CGI-Quality said:
jarrod said:
Michael-5 said:
CGI-Quality said:
VXIII said:
CGI-Quality said:
Not about being harsh, it's about being real. Halo being a "2nd party IP" isn't fact. In fact, it's quite wrong. Epic Games owns the Gears IP - it's 3rd party. Resistance is Sony's, meaning they can do whatever they please with the IP. You have to understand that that means it's a 1st party title, which is to be developed by a 3rd party dev (as of now).
You don't have to like if people say Resistance is 1st party and Gears isn't, facts are facts. Gears belongs to Epic, not Microsoft - 3rd party. Resistance belongs to Sony, not Insomniac - 1st party.
|
What's the 2nd party then ? could you name some games so I can understand this correctly ?
|
2nd party really isn't a term. Sony basically nicknamed any studios that work only with them but are still 3rd party, 2nd party. As Insomniac proved, however, 3rd party is 3rd party. Just because they work only with one company doesn't mean they'll always be that way.
Also, Epic Games was obviously never a "2nd party", or Unreal Tournament III wouldn't have been not only on PS3, but a timed "console" exclusive for it.
|
So explain how Insomniac can be a 1st party developer (like you say), when they have a multi-console game in development? Also why do manufacturers like Nintendo and Microsoft also use the term 2nd party?
|
Insomniac isn't 1st party, they're 3rd party. They can still work on a 1st party game though (like Resistance 3), it just means the game isn't 1st party developed.
Nintendo actually coined the term "2nd party" originally in the mid 1990s to help explain their relationship with RARE. Basically meaning an exclusive external developer relationship (Nintendo hadn't bought into RARE at the time).
Microsoft doesn't use the term afaik. In fact, anything they publish they refer to as 1st party, even IPs they don't own like Shenmue II or Gears of War.
|
I actually wasn't aware of that. Anyway, I wonder if he'll debate that first paragraph with you.
|
CGI, seriously whats with all the negative connotation towards me? Wh are you trying to tarnish my image?
Anyway jarrod, that you for clearing that up. This debate was really stupid, but at least I know 2nd party is a term used by Nintendo and Sony. I'll accept Resistance being a 3rd party game, I hate when people classify Resistance as a 1st party exclusive, but Gears as 3rd party because Resistance is not a 1st party game.
So when is it appropriate to use the term second party? Is it an actual marketing term? Also what about Pokemon, Nintendo doesn't own Game Freak, but they are an exclusive external developer, so that means that they are second party.
Also technically, by Nintendo's definition of second party, Halo Reach is a second party title. Microsoft and Bungie agreed to make Halo, and Bungie exclusively only makes Halo games for the 360 (for now). Therefore Halo was developed by an exclusive external developer correct?
Halo 3 is 1st party I don't deny that, just technically (since CGI you claim 2nd party is not an actual type of developer), Halo: Reach is second party right?
I'm just using the facts presented and making a case, please don't insult me because I say differently then you CGI, be civil.
