| S.T.A.G.E. said: No. A First party denotes ownership of said intellectual property overall. Microsoft owns the IP to Quantum Break and Scalebound, but they are both made by third party, hence why its definitively called first party. The deal to make the games gave them the rights from the start to the IP as their own property. The struggle over intellectual property with Sony is why they went to Microsoft. They dont want anyone owning their game, its theirs. They just need to find a publisher and Microsoft needed games so they published it. |
Actually, you are so wrong on this it is remarkable. Being first or 3rd party has no relation to IP ownership. It's relative to a publishers relation to the hardware they publish on. Here is the definition in relation to video games:
Adjective
- Of or relating to someone directly involved in a given transaction, such as a buyer or seller.
- Of or relating to the plaintiff in a lawsuit.
- (video games) Of a video game, developed or published by company responsible for the platform on which it is released (or its internal developers), as opposed to third-party.
Microsoft is the only first party publisher on Xbox consoles. Xbox. Xbox 360. Xbox One. Full stop. The couldn't be 2nd party of 3rd party if they tried. Unless you want to argue that fact. Anything Microsoft publishes on Xbox consoles is a FIRST PARTY GAME. That includes games from Studios and IPS that don't fall under their ownership.
At best you could say Insomniac and the Sunset Overdrive IP are not first party (they are not second party either), they are 3rd party. But the Sunset Overdrive videogame that came out last year is first party as it falls under Microsofts publishing arm.
| S.T.A.G.E. said: Let me create an example for you. Marvel/Disney owns the rights to the Marvel family of games, but Activision develops and publishes the games via a license. Through the license, Disney and Marvel collect fees even though they dont publish because they own the Licensce and through ownership collect royalties and other things from the game because of the value of their product when other vendors feel the need to create a business proposition to create games from said companies IP license. Recently Marvel stripped Activision of their rights to their games license and all Activision made games were stripped from PSN and Xbox Live. |
This is a redundant example, neither Activision or Disney manufacture Xbox or Playstion consoles so could never be anything but 3rd party unless Activision or Disney start manufacturing consoles of their own.
| S.T.A.G.E. said: I never saw this post, but my point is Sony has all bases covered from a first, second and third party end. |
What are your thoughts on this years lineup given that The Order, Bloodborne, Until Dawn and The MLB license were all products originating outside of Sonys internal studios? That's a year and a half gap between any idea conceived by them, could you explain how that shows Sonys 1st party is covered during that period of time? This is assuming Knack and Driveclub were "bases covered" quality.
| S.T.A.G.E. said: My issue isnt with them is that they are almost solely reliant on third party for AAA new IP's. From that perspective its easy to see that Sony and Nintendo are on a whole level in creativity even though they dont have as much money. Its also noticable in gaming droughts because strategically Microsoft and Nintendo are the ones who have the hardest time there. With Nintendo its third party and with Microsoft its first party when the third party publishing stops 2/3 of the way through the gen and they start relying more and more on sequels. |
What's your definition of AAA? Sales or scores? Because Knack and Driveclub garnered neither and every other new IP on PS4 up until Holiday 2016 comes from third parties.
In fact the only new IP of note on the Horizon... is Horizon, which was born out of Killzones declining stagnent receptions then a drive to create new IP.
