Gamespot rumor: Big third-party Xbox One exclusive at E3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nafai1123 said:
When did the definition of 1st party change? 1st party has always been a OWNED studio. Published is 2nd party, anything else is 3rd party. If you're going to classify 1st party as ANY game that was published, it completely dissolves the meaning of 1st party....which I suspect is the reason for the attempted change in definition to begin with.

ME1 is first party? LOL

Here's how the classification SHOULD work, since it actual creates distinction which is the whole fucking point of classification to begin with.

1st party: owned studio, owned IP
2nd party: published game, owned IP
3rd party: published or non-published game, don't own IP

Look at that, they actually create some distinct meaning!
Click to expand...

2nd-party is a colloquial term to describe a developer's relationship, not the type of game that is produced. a 2nd-party company is actually a 3rd-party company who works exclusively with a 1st-party company and may make games with a 1st-party intellectual property.

the term '2nd-party' is really confusing because developer relationships can change all the time. is thatgamecompany a 2nd-party sony studio? what about next-level games? it's a really nebulous definition that has no meaning in the real world and we shouldn't use it anymore.

edit: fuck yeah top of the page. this is going to replace the whales in my nightmares.
 
pswii60 said:
Owning the IP or not is irrelevant. If the game is both fully funded and published, it's second party.
Click to expand...

Oh, I understand that, but I think that's how it should be classified. It creates distinction between a published IP that could eventually turn multiplatform and a published IP that won't.

TheUnsunghero26 said:
It's a few pages back, but I posted a link to how Phil Spencer defines 2nd party. He's even answered a question on twitter saying that ME1 is first party (its a unique case given EA's acquisition though), and Dr. Ray even said it was first party.

I know there's a confusion over 1st/2nd party (I used to think 2nd party was what you said) but, the guy I was quoting was saying they were third party, which is far from the truth.
Click to expand...

Ah gotcha. Yeah, they definitely aren't 3rd party, but I dislike Spencers attempt at confusing the definition of 1st party. At the very least, owned studio = 1st party, published game = 2nd party.

AniHawk said:
2nd-party is a colloquial term to describe a developer's relationship, not the type of game that is produced. a 2nd-party company is actually a 3rd-party company who works exclusively with a 1st-party company and may make games with a 1st-party intellectual property.

the term '2nd-party' is really confusing because developer relationships can change all the time. is thatgamecompany a 2nd-party sony studio? what about next-level games? it's a really nebulous definition that has no meaning in the real world and we shouldn't use it anymore.

edit: fuck yeah top of the page. this is going to replace the whales in my nightmares.
Click to expand...

I understand the actual definition is between the companies, but "1st party games" and "3rd party games" have become common terms and therefore should have a clear definition.
 
funkystudent said:
I remember hearing that Ubi and MS might be getting close and MS getting Co Marketing on Assassins Creed.

What if MS comes in and saves Rainbow Six Patriots from its development hell and its the game?

PoP just seems like a weird fit for MS but Patriots could have been in a similar spot as Dead Rising 3. IE: Cancelled or get the 1th party to fund it and MS paid the bill
Click to expand...

Where did you hear that about Assassins Creed? Would be interesting, and weird, always associated it with Sony!
 
There's no such thing as second party, it's just some needless term invented by people on message boards, or maybe the press.

First party games are published by a platform holder.
Third party games are not published by a platform holder.

The only real point of ambiguity would be when first parties publish games on other platforms, because those are first party games with third party publishing.
 
Rembrandt said:
Are you saying Episodes from Liberty City was a negative for Rockstar? Considering MS paid a pretty nice amount for something that helped extend the life of the game, plus get them more revenue?

If anything, Rockstar has learned the negatives of exclusives period since Sony isn't paying for exclusivity with GTA anymore.
Click to expand...
I wasn't talking about money, I think they are more interested in treating their audience equally since the exclusives.
 
Ohh, I hope it's a franchise being revived, like Dino Crisis.

It's obvious Microsoft once again thinks throwing money at the problem is the solution, which generally means good things for gamers :D
 
I hope this is another time exclusive thing not a straight up exclusive. I hate 3rd party doing exclusives especially for popular IPs. MS throwing money hats as usual :/

Why does GAF has a big boner for shenmue? Was it really a great game? Would it be even be relevant in today's gaming landscape?
 
kinoki said:
This isn't news. This is a vague statement that's so non-specific it's right by not stating anything that's not already known.
Click to expand...

Yup. In other news my uncle works at Nintendo and he says at least one new game is going to be announced.

My cousin works at Sony and he says at least one new indie game will be announced at Sony's press conference.
 
Shenmue III would only excite a very limited segment of the hardcore base. There is zero mass market appeal and even a majority of gamers who grew up on PS360 would probably ignore it.

I think it would be another nice feather in Sony's cap when Mark Cerny & Yu Suzuki announce Shenmue III (and Shenmue I+II HD) for PlayStation 4, either this E3, or at next year's.

I very much doubt Phil Spencer and Microsoft would bother with the Shenmue IP.
 
I hope it's Platinum Games, just to see next-gen awesomeness from them. If that's true, then everyone but Sony is contracting them. Sony, what's your major malfunction.
 
Stumpokapow said:
Timed exclusive on ME4, console exclusive on L4D3, or exclusive on Dragon's Dogma 2 or something from Capcom
Click to expand...

Mass Effect 4 being timed exclusive seems to make the most sense, as it is a franchise with a strong association with the Microsoft brand and they have a strong positive relationship with the developer. I wonder if Valve would be willing to make L4D3 exclusive though to MS console again, I heard their relationship has become increasingly problematic because of the issues with XBL restriction.

I'd take Dragon's Dogma 2 so hard if it means it exists :O
 
Tenchi Ryu said:
Hmmm....

*Looks at Bioware's Wiki page*

"Untitled Star Wars game Frostbite 3 In development"

*Remembers Spencer loves KOTOR*

*Can see Disney collabing with MS*

*Exclusive star wars title = Megaton*

tumblr_m9cho70BUC1ry10fwo1_500.gif
Click to expand...

What?

Why is this the first I'm hearing about this?
 
Stop jinxing Dragon's Dogma 2 GAF! God dammit if this happens and I don't get to play it on my ps4 I'm making a voodoo doll out of all of you


aka cry about it for weeks
 
zmihaie said:
here's where it gets somewhat fuzzy

take for example Minecraft
MS doesn't own the IP, but they published it

can you call that 1st party? no
Click to expand...
Minecraft on 360 and XBO is first party, yes.

Just like Mass Effect, it doesn't matter that it has an alternate publisher on other platforms.
 
Tenchi Ryu said:
Hmmm....

*Looks at Bioware's Wiki page*

"Untitled Star Wars game Frostbite 3 In development"

*Remembers Spencer loves KOTOR*

*Can see Disney collabing with MS*

*Exclusive star wars title = Megaton*

tumblr_m9cho70BUC1ry10fwo1_500.gif
Click to expand...

I'll keep an eye out for this also because of the Steven Spielberg/George Lucas Xbox and MS (and kinect at the time) love and the now original Microsoft TV Show angle.
 
StuBurns said:
There's no such thing as second party, it's just some needless term invented by people on message boards, or maybe the press.
Click to expand...

I think second party is a very real thing, it just is a distinction that isn't different enough from first party for game buyers to care. First Party means a platform holder owned IP developed by a studio owned by the platform holder. Second party means a platform holder owns the IP, but its developed under contract by an independent studio. Either way the games that end up being made are owned by the platform holder and aren't going to appear on any other platform unless they specifically allow it.
 
StuBurns said:
There's no such thing as second party, it's just some needless term invented by people on message boards, or maybe the press.

First party games are published by a platform holder.
Third party games are not published by a platform holder.

The only real point of ambiguity would be when first parties publish games on other platforms, because those are first party games with third party publishing.
Click to expand...

The way I see it, first party games are games where the total revenue belongs to the platform holder. Nintendo makes and sells a Mario game, they get all the money. Nintendo publishes Wonderful W101, but Platinum Games gets a cut of the profits, so I don't consider it first party even if it is exclusive.
 
StuBurns said:
First party games are published by a platform holder.
Third party games are not published by a platform holder.
Click to expand...

This is a change from the historical definition. And not a very helpful one. Saying "Mass Effect is both first and third party" means that it's not a useful classification system.
 
Raoh said:
I'll keep an eye out for this also because of the Steven Spielberg/George Lucas Xbox and MS (and kinect at the time) love and the now original Microsoft TV Show angle.
Click to expand...

Also JJ Abrahms showing up ain the Xbox One's videos last year and him being the director of new Star Wars films.
 
AmyS said:
Shenmue III would only excite a very limited segment of the hardcore base. There is zero mass market appeal and even a majority of gamers who grew up on PS360 would probably ignore it.

I think it would be another nice feather in Sony's cap when Mark Cerny & Yu Suzuki announce Shenmue III (and Shenmue I+II HD) for PlayStation 4, either this E3, or at next year's.

I very much doubt Phil Spencer and Microsoft would bother with the Shenmue IP.
Click to expand...

Huh? You say it would be bad for ms but good for Sony? Does not compute.

Also google which system shenmue 2 was exclusive to in America...
 
Admiral Woofington said:
Stop jinxing Dragon's Dogma 2 GAF! God dammit if this happens and I don't get to play it on my ps4 I'm making a voodoo doll out of all of you


aka cry about it for weeks
Click to expand...

Heh, I'll be sad if it is Dragon's Dogma 2, but you know what, I'll totally sacrifice Dragon's Dogma 2 just so it isn't Fallout :P. I guess then I'm going to be the first Voodoo doll you make ;).
 
Birgitte2004 said:
This is a change from the historical definition. And not a very helpful one. Saying "Mass Effect is both first and third party" means that it's not a useful classification system.
Click to expand...
It doesn't really matter what is useful, it matters what is correct within the legal terms people are using.

What doesn't make sense is using them randomly for any given meaning the person wants to, "oh, the developer gets a residual for this game, so it's third party, or maybe second party", "well, a MS owned studio is making a MS owned IP for the DS, and it's not being published by MS or Nintendo, so it doesn't fit any of them, so I guess that's fourth party".

The terms only have value if people use them with consistent meaning, and MS thinks Mass Effect is first party, and Epic think Gears is, obviously they don't regard the term second party whatsoever. In which case, there is only first and third, and the only thing that matters is who's the publisher.
 
Amir0x said:
Ohh, I hope it's a franchise being revived, like Dino Crisis.

It's obvious Microsoft once again thinks throwing money at the problem is the solution, which generally means good things for gamers :D
Click to expand...

It's only good for gamers if Microsoft uses that money to fund a game that wouldn't have otherwise been created. It's BAD for gamers if they use that money to secure exclusivity for a game that otherwise would have been available on other platforms. The thought of potentially losing an established franchise such as Fallout, Mass Effect, Deus Ex, Just Cause, etc. (even if it's only timed exclusivity) infuriates me.
 
I find it very hard to believe they could snag something as big as fallout or ME even only as a timed exclusive in the current market. I think it'll just be the rumoured platinum game. We'll see I guess.
 
AyaisMUsikWhore said:
Star Wars is very very convincing.
Click to expand...

It's starting to make just too much sense.

Star Wars has a very strong U.S and U.K following, so MS could capitalize on the only two markets they pretty much have left. MS and Disney usually get real buddy buddy, and throw in some George Lucas love for Microsoft, might be on to something, especially if EA is involved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

"Xbox PC" has started showing up in more third-party trailers
News 
39
966
Walliwallipaloo replied
switch 2 power excites third party studios
Rumor 
45
4K
GigaBowser replied
my analysis playing third party games on GC
Retro  2
94
2K
BlackTron replied
Will Sony become third party publisher?
2 3 4 5
232
5K
RCX replied
Do you think third party developers will ever go back
22
508
cobaltorange replied
Top Bottom