CGI-Quality said:
mantlepiecek said:
|
CGI-Quality said:
Correct, they didn't. Eat Sleep & Play are not SCE. Sony didn't go these developers, afaik, and say we have an IP we want you to develop. The developer goes to Sony and the freedom is granted to do whatever they want, if a deal is made. Unless Sony is the parent company, Sony didn't create the franchise. Naughty Dog is a branch of SCE, therefore, Uncharted is Sony's created prpoperty, quite different from Resistance, inFAMOUS, & Twisted Metal.
This basic scenario is simple, if you hire me to develop/create a game for you, YOU aren't the creator.
|
There's one flaw in your post.
Lets take MS's Halo as an example. Bungie made it, published by MS. But bungie is no longer at MS, but since MS owns Halo, they can ask 343 to make a Halo game for them.
If Insomniac completely goes multi-plat tomorrow, and refuses to make resistance anymore, Sony might ask ND to make it for them(just an example). And then it automatically becomes their IP.
So, I think we should include IPs made by third parties but owned by Sony as well. They are, after all owned by Sony, and if they wish, they can easily change the developing teams for it to the first party, they just don't do it.
|
I have nothing against including 3rd party IPs with 1st party IPs, just re-word the meaning. If it read - "what new IPs has Sony been involved with or put out", that would make more sense. But an IP not created by Sony shouldn't be credited to them as the creators, just because they slapped their name on it and called it their property.
Also, Bungie is the creator of the Halo IP, so no matter how many times MS asks another dev to make a new Halo title, the IP wasn't created by them. This goes for Resistance as well. Even if Naughty Dog were to take over, they didn't create the IP (which snuggles in with my point).
|
