Why is moneyhatting frowned upon?

[Teeqoz]

S.T.A.G.E. said:

Teeqoz said:

MS has to own the studio for it to be a 1st party game. That's the definition of a 1st party game. I'm not sure for all of them but for Sunset Overdrive MS doesn't own the IP, Insomniac does. I doubt MS owns the IP for Project Spark because it's coming to PC. You're using 3rd party games as an argument for MS 1st party.

No. A first party game is when an IP is owned by a platform holder. This is not to be mistakened with a first party developer (which MS barely ever use or are just using improperly). This is why MS isn't known for internal prowess.

Sunset Overdrive is a third party game. Gears of War was made  by second party  until Microsoft made it first party by buying the IP. The game started out third party but Microsoft contracted Epic and funded them for the production of the game which made them a second party studio for them at that time.

Rare was a second party developer for Nintendo until Nintendo gave up their shares and MS bought them and made them first party. First party content can be made by a second party (contracted to make an IP owned by the publisher). We call that a "commission" because you're paying for the work of a contracted outside source.

Also second party dont have to make first party, they are just contracted to make exclusives, but a publisher can request to keep an IP but they have to pay up for the rights. This is why when Rare left Nintendo they took  almost their whole catalogue with them even though Nintendo published most of the games. 

First Party:

1. Electronic games. Of a video game, developed and published by the manufacturer of the video game's respective platform or its internal developers, as opposed to third-party.                                                                                           There you go, you're plain wrong