[PlayStation] State of play announced for the 31st of January 40 minutes 15+ games

People preemptively setting themselves up to be "disappointed" if Sony doesn't show games from their "1st party" studios = retarded. We're going to get a bunch of *exclusive* bangers, end of story. I'll say it again, we won't be shown anything from Guerilla, SSM, Bend, Sucker Punch, ND or Housemarque until later this year, PlayStation has more than enough ammo until then, stop playing.

If in this SoP alone we get gameplay trailers for both Death Stranding 2 and Judas that's already big time, we're talking about the latest games from TWO of the greatest devs in the history of the industry, let's keep it all the way real. On top of that you've got all the other stuff, can't fucking wait 👌
 

aJsnvXj.jpg

Mr Rogers Clown GIF
 
I'm not having this argument with you again because of your made-up definitions. The truth remains the same: all funded and owned titles are first-party games.
But Sony doesn't own either of the IPs.
Edit: just checked, Stellar Blade IP belongs to Shift Up, Rise of Ronin belongs to KT.
 
Last edited:
I forgot to answer this part.

Death Stranding and TLOU 2 are both first-party games because Sony funded and published them. It's the reason that both games have the PS Studios logo with 0 differences at all.

Fall Guys / Kena are not published or funded by Sony, so they are not first-party games. Those are 3rd party games. And you'll notice that the PS Studios logo does not appear for these two.
Thanks for the answer. So for you all game will the PS studio loge will be first party. Good enough for me. My question was in general, as limiting myself for just the SOP don't make sense to me. As for your other post, I don't really care about first second or third party, only wanting to understand why you were arguing with someone else about it and why that could be problematic for anybody. Remember that Sony giving Kojima the Decima engine AND 100 Guerrilla employees is way beyond the normal help that a studio can have from a publisher. So for any game made in collaboration with another studio, I consider that second party at a first glance. Only after knowing the details can I say that it is first party or not. For example Fall guys could have been a first party game if Sony decided to buy the studio that created the game before it got to completion. Older, but I would not consider Scalebound a first party game, because it would have be a Platinum game, just funded by Xbox. I do admid that at some point it get ridiculous and will think about it. As for Returnal, I consider any studio that make games exclusively for Sony, like From Software did before Demon's souls, to be "second party", even if I admit that making a difference is academic at this point, and that I consider Ratchet&Clank games first party since the PS2. Stupid, I know.
 
People preemptively setting themselves up to be "disappointed" if Sony doesn't show games from their "1st party" studios = retarded. We're going to get a bunch of *exclusive* bangers, end of story. I'll say it again, we won't be shown anything from Guerilla, SSM, Bend, Sucker Punch, ND or Housemarque until later this year, PlayStation has more than enough ammo until then, stop playing.

If in this SoP alone we get gameplay trailers for both Death Stranding 2 and Judas that's already big time, we're talking about the latest games from TWO of the greatest devs in the history of the industry, let's keep it all the way real. On top of that you've got all the other stuff, can't fucking wait 👌
Yeah, no kidding. My love of a game doesn't depend on whether its 1st party, 3rd party, exclusive. A good game is a good game. If the game is exclusive to Playstation and/or heavily marketted with Playstation, they should show it at their show.
 
Thanks for the answer. So for you all game will the PS studio loge will be first party. Good enough for me. My question was in general, as limiting myself for just the SOP don't make sense to me. As for your other post, I don't really care about first second or third party, only wanting to understand why you were arguing with someone else about it and why that could be problematic for anybody. Remember that Sony giving Kojima the Decima engine AND 100 Guerrilla employees is way beyond the normal help that a studio can have from a publisher. So for any game made in collaboration with another studio, I consider that second party at a first glance. Only after knowing the details can I say that it is first party or not. For example Fall guys could have been a first party game if Sony decided to buy the studio that created the game before it got to completion. Older, but I would not consider Scalebound a first party game, because it would have be a Platinum game, just funded by Xbox. I do admid that at some point it get ridiculous and will think about it. As for Returnal, I consider any studio that make games exclusively for Sony, like From Software did before Demon's souls, to be "second party", even if I admit that making a difference is academic at this point, and that I consider Ratchet&Clank games first party since the PS2. Stupid, I know.
As you can see, having distinctions like these eventually become arbitrary and incorrect.

R&C, Returnal, Death Stranding, Demon's Souls, are all first party games PlayStation. Scalebound would have also been first-party for Xbox, because it was to be funded and published by Xbox.

I also posted Phil Spencer's statement on this. Hermen also talked about this in one of the interviews and said the same thing.

 
I think showcasing games is important, they'll never please critics on whats displayed, defending fandom etc. it's import for Sony fanboys to hear this not everything has to be an attack on Microsoft or Nintendo. Those are respected institutions with people running around talking about video games the same thing that's foundational to your Sony empire.
 
I think showcasing games is important, they'll never please critics on whats displayed, defending fandom etc. it's import for Sony fanboys to hear this not everything has to be an attack on Microsoft or Nintendo. Those are respected institutions with people running around talking about video games the same thing that's foundational to your Sony empire.
Sony pretty much never attacks Xbox. They flat out deny it's existence, which is an even bigger unsult.
 
As you can see, having distinctions like these eventually become arbitrary and incorrect.

R&C, Returnal, Death Stranding, Demon's Souls, are all first party games PlayStation. Scalebound would have also been first-party for Xbox, because it was to be funded and published by Xbox.

I also posted Phil Spencer's statement on this. Hermen also talked about this in one of the interviews and said the same thing.
When emotions are getting mixed in, normal for things to be arbitrary. Some people are discussing if films not made by Miyazaki but by the studio will be considered true Ghibli films. I prefer being happy that Sony first party games are put on a piedestal than getting angry about that. But your post did make me think more about it.
 
So, looking to see a couple of things (none of which will actually happen)

1) The little devil inside
2) Ps Portal news/ firmware update
3) I saw this mentioned somewhere else and I think its a fantastic idea. Sea of Thieves on Playstation... would be awesome.
4) Dave the Diver release date
5) Concord information and it actually being something worth looking into
6) Silent Hill 1/2 remake info
7) surprise me!!!!
 
I don't understand what you (and well, Heisenberg, because that sentence is weirdly worded :messenger_grinning_sweat:) are trying to say, but I'm talking about this.
In this comment, I made an error, by the way. I meant to write funded and published. I have fixed my original comment.
 
When emotions are getting mixed in, normal for things to be arbitrary. Some people are discussing if films not made by Miyazaki but by the studio will be considered true Ghibli films. I prefer being happy that Sony first party games are put on a piedestal than getting angry about that. But your post did make me think more about it.
I've always thought of exclusive games that were funded by Sony/Xbox/Nintendo but not outright owned by them and have made multi-plats to be 2nd party.

Sunset Overdrive being an example. Scalebound would have fallen into that category.

But it ultimately doesn't matter.
 
So, looking to see a couple of things (none of which will actually happen)

1) The little devil inside
2) Ps Portal news/ firmware update
3) I saw this mentioned somewhere else and I think its a fantastic idea. Sea of Thieves on Playstation... would be awesome.
4) Dave the Diver release date
5) Concord information and it actually being something worth looking into
6) Silent Hill 1/2 remake info
7) surprise me!!!!
I am not getting my hopes up for an awesome SoP, but Sony is long overdue for a good one. The last few have largely sucked. I would love to see confirmation of the Bloodborne remake.
 
'Owned' (as in owning a specific game) can still be right, we have Sunset Overdrive and Spider-Man as some examples.
Yeah, but I can see how 'owned' can get muddy. Sunset Overdrive is now owned by Sony, but Sunset Overdrive is still a first-party Xbox game. Because Xbox funded and published it.
 
I'm not having this argument with you again because of your made-up definitions. The truth remains the same: all funded and published* titles are first-party games.
Lol, nonsense.
You can´t just buy something and pretend you did it.
We´re still only talking about 3rd party software with exclusivity deals, commissioned work basically.
 
Last edited:
Lol, nonsense.
You can´t just buy something and pretend you did it.
We´re still only talking about 3rd party software with exclusivity deals, commissioned work basically.
There is no "buying" in this case.

You don't "buy" something that you literally fund from start to finish, e.g., Death Stranding. It's yours to begin with.
 
I think he was taking the piss
nah, he's on a mission to redefine basic language that is clear and useful for helping know if a game is 1st party, 2nd party, or 3rd party so he can pretend more games are 1st party. Been doing it for a while. I just find obscuring language annoying and a pet peeve of mine. He wants to make things less clear and less defined, not more clear. You can see in his own words that I quoted that he doesn't even find his own definitions adequate since he has to add words to make the distinction, as we all already do with 1st and 2nd party in a much more succinct and clear manner.
 
nah, he's on a mission to redefine basic language that is clear and useful for helping know if a game is 1st party, 2nd party, or 3rd party so he can pretend more games are 1st party. Been doing it for a while. I just find obscuring language annoying and a pet peeve of mine. He wants to make things less clear and less defined, not more clear. You can see in his own words that I quoted that he doesn't even find his own definitions adequate since he has to add words to make the distinction, as we all already do with 1st and 2nd party in a much more succinct and clear manner.
By "he" do you mean Phil Spencer? 👀

6r8STy3.jpg
 
Last edited:
By "he" do you mean Phil Spencer? 👀

6r8STy3.jpg
I don't agree with anyone that can't acknowledge an obvious distinction where I laid it out. I don't care who you quote. It's dumb and inferior language that gives us less information, not more. I'm sure he would have the same issues you did, and have to talk about "internal, select" BS. 2nd party is clear and easy to use. Everyone is familiar with it.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree with anyone that can't acknowledge an obvious distinction where I laid it out. I don't care who you quote. It's dumb and inferior language that gives us less information, not more. I'm sure he would have the same issues you did, and have to talk about "internal, select" BS. 2nd party is clear and easy to use. Everyone is familiar with it.
What makes your distinction sound over others?

Phil Spencer is wrong. Hermen Hulst is wrong. The entire industry is wrong. Only you're right? Got it.
 
I don't agree with anyone that can't acknowledge an obvious distinction where I laid it out. I don't care who you quote. It's dumb and inferior language that gives us less information, not more. I'm sure he would have the same issues you did, and have to talk about "internal, select" BS. 2nd party is clear and easy to use. Everyone is familiar with it.
The irony of him quoting Spencer to prove a point is hilarious.
 
There is no "buying" in this case.

You don't "buy" something that you literally fund from start to finish, e.g., Death Stranding. It's yours to begin with.
There is a clear difference between commissioned work and in-house work in every industry where that kind of B2B relationship exists....
To pretend the gaming industry is an exception is just nonsense.
Call it outsourced, commissioned, 2nd party...those are all applicable.1st party however is plain factually wrong.
But..why are we even discussing this terminology? how about we drop it completely, it doesn`t matter from customer-side anyways .....
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom