Chrizum said:
I don't think that's correct. Retro is owned by Nintendo, but Retro is not a in-house developer. That's called second party as far as I know. |
If you mean 'in house' developer as in are they based in the main headquarters then no, but Nintendo own 100% percent of the company and are as much a part of Nintendo as any of the EAD studios. A second party dev (while not a clearly defined term) is gerally accepted to mean a studio that is under contract to produce games exclusively for a certain company ( normally within within a period of time) while still remaining indepent. A good example of this would be Nintendo's relationship with Silicon Knights last gen.








