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

Forums - Sony Discussion - A Look At Sony's 1st and 2nd Party Studios PS3/PS4

theprof00 on 16 December 2014
DanneSandin said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
DanneSandin said:
Cool data! But I don't get the difference between 1st and 2nd party?

Not owned by Sony but under contract for certain amount of games and partially/totally financed by them.

Ex: Heavy Rain for Sony, Bayonetta 2 for Nintendo, Gears of War 1-3 for MS.

Ok, but you putting GeoW up there doesn't really help clarify things... Are you talking about 3rd party exclusives, or games financed by Sony made by 3rd party companies - like Bayo2?

mmm no it's not entirely correct as epic was making multiplats as well. It's basically a studio that makes exclusives but isn't owned. Sometimes those companies are partially owned or funded by the first party as well, which is what spurs exclusivity. With gears of war, it might have just been a contractual agreement, but they were releasing other games on ps3 as well, like unreal tournament.

2nd party really just means it's a first party that isn't owned by the platform holder.

Examples:
Nintendo: GameFreak
Sony:(previously)Insomniac, (previously)team ico, (previously) quantic dream and media molecule. Sony now owns all of those except insomniac.
MS: ?



Around the Network
enditall727 on 16 December 2014

Interesting thread.

I think that Naughty Dog is at the point where they should be able to release a game every year this generation starting in 2015. They have 2 teams and basically didn't release anything in 2014. Are there any other 1 st party studios that split into 2 teams?



HollyGamer on 16 December 2014

Tag



Farsala on 16 December 2014

Needs slight updating for San Diego on PS4 as Troll Whisper said earlier.



theprof00 on 16 December 2014
BraLoD said:
theprof00 said:
DanneSandin said:

Ok, but you putting GeoW up there doesn't really help clarify things... Are you talking about 3rd party exclusives, or games financed by Sony made by 3rd party companies - like Bayo2?

mmm no it's not entirely correct as epic was making multiplats as well. It's basically a studio that makes exclusives but isn't owned. Sometimes those companies are partially owned or funded by the first party as well, which is what spurs exclusivity. With gears of war, it might have just been a contractual agreement, but they were releasing other games on ps3 as well, like unreal tournament.

2nd party really just means it's a first party that isn't owned by the platform holder.

Examples:
Nintendo: GameFreak
Sony:(previously)Insomniac, (previously)team ico, (previously) quantic dream and media molecule. Sony now owns all of those except insomniac.
MS: ?


Nintendo doesn't owning GameFreak is one thing I can't really understand.

They probably don't want to be bought, or maybe they're too expensive? I don't think they're a public company so they can't be bought out or anything. They probably have all their costs paid for and keep 50%. I don't know either man. They should've offered back when the first pokemon released. It was obvious how big the franchise would become.



Around the Network
PlayMatt on 16 December 2014
BraLoD said:
PlayMatt said:
I love SCEJS but they were TERRIBLE on the PS3 Generation...

No sign of a new awesome JRPG/making the so much wanted LoD
No mainline Ape Escape (the move game is a big SHIT!)
Didn't finish The Last Guardian!
Took SIX YEARS after Siren 2 to release only a reimagine of the first Siren, ok, the only thing they did (which is AWESOME was Gravity Rush, but bitch please 6 years for a portable game and a reimagine?????)
Puppeteer was awesome
The Eye of Judgment was a good try... too bad it didn't rock! :/
At least they made some classic PSP/Vita games!


Well, they gave me a 10 game (IMO) each gen.

The Legend of Dragoon
Shadow of the Colossus
Demon's Souls

The problem is that they were really messed up last gen, I remember reading a article they were doing what they wanted without any bussiness sense and schedules and all that... and that's why things like The Last Guardian absurd delay happens. But now they are back on the tracks. I hope for their best as they are my favorite gaming studio.

They already have Bloodborne to the PS4 now, if they can also gimme The Last Guardian and The Legend of Dragoon 2 this gen...
No, I can't take it, it's just too much to me. XD


yes they're finally getting back in the track on the PS4 generation... Already put out Knack (lol) and are almost releasing Bloodborne... But man from the PS2 to the PS3 it's main internal teams got so stuck in time... in PS2 days we got so much! 2 games from team Ico (Ico/SoTC) 2 games from team Siren (Siren/Siren2) 2 main Ape Escape games (Ape Escape 2 & 3), hopefully they will shine again on PS4 days... 



The Bitch is back! And better then ever! #BritneyReturns

SONY Bring them BACK for PS4 and VITA!

theprof00 on 16 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
theprof00 said:

They probably don't want to be bought, or maybe they're too expensive? I don't think they're a public company so they can't be bought out or anything. They probably have all their costs paid for and keep 50%. I don't know either man. They should've offered back when the first pokemon released. It was obvious how big the franchise would become.

If you were the one that created Pokemon would you have sold it? Or would you have wanted not only creative control but also a chunk of the profit?

mmm what I'm saying is that, as Gamefreak, having created pokemon, you could have sold for several hudred million, and then funded work in a whole new series of games.
I mean yeah, why give that up. But if you could just sell it and pretty much secure you financially for the rest of your life? Polyphony digital sold their series and they have complete control. It's all about the contract.



Dgc1808 on 16 December 2014

An average sales per game column would be cool.



4 ≈ One

pokoko on 16 December 2014

Yoshida brought in the founder of Sony Santa Monica to get Studio Japan in order. I think they'll rebound.

Guerrilla having two teams now should be interesting.



theprof00 on 16 December 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
theprof00 said:

mmm what I'm saying is that, as Gamefreak, having created pokemon, you could have sold for several hudred million, and then funded work in a whole new series of games.
I mean yeah, why give that up. But if you could just sell it and pretty much secure you financially for the rest of your life? Polyphony digital sold their series and they have complete control. It's all about the contract.

If the ip is as big a hit as Pokemon was then you can keep it and still be secure financially for the rest of your life.

I don't know why you bring up Polyphony though, they never sold anything, Sony initially created them and has owned them ever since.

You're right, I was mistaken about their origins. My point was that because they had a successful franchise they were given control of their development without interference.

Don't know why you're making an argument out of selling or not :D

It's simply the age old question of lottery winnings. Say you win 100m dollars.
Do you take the lump sump of 60m? Or do you take the installments of 3m for 30 years?

It's not a cut and dry answer.
Personally, I take the lump sum because I can invest it.

It's similar. You can make 50% of the sales profits now and keep doing what you're doing, or you can take 40% and 500m plus contractual negotiations.