By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
c0rd on 19 September 2010
Edit Thread
Shorty11857 said:
jarrod said:

Er, Dance on Broadway isn't a new IP really... it's part of Ubi's Dance series.  I'd actually say that's similar to the Wii Party dust up earlier in the thread, if DoB counts, Wii Party probably should too then. :/

I'd also be wary of including IPs based on establsihed properties, like Dante's Inferno, ZhuZhu Pets or that Disney Dragon thing.  Not exactly "New IP" there at all...


Yeah I can really see what you're seeing, it's just heard to define what new IP is exactly

Would you (and everyone else in this thread) agree that the Wii, Lego, Sid Meier, Tom Clancy, Dance and maybe Imagine series should all have their new releases that aren't sequels (Wii Sports Resort, Civ 5 etc) or based on franchises that already exist in gaming (Lego Harry Potter, Lego Rock Band) should all be classed as IPs? Of course the Lego series will probably never have that but just an example

And also I'm gonna class new IPs as, new IPs in gaming, it's not perfect or 100% right but I think it's a fair way to define it for the purpose of this thread and I just want to be consistent.

So yeah basically unless a fair few people disagree I'm thinking of adding Wii Party to the list and going those "rules/definitions" for the rest of the thread

I'd vote leaving Wii Party out of it, the game is definitely part of the Wii Series (which, c'mon people, do have a ton more in common with each other than just the name).

Not sure about Ubi's Dance, but games with creators' names on them aren't necessarily all the same IP. For example, under Tom Clancy, Rainbow Six and Splinter Cell are two seperate IP's. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, Civilization, or Pirates should be all seperate - wouldn't be fair to lump them in as the same, just because his name is on it.

Though now that I think about it, it is hard to sort them out for sure...