Support NeoGAF

[sixteen-bit]

Playing them side-by side, it's pretty bad.

 

[Combichristoffersen]

Also the game itself is bad.

What the

 

[LiK]

What the

Dont fall for it!

 

[Unconditional]

it's not bad....if you don't look at the xbox version.

 

[Vorg]

What the

It's french. Not a surprising reply coming from him tbqh.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

Bottom line, if you have a 360, get it for 360.

If you don't, don't let the PS3 port keep you from playing a great game.

 

[Baron]

Dont install it on 360. It ran like shit. It was better for me on the ps3.

Hmm...does the Games on Demand version suffer from these same loading issues? I was thinking of buying that for my 360 and just leaving the disc version I own sealed.

 

[LiK]

Hmm...does the Games on Demand version suffer from these same loading issues? I was thinking of buying that for my 360 and just leaving the disc version I own sealed.

It wasn't that bad. I had it installed and it was fine.

 

[viewtiful_dru]

Just buy a 360 to play the game.

After all they don't call it a Microsoft Bayonetta Player 360 without good reason.

 

[Infamous Chris]

Hmm...does the Games on Demand version suffer from these same loading issues? I was thinking of buying that for my 360 and just leaving the disc version I own sealed.

I don't even know what the guy you quoted was talking about. I always install games on my 360 and it ran perfectly.

 

[cj_iwakura]

Never played the 360 version, played PS3's to completion, loved it.

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Never played the 360 version, played PS3's to completion, loved it.

Same here. Best gaming experience of 2010 for me.

 

[Poimandres]

I have both consoles and I played it on PS3 (my multiplat choice). I can see the complaints, but not enough to stay away, not finish etc.

I still had fun, that's what'll always matter in the end to me.

I just don't understand this...

Fair enough if it was a multiplayer centric game and the majority of your friends had one machine. Or if the differences were very minor. Maybe controller preference? When the choice is available, I don't know why anyone would choose a markedly inferior version.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I don't even know what the guy you quoted was talking about. I always install games on my 360 and it ran perfectly.

It does tear a little less running from disc, not much in it though. Weird thing is, NXE was pretty well established by the time it came out, would've thought they would've optimised it to run better from HDD.

 

[MuddyDonut]

I know that

Spoiler

The Hell's Highway Scene

suffers really bad, I guess too much shit is going on and it chugs and chugs, but everything else is acceptable and the game should not be missed out on!

 

[staticneuron]

I just don't understand this...

Fair enough if it was a multiplayer centric game and the majority of your friends had one machine. Or if the differences were very minor. Maybe controller preference? When the choice is available, I don't know why anyone would choose a markedly inferior version.

It's not "markedly" though. Playing only the PS3 version I noticed game affecting slowdown 3 times in the entire game.

Even though I own a 360, I do not like playing anything other than shooters on the controller. And since it is hardly noticeable unless you do a side by side comparison (have better things to do with time and money), then there isn't much to contemplate over.

 

[gunbo13]

Dont fall for it!

It's not bad but it is not great. Casual action game fans will enjoy it and will label it as awesome. Though, it actually has really poor balance. Most people don't notice but it gets real dark the deeper you dive. Flash > substance yet that works in some regard.

 

[Ravage]

I've only played it on the PS3 and it is perfectly playable. Have no idea what it was like pre-patch though, but it shouldn't matter now.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

It's not "markedly" though. Playing only the PS3 version I noticed game affecting slowdown 3 times in the entire game.

Even though I own a 360, I do not like playing anything other than shooters on the controller. And since it is hardly noticeable unless you do a side by side comparison (have better things to do with time and money), then there isn't much to contemplate over.

Why do people keep saying this? It is markedly inferior, it's almost unanimously one of the worst ports this gen. It isn't insignificant, every aspect of the graphical makeup of the game is hindered somewhat on Playstation.
Only noticed slowdown 3 times? Firstly, the Xbox version slowdowns down more than 3 times in the first half an hour, never mind the Playstation version. And secondly, what, you kept count of how many times it chugged?
I assumed you'd have better things to do with your time.

 

[Risk Breaker]

It's not bad but it is not great. Casual action game fans will enjoy it and will label it as awesome. Though, it actually has really poor balance. Most people don't notice but it gets real dark the deeper you dive. Flash > substance yet that works in some regard.

What does that even mean?

Also, the game is one of my most played and favourite games this gen and I only played it on PS3, so... Main difference is that when 360 is 60FPS, PS3 is 45FPS. When 360 is 45FPS, PS3 is pretty close to 30FPS. Is it good? Not at all. Is it game breaking? Not at all.

 

[a Master Ninja]

PRO TIP: Bayonetta 360 seems to be one of the only games to run smoother streaming from the disc rather than from an HDD install. I've seen mid-level loads hitch for a split-second on an install that are silky smooth running off the disc. I'm not sure how this can be explained but I and other posters in the official thread have experienced it. Hard drive fragmentation?

 

[Maleficence]

Still no chance of a PC port?

 

[Jintor]

What the hell are you even balanced against?

 

[WickedLaharl]

It's not "markedly" though. Playing only the PS3 version I noticed game affecting slowdown 3 times in the entire game.

Even though I own a 360, I do not like playing anything other than shooters on the controller. And since it is hardly noticeable unless you do a side by side comparison (have better things to do with time and money), then there isn't much to contemplate over.

evidence posted in this very thread proves you wrong. it is vastly inferior on PS3. just because you gimped your experience with the game there's no reason to argue against facts.

 

[gogogow]

Why do people keep saying this? It is markedly inferior, it's almost unanimously one of the worst ports this gen. It isn't insignificant, every aspect of the graphical makeup of the game is hindered somewhat on Playstation.
Only noticed slowdown 3 times? Firstly, the Xbox version slowdowns down more than 3 times in the first half an hour, never mind the Playstation version. And secondly, what, you kept count of how many times it chugged?
I assumed you'd have better things to do with your time.

Have you played the PS3 version? If you have, you would know what he meant.

I have both, the 360 version (bought and finished first) and the PS3 version (finished and platinum'd). The PS3 version IS inferior, but still very playable, because 90% of the time the framerate hovers around 30fps. The small framerate drops inbetween is really not that noticeable. What staticneuron means is that the game has very few situations, 2-3 times max. in the entire game, where the framerate slows to a crawl. The one I remember is the platforming part nearing the end of the game, luckily there's almost no enemies there, 2-3 enemies max, which are optional, unless you want to platinum the game than you have to beat them.

I think people who played the PS3 version just remember those segments, because the framerate is extremely bad, not that we kept count on purpose.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Actually, I think there are a bunch of small spots where the framerate doesn't quite collapse but the game gets just jittery enough that it's tough to play (I'm thinking of the big courtyard fight in chapter 2 and any fight with Gracious and Glorious in chapter 10 specifically, but I know there were a lot of other similar spots).

 

[cajunator]

Played both in demo form. Decided on 360 version. Have not regretted the decision.

 

[InfiniteNine]

PRO TIP: Bayonetta 360 seems to be one of the only games to run smoother streaming from the disc rather than from an HDD install. I've seen mid-level loads hitch for a split-second on an install that are silky smooth running off the disc. I'm not sure how this can be explained but I and other posters in the official thread have experienced it. Hard drive fragmentation?

Really? Mine runs smoothly all the time from an install.

 

[LowEndTorque]

Wow, Gaf really loves Bayonetta eh?

I own the 360 version, played through it once, and wasn’t all that impressed tbh.

I might have to give it another playthrough to see if I can try to figure out what all the fuss is about.

 

[Raziel]

about as bad as it is anywhere.

 

[Castor Krieg]

I have both, the 360 version (bought and finished first) and the PS3 version (finished and platinum'd). The PS3 version IS inferior, but still very playable, because 90% of the time the framerate hovers around 30fps.

Playable =/= enjoyable. Games like Bayonetta and DMC should have mandatory 60FPS, the more you get away from that target, the more the game suffers.

 

[Fugu]

I played through Bayonetta (five times) on the PS3 using a shitty CRT in a dorm room in 480i. It was my game of the year when I played it in 2009; mind you, this was also before the patch that reduced the loading times. The PS3 version is still an amazing game and as someone who is pretty good at Bayonetta, I can tell you that while the graphical problems may annoy you, the framerate is not enough to prevent you from playing like a badass.

EDIT: I should also echo the general sentiment of this thread that you should buy it on X360 if the option is available to you.

 

[jett]

Playable =/= enjoyable

It's because the game is so enjoyable that most of us put up with the PS3 version's issues...

 

[gogogow]

Playable =/= enjoyable. Games like Bayonetta and DMC should have mandatory 60FPS, the more you get away from that target, the more the game suffers.

I enjoyed both versions. It's playable and enjoyable to ME. I think i'll decide for myself what is playable and/or enjoyable, thank you very much.

 

[Riposte]

It's not bad but it is not great. Casual action game fans will enjoy it and will label it as awesome. Though, it actually has really poor balance. Most people don't notice but it gets real dark the deeper you dive. Flash > substance yet that works in some regard.

I'm not buying this for a second. "Balance" isn't really a big deal and exploits pop up in every game, though rarely are they obvious.

 

[Risk Breaker]

The PS3 version is still an amazing game and as someone who is pretty good at Bayonetta, I can tell you that while the graphical problems may annoy you, the framerate is not enough to prevent you from playing like a badass

Yeah, this is important and true as well.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

Have you played the PS3 version? If you have, you would know what he meant.

I have both, the 360 version (bought and finished first) and the PS3 version (finished and platinum'd). The PS3 version IS inferior, but still very playable, because 90% of the time the framerate hovers around 30fps. The small framerate drops inbetween is really not that noticeable. What staticneuron means is that the game has very few situations, 2-3 times max. in the entire game, where the framerate slows to a crawl. The one I remember is the platforming part nearing the end of the game, luckily there's almost no enemies there, 2-3 enemies max, which are optional, unless you want to platinum the game than you have to beat them.

I think people who played the PS3 version just remember those segments, because the framerate is extremely bad, not that we kept count on purpose.

Of course I've played the PlayStation version, I'm not just parroting what others have said. My mate had it, and OK, maybe there was only a handful of times where it was actually unplayable. But the framerate/tearing is a mess on ps. Just becuase it only adversly affects play a handful if times, doesn't mean the rest of it is enjoyable to witness.

Edit, second read, I see what he means. At only stuck in his head at three or four occasions where it was unplayable. I read it as, "it didn't drop at all apart from 3 occasions." My bad!

 

[ULTROS!]

Although the port wasn't fantastic or anything, the game is still playable and enjoyable in my point of view (played the PS3 version).

Just go for whatever system you want to play it on. If you like the best of the best graphics and achievements, go for the 360. Else if you care about trophies, go for the PS3 version.

 

[Poimandres]

It's not "markedly" though. Playing only the PS3 version I noticed game affecting slowdown 3 times in the entire game.

Even though I own a 360, I do not like playing anything other than shooters on the controller. And since it is hardly noticeable unless you do a side by side comparison (have better things to do with time and money), then there isn't much to contemplate over.

Much lower frame rate, lower quality textures, inferior IQ, much more tearing, longer loading times (don't know if they're equal after the patch). The PS3 version was "marked" down as a result of these differences... how is that not "markedly inferior"?

It's still playable... except for those few instances where it's kind of not...

With a lot of multi plats I'd describe the differences as superficial. This isn't one of those cases.

If you have an extreme aversion to the 360 controller I can see where you're coming from, and the issues don't cripple the game. But the differences are pretty damn apparent.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

Literally the only reason to play this on PlayStation 3 (if you have the choice) is if you really can't stand the 360 pad for action games. If you slightly prefer the PS pad for action games, like me, I'd still recommend the Xbox version. What you lose in controller comfort, you gain threefold in the gameplay experience.

Edit: OK, threefold may be going slightly overboard, but you really need to despise the Xbox pad for these games to plump for the PS version. Plus, it runs better from disc on Xbox, so extra HDD space. Bonus!

 

[R_thanatos]

Much lower frame rate, lower quality textures, inferior IQ, much more tearing, longer loading times (don't know if they're equal after the patch). The PS3 version was "marked" down as a result of these differences... how is that not "markedly inferior"?

IQ ?? i though this discussion was serious. Nevermind then ..

Also loading times are not an issue anymore . ( yes most of the assets are on the disc now ..loading is not an issue anymore )

 

[staticneuron]

Why do people keep saying this? It is markedly inferior, it's almost unanimously one of the worst ports this gen. It isn't insignificant, every aspect of the graphical makeup of the game is hindered somewhat on Playstation.
Only noticed slowdown 3 times? Firstly, the Xbox version slowdowns down more than 3 times in the first half an hour, never mind the Playstation version. And secondly, what, you kept count of how many times it chugged?
I assumed you'd have better things to do with your time.

I "JUST" beat the game the other night. I have been playing it for quite some time. Maybe before it recieved its pach it has been horrible but I have not had a problem with it outside of a handful of times. It is obvious to notice slowdown in such a fast paced action game. When dodges and combos rely on precise timing it isn't even a question of "if" someone would notice slowdown when it happens.

evidence posted in this very thread proves you wrong. it is vastly inferior on PS3. just because you gimped your experience with the game there's no reason to argue against facts.

Uh huh. In comparison yes, but it is not clearly defined when playing the product by itself. The point I am bringing up is that the game is in no which way noticeably worse on its own. Probably before the patch but not what I played recently.

Much lower frame rate, lower quality textures, inferior IQ, much more tearing, longer loading times (don't know if they're equal after the patch). The PS3 version was "marked" down as a result of these differences... how is that not "markedly inferior"?

Has anyone responding to me played the PS3 version after the patch? Not hearsay, but actually played the game? Because these responses are kinda ridiculous.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

IQ ?? i though this discussion was serious. Nevermind then ..

Also loading times are not an issue anymore . ( yes most of the assets are on the disc now ..loading is not an issue anymore )

What the fuck? IQ is one of the biggest dividing factors between the two. The PlayStation version is really blurry and washed out, quite "grey". The colours really pop on Xbox. I can only assume you haven't played both, as it is clearly obvious that the image displayed on Sony's console is, er, compromised.

Why comment in a comparison thead having only played one version? "Oh it's fine, perfectly playable." In comparison to what? Not playing it at all?

 

[MjFrancis]

PRO TIP: Bayonetta 360 seems to be one of the only games to run smoother streaming from the disc rather than from an HDD install. I've seen mid-level loads hitch for a split-second on an install that are silky smooth running off the disc. I'm not sure how this can be explained but I and other posters in the official thread have experienced it. Hard drive fragmentation?

That was my problem, but since I play on a computer monitor in close proximity playing off the disc becomes far too annoying. I might give it another try for Bayonetta, though, and just turn up the volume to mask the noise of the screeching disc drive.

Really? Mine runs smoothly all the time from an install.

You may not have noticed the occasional hiccups, but what of the screen-tearing? It happened to me in every level.

 

[NBtoaster]

Has anyone responding to me played the PS3 version after the patch? Not hearsay, but actually played the game? Because these responses are kinda ridiculous.

The patch didn't improve the framerate or other problems besides loading.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

Uh huh. In comparison yes, but it is not clearly defined when playing the product by itself. The point I am bringing up is that the game is in no which way noticeably worse on its own. Probably before the patch but not what I played recently.

This may be the most nonscensical post I've ever read on GAF. Just.......what?

 

[LiK]

The patch didn't improve the framerate or other problems besides loading.

Correct. It only fixed the loading. Nothing else was fixed/improved.

 

[sixteen-bit]

My level tolerance for inferior product is extremely low, so the differences are huge to me. I'd recommend the 360 version every time.

 

[Anteater]

The framerate did not improve after the patch, only the load times, I have been playing the game before and after patch.

 

[staticneuron]

The patch didn't improve the framerate or other problems besides loading.

If so, then I have no idea what people are talking about. It is incredibly noticeable when a game drops frames because of input lag. If people are comparing disparity between maximum possible framrates (60 vs 30) that is an aesthetic complaint.

This may be the most nonscensical post I've ever read on GAF. Just.......what?

Meaning the game was playable. Only a handful of times in the game did I notice any disparity between input and reaction on screen.