By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - I think I know who will be making Microsofts Japanese title.

Jaywood2010 on 29 March 2014
Nem said:

I just read the headline on the Xbox thread and Microsoft says it has multiple first party titles in development for Japan.

Some of us believe it could be owned ip's.  Example being Phantom Dust, Lost Odyssey, and State of Decay being Microsoft owned Ip's.  SO in other words microsoft could be paying a 2nd party for a first party game whether it be a new ip or an existing one.  All it means is whatever it is, it has no chance of going on competing platforms since it will be owned by Microsoft regardless of the developer.

The only prediction i have at this moment is  a new Phantom Dust will be announced before the end of 2014




       

Around the Network
ethomaz on 29 March 2014

Nem said:

Ryse is actually second party. Though Microsoft seems to own the IP.

Gears of War was second party aswell until recently.

Gears was third-party exclusive .

Ryse is first-party exclusive.

Neither Crytek or Epic was exclusive studio that works only for MS... that's means a second-party exclusive studio... there is no second-party game.



Turkish on 29 March 2014

I KNOW IT BETTER THAN YOU

THEY WILL GET A NEW IDOLMASTER ROLMFAO



Nem on 29 March 2014
JayWood2010 said:
Nem said:

I just read the headline on the Xbox thread and Microsoft says it has multiple first party titles in development for Japan.

Some of us believe it could be owned ip's.  Example being Phantom Dust, Lost Odyssey, and State of Decay being Microsoft owned Ip's.  SO in other words microsoft could be paying a 2nd party for a first party game whether it be a new ip or an existing one.  

The only prediction i have at this moment is  a new Phantom Dust will be announced before the end of 2014


I thought who developed the game is the "party" not the IP itself. ^^

But i understand what you want to say.



Figgycal on 29 March 2014

It could just be that they have mistaken the word "esclusive" for "first-party". Unless they have been buying Japanese developers.



Around the Network
Jaywood2010 on 29 March 2014
Nem said:


I thought who developed the game is the "party" not the IP itself. ^^

But i understand what you want to say.


Youre right, it would be a 2nd party but it would also be a first party ip if that makes any sense.




       

ethomaz on 29 March 2014

Just to explain guys...

Software (Game)
First-party: The console maker own the IP
Third-party: A third-party own the IP

Developer (Studio)
First-party: The console maker own the studio
Second-party: A thrid-party studio that works in exclusive to the console marker
Thrid-party: A third-party lol

Eclusive = the software/game is only in this platform.

Figgycal said:

It could just be that they have mistaken the word "esclusive" for "first-party". Unless they have been buying Japanese developers.

If MS own the IP it is first-paty... Ryse for example.

 



Jaywood2010 on 29 March 2014
ethomaz said:

Just to explain guys...

Software (Game)
First-party: The console maker own the IP
Third-party: A third-party own the IP

Developer (Studio)
First-party: The console maker own the IP
Second-party: A thrid-party studio that works in exclusive to the console marker
Thrid-party: A third-party lol

 

Rarely do i agree with you but this is what my conclusion is as well




       

Nem on 29 March 2014
ethomaz said:

Nem said:

Ryse is actually second party. Though Microsoft seems to own the IP.

Gears of War was second party aswell until recently.

Gears was third-party exclusive .

Ryse is first-party exclusive.

Neither Crytek or Epic was exclusive studio that works only for MS... that's means a second-party exclusive studio... there is no second-party game.

You are right about Gears actually, if it was published by Epic.

Hmm..  it makes some logic what you are saying. Though i think the difference is negligable. Second party titles are always gonna be exclusive. You are telling me the IP ownership dictates if its first or second party? Doesnt make much sense to me. :x   An IP isnt a "party".



ethomaz on 29 March 2014

Nem said:

You are right about Gears actually, if it was published by Epic.

Hmm..  it makes some logic what you are saying. Though i think the difference is negligable. Second party titles are always gonna be exclusive. You are telling me the IP ownership dictates if its first or second party? Doesnt make much sense to me. :x   An IP isnt a "party".

There is no second-party title... second-party is a word used for studios (1st: Concole maker own the studio; 2nd: Exclusive developer contract; 3rd: well third)... the IP is first-party (console maker own the IP) or thrid-party (a third own the IP).