Uhhh no. First party is a term that simply refers the game was published by the manufacturer of the console. Ownership of the IP is something else entirely, especially when you consider licensed games...and not really relevant in this case since MS considers GoW a MGS franchise and always refers to the games in the series as "first party" amongst others from non-owned studios like Harmonix and Frontier

Microsoft Studios has a number of successful core franchises: Halo, Fable, Forza Motorsport, and Gears of War

No......these are the definitions right here.Gears of War is a THIRD PARTY game. Microsoft does not own either the Intellectual property nor the developer of Gears of War. It is a third party exclusive. In a second party generally the IP is owned by the publisher and the developer focuses full time on that console. Gears is third party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_development_party#First-party_developer

First party developer

"In the video game industry, a first-party developer is a developer that is part of a company that manufactures a video game console, and develops exclusively for it. First-party developers may either use the name of the company itself (like Nintendo), have a specific division name (like Sony's Polyphony Digital), or have formerly been an independent studio before being acquired by the console manufacturer, such as Rare or Naughty Dog.^[1]"

Second Party

The term "second-party" developer is a common misnomer used (erroneously) in place of subsidiary. It is colloquially used in reference to a type of first or third-party developer that specializes in development for a particular platform. Some of these studios may have exclusive publishing agreements or other business relationships with a particular manufacturer while maintaining independence. An example of this is Insomniac Games, which, until recently, had been developing games solely for Sony's PlayStation platforms despite being an entirely independent studio. Another example is Game Freak, which mainly develops the Nintendo-exclusive Pokémon game series. Studios like Insomniac and Game Freak are very rare in the video game industry because without the direct support of the platform owner, it is very risky financially to be developing solely for a particular platform. Other studios that have been called "second-party" may be wholly owned and funded by their parent company, but these are all considered subsidiaries.

Third Party

A third-party developer is a developer not directly tied to the primary product that a consumer is using. The primary product may be software or hardware. In the video game industry, many third-parties publish the games they develop, such as Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Bethesda Softworks, Activision, and Sega, while others only develop games to be published under other companies, such as Raven Software. Furthermore, third-party developers can be owned by larger third-parties, such as the relationship between Neversoft (creator of the Tony Hawk's Pro Skater series) and Activision. Because of this, much larger third-parties that also publish their own games are typically referred to as publishing houses even though they do develop many of their own games internally.

Another example is a developer that is a separate legal entity from the software being used, usually providing an external software tool that helps organize or use information for the primary software product. Such tools could be a database, Voice over IP, or add-in interface software, among others.

In addition, accessories like headsets can be referred as third party headsets, meaning that the company of the headset is different from the console company. For example, Turtle Beach is a third party headset company to the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.^[2]

Hmmm, as laid out by wikipedia I see. There's a reason why there's no citations in that article....because there's no specific definitions as you have attempted to insinuate...I could re-write it to prove a point, but I don't want to.

You're very confused here. Epic is a third party developer. Gears of war 1, 2 and 3 are first party games from a first party publisher. 

Then please enlighten us, who was the third party publisher???

There are no second parties, only first and third. First is anything with Microsoft (game) Studios on the cover, third is anything that isn't.

Publisher doesn't mean owner, it just means the general funder of an IP. Insomniac games is a second party developer to Sony. They create games specialized for Sony's console while having their independence as a company, Sony owns the rights to the IP's. Naughty Dog used to be second party before Sony bought them as well in Playstations first generation. Gears of War is neither owned nor the company who made it by Microsoft. Publishing is only the funding for production and distribution of said game with the with the promise of profitable return. The only rights Microsoft has to the Gears franchise is a three game exclusivity contract which means Epic has to develop said franchise exclusively for them. That contract is now over and Epic can do whatever the hell they want with the franchise.

Not even that. You don't have to fund a game to be the games publisher.

No, no, no you're dealing with very past tense here. Insomniac games is and always has been, a third party developer. Especially when they made Disruptor which was published by Universal in '96. They then made the Spyro games that were co-published/distributed between Universal/SCE. Then Universal got the rights to the characters and Insomniac while being a third party developer, made first party games for Sony in the form of Ratchet and Clank and Resistance, until they got fed up with that and stopped making first party games for them, now they make third party games for EA.

No, they were the same deal as Insomniac until Sony purchased them, they were third party for a decade and made Apple, Genesis and 3DO games. Then they made the Crash Bandicoot games that were co-published/distributed between Universal/SCE. Then Universal got the rights to the characters and Sony purchased ND and made the studio change from a third party to a first party.

So? Gears of War 1, 2 and 3 are still first party games. Microsoft says so.  Lucasarts own Star Wars, but you damn sure Knights of the Republic is an EA game.

Publishing is getting the game on shelves (or digitally distributed) . You neither need to fund the game or even expect a promise of a return on it.

And I will have to call you out on this. THERE ARE NO OFFICIAL STATEMENTS IN REGARDS TO WHAT CONTRACTS MICROSOFT HAS WITH EPIC REGARDING THE GEARS OF WAR SERIES.

Any one who says that Epic only has an "x amount of game" deal with Microsoft is making shit up...or parroting the guesses of Michael Pachter on the GT Bonus round from 2009. The truth is it could have been 1 game and Epic liked working with MS so much, they wanted to continue in perpetuity or it could be for 50,000 Gears games and Mark Rein has sold his decendents into slavery. Only Epic and MS (and their lawyers) know.

It's an urban myth perpetuated by the ardent desire for non-Xbox 360 owners in hopes that the franchise might make it to another console some day. The franchise might if Epic gets another publisher, those 3 games won't...unless it's a Microsoft Published HD collection for one of their new consoles. 

The crystal ball says, "options for renewal" after each games sales come in would be the most likely scenario...MS wouldn't want to tie themselves down to a series that might fail, just ask the Too Human Trilogy.

They could have done that with Part 3 and Shadow Complex...of course that was back when it was only a 2 game deal, I imagine next gen when Samaritan and PCF's Pendulum War trilogy it will only be a 8 game contract.

lol...then by your logic Mass Effect one was first party (which is just coo coo). Do you know how many third party games have been published by Microsoft? Learn the terms buddy. Naughty Dog was a second party developer for Sony, which means they held third party status (notice I said status) but developed exclusively for Sony by choice (and contractually) working on Sony IP's. All of their games were created (while with Sony) with  Sony's platforms in mind.

Why is there an argument about first v. third party games? also why is S.T.A.G.E. still posting in this thread?

Are you going to write his name in the Death Note?!

If he keeps making statements about Americans being stupid and only playing FPS games, then yes  . 

Nevermind your derailing the topic......its all relative in the end. If the game is published under the MGS label some consider it a 1st party game made by a 3rd party developer.