishment 2, Wonderful 101, Bayonetta 2, Hyrule Warriors, Devil's Third and many more rumored projects that didn't make it to release such as the rumored Yoot Saito colaboration on 3DS etc. Many of those weren't hugely successful and/or outright failed financially.

You're alone on that hope.

If they'd accept an offer for Nintendo to fund it, that tells me it wouldn't exist otherwise.
sarcasm?
 
Oct 21, 2010
7,055
0
580
#42
I think this is propaganda!

Honestly though I'd love for it to be true. Ubi has had enough time to make it and they never got around to it despite all the promises. If Nintendo is willing to get it done, good for them.
 
Jun 7, 2004
114,759
1
0
36
#43
Nintendo's decisions to continue to fund games that diversify their platforms are based on factors that often have little to do with making big bucks. It's really unusual and arguably poor business sense, especially when they fail to promote those games they're funding, but it's been like this for over a decade now. If Nintendo was actually worried about big games they're funding not selling a million, they would have closed Monolithsoft up a long time ago for example. We would also never have gotten Sin and Punishment 2.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
Jul 30, 2009
73,803
6
890
Western Australia
#44
Whether or not that tactic worked for them once before, they still need to fund exclusive third party games for their console. It's not exactly something Nintendo invented with Bayo2.

-Dead Rising 3
-Rise of the Tomb Raider
-Street Fighter 3
-etc

Console holders fund exclusives. It's just that Nintendo is only able to pick the more nichey ones.
You'll notice I specifically mentioned "cult favourite". The intention was to separate the funding of a Bayonetta sequel from, say, the co-funding of a sequel to a game that has ultimately sold over 8.5m copies.
 
Mar 26, 2013
15,673
3
0
#45
What does Nintendo exactly gain by this?

Nintendo's decisions to continue to fund games that diversify their platforms are based on factors that often have little to do with making big bucks. It's really unusual and arguably poor business sense, especially when they fail to promote those games they're funding, but it's been like this for over a decade now. If Nintendo was actually worried about big games they're funding not selling a million, they would have closed Monolithsoft up a long time ago for example. We would also never have gotten Sin and Punishment 2.
Fair enough.
 
Jun 7, 2004
74,677
2
1,405
#46
Sep 19, 2010
9,349
0
0
abrasiontest.wordpress.com
#47
Partnerships like these do tend to have other effects just outside of sales. The Bayo 2 deal probably moved some consoles and on top of that strengthened their relationship with Platinum.

The director on Bayo 2 is now working on Star Fox Zero with Miyamoto's team which probably wouldn't have happened without the two companies working closely on Bayo 2.