kain_kusanagi said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
kain_kusanagi said:
brendude13 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
brendude13 said:
Final Fantasy on PS1, Resident Evil on Gamecube, Monster Hunter on 3DS, that kind of thing. When a game / franchise that is either exclusive or has a huge following on one system ends up being exclusive on a competing system.
|
ok. I don't consider that stealing. I'd much prefer them all to be multiplatform though. Square moved to Playstation for the CD format, Capcom signed a contract with Nintendo for timed exclusives and 2nd party games. I don't have a big problem with that, but like I said I'd prefer it all to be multiplatform.
|
Capcom wasn't 2nd party to Nintendo.
|
2nd party is just a made up term to describe the exclusivity contract between a platform hold and a 3rd party developer. Capcom entered into contract with Nintendo to make several exclusive games for the Gamecube. Those are commonly refered to as 2nd party games.
|
Capcom made third party for sega, they were never second party to Nintendo. I read that Nintendo had exclusive chips integrated into the system to keep devs with them despite Segas growing marketshare. They were slowly losing power to Sega because of games and brand image before Sony even arrived to deliver the final blow. Capcom made serveral games that were multiplat with the Gamecube that still came out on the PS2. Look them up. The PS2 was that dominant.
|
I'll say it again. the term "2nd party" is just a popular way to describe a contract between a platform holder and a 3rd party developer. Resident Evil Zero and the Resident Evil Remake as well as some other games were part of a deal between Capcom and Nintendo for the Gamecube. Those games would be correctly described as 2nd party games. If you want to read the definition of these types of development terms here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_developer
|
Yes, definitely Capcom had a lot to make up for after leaving Nintendo out for a while during the PS1 era.
