It’s literally the Principal Skinner meme and I love watching it unfold in real time. Especially as he keeps telling people they don’t “get it”, as if he is dropping deep logic here that is just beyond most of the users. 

Please, kindly get lost. 

I haven’t disputed the ownership of titles. Only the nature of their production. 

You are playing semantics, instead of seeing this at face value. 

That comment of yours is nicely displaying I was never ever wrong about you and your nature. Not that there was any doubt. 

Ok, you clearly don't get what everyone is telling you. Let's be real no one complains more about nintendo than nintendo fans.

Also congrats for single handedly derailing the thread.

You’re one to talk. Congrats on providing absolutely nothing into the mix. 

Feels like talking to a brick wall here

My thought exactly with some of you in this thread.

This started with this one question:

-Who can survive just by 1st party alone?

Now, tell me, how is a first party IP title being developed or co-developed by a third party developer equivalent to surviving by first party alone? 
The reliance on outside devs remains there, which is why I said none of the big 3 could survive alone in the long run.

The question of who can survive on first party alone is a simple question with an obvious answer, because Nintendo has literally been doing it for generations. But you don’t like the answer so you are trying to harp on irrelevant semantics.

It’s not any of our fault that Microsoft or Sony don’t have stables of long standing high quality IPs that they can outsource to other studios to make first party games with. Nintendo on the other hand does. They also have a much stronger first party offering. This is obvious when you look at sales (nothing MS offers is close and now with GamePass nothing will ever be close, and the only Sony titles that approach Nintendo sales do so with massive bundling and deep price cuts).

But you know all of this which is why you want to exclude it, because excluding it means nothing to MicroSony but has a big effect on Nintendo. All of these companies consider these games first party, get with the times. It doesn’t matter what you think qualifies as first or third party, it’s widely accepted what is first party by pretty much everyone else.

Sony doesn’t have a Fire Emblem or Pokémon in their arsenal to outsource but if they did, you’d consider it first party.

What a stupid hill to die on.

You are Sony fan, no wonder.

Period

Jeez this is the worst thread I've seen in a while. Instead of arguing the semantics of first party and third party and hurling personal attacks it would be far more fruitful to discuss how much tougher it would be for Nintendo to survive without the assistance of third parties. There's potential for an interesting discussion there instead of whatever this mess is.