First Party Developers are the guys who own a group that develop the game, they publish the game themselves, and the game is made on the console they made.
These are the Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft.
Second Party Developers are the guys who own a group that develops the game, they publish it themselves, but the game is made for someone else's consoles
These are the SEGA, SQUARE ENIX, CAPCOM, Bandai Namco, sometimes the Indie Crowd.
Third Party Developers are the guys who are the group that develop the game, but someone else has to publish it, and it's made for someone else's console.
These are Bioware, Team Ninja, Netherrealms Studios, Arc System Works, Platinum Games, sometimes the indie crowd.
Or am I completely wrong, and the 1st party is Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, and everyone else is 3rd Party?
No.
First-Party developers are Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft - They develop games in-house for their own platforms.
Third-Party developers are Developers developing for a platform like PlayStation, Xbox and Nintendo with a publisher that are not the above mentioned.
Second-Party developers would also be Developers developing for a platform like PlayStation, Xbox or Nintendo.
Difference here being that all their games have stayed "exclusive" to one of the big three and probably were also published by them, even though they're an independent studio.
Insomniac was a second-party developer up until, well, Fuse.
Sucker Punch was a second-party developer.
Rare was a second-party developer for Nintendo back in the day.
Rare and Sucker Punch arent second-party anymore since they're now 100% owned by either Sony or Microsoft - making them first-party.
Welp, my school taught me that which party a company is in is determined by how many channels they must go through to get their product to the public.
Therefore, a company that must go through 2 external channels are 3rd party, 1 external channel is 2nd party, and if the entire process is done by company itself, it's first party. At least, that's how I understood it...
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 04:52:06 AM
a company that must go through 2 external channels are 3rd party, 1 external channel is 2nd party, and if the entire process is done by company itself, it's first party.
2nd Party: The one external channel is The console Manufacturer
3rd Party: Product is licensed by the first party and then published by a third party.
And then you've got independent developers.
At least, that's as low as I can simplify it within your parameters.
A first party would be as Kyo said, studios within Sony/MS/Nintnedo. Second Party would be studios owned by SOny/MS/Nintendo, third party would be studios within the likes of Ubisoft, Activision, EA, et cetera.
So, first party are like Santa Monica Studios, Retro Studios, Naughty Dog who are owned by either Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft.
Second party are like those that aren't owned by the big 3, but they games on their consoles... Still a little confused on this one...
Third party are guys like Sonic Team, Bioware that get liscened by the big 3, and they go through a publisher like SEGA, EA.
Right?
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 05:16:40 AM
So, first party are like Santa Monica Studios, Retro Studios, Naughty Dog who are owned by either Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft.
Second party are like those that aren't owned by the big 3, but they games on their consoles... Still a little confused on this one...
Third party are guys like Sonic Team, Bioware that get liscened by the big 3, and they go through a publisher like SEGA, EA.
Right?
Best exmaple for a second-party developer would've been Insomniac up until a few years ago.
All their games were published by Sony and always were on Sony platforms - but they were never part of Sony per se.
That would've also included Sucker Punch until recently right?
So second party has to be exclusive to the console, but not owned by the console maker?
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 05:34:16 AM
That would've also included Sucker Punch until recently right?
So second party has to be exclusive to the console, but not owned by the console maker?
Basically.
So like... is Sonic Team second party?
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 06:00:02 AM
So like... is Sonic Team second party?
no.
Also, i moved all your videogame related topics to the videogame section
Quote from: {Your Lovely Kyo}~ on July 29, 2013, 06:07:51 AM
no.
Also, i moved all your videogame related topics to the videogame section
In that case, what the hell is Second Party?
If you're gonna make your games exclusive to a console, why not just join them?
Also thx.
Because as long as they're not entirely owned by a manufacturer, they don't have to do what that manufacturer says? They can make whatever they want.
Also, Sonic Team is a team owned by (Or part of) SEGA, which is a third-party publisher.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 30, 2013, 01:06:49 AM
Because as long as they're not entirely owned by a manufacturer, they don't have to do what that manufacturer says? They can make whatever they want.
So they get to make what they want at the expense of the 1st Party's image? While still having the potential to leave at any time?
So then why bother going 1st Party?
Better funding.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 30, 2013, 04:53:00 AM
Better funding.
But they also have to make what the first party allows them to?
Second parties are still given creative freedom.. they make games and then show them to the first party for approval, I suppose. It's not like they're "under control", But considering they get their funding from the first party, it simply means if the first party asks for something specific to be done with said funding, then you do that.
Well I guess they just go down the route their comfortable with I suppose.
And I hear that Game Freak is actually 2nd Party... The thought of them pulling an Insomniac makes me uneasy. And yes I know Nintendo owns the IP of Pokemon and Harmo Knight.
I don't think they will. Nintendo still funds a lot of their projects and marketing, yes? The only reason they would is if Nintendo stopped supporting them.
Pfft, like that'll ever happen.
Yeah. No way in hell.
Unless the likes of Pokemon one day become irrelevant, we won't need to worry about Game Freak turning coat.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 30, 2013, 07:50:35 AM
Unless the likes of Pokemon one day become irrelevant.
Then gaming would've officially lost all soul...
Not really. Even some timeless formulas eventually become old. The only way I can see that happening is if the brand doesn't change along with the times. The solution isn't always just to add more 'mon.
They seem to be doing that well.. for now.