• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

CeroMiedo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,337
I didn't say anything about why or why not. I said these systems had great exclusive games by third parties (mostly japanese) and Switch doesn't.
One thing about "handhelds" is, their games are basically low resolution small profile games which is cheap to make, fast to produce and easy to profit. Now there is switch, a so called "hybrid", which requires much larger budgets to make games for it, and the cheapest budget kind of titles a publisher could publish on it are offline mobile games
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,894
Its the 2nd best selling console in the world.

It would be dumb of them not to support it.
 

Deleted member 2793

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,368
One thing about "handhelds" is, their games are basically low resolution small profile games which is cheap to make, fast to produce and easy to profit. Now there is switch, a so called "hybrid", which requires much larger budgets to make games for it, and the cheapest budget kind of titles a publisher could publish on it are offline mobile games
Ok, but again, I didn't say why or why not. I was replying to someone who said their previous handhelds had poor libraries, they didn't and I prefer them to some ports.

I also think people vastly overrate the budget a Switch game needs, but as long as people keep repeating this, I guess publishers will never try. I wished for Switch to save the AA japanese industry, but I feel like it's actually helping its death.

I don't understand why they have to be exclusives ? Most important thing is that they are great games.
They don't need to be, but when talking about previous systems it's worth saying they had these exclusives. I wouldn't mind more DS-3DS like games being multiplat with Switch/PC/PS4/etc, but what's happening is not that they're going multiplat, they're just ceasing to exist.
 

unicornKnight

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,194
Athens, Greece
It seems to only get better each year, the opposite of Wii U that looked normal initially and in a few months it was one cancellation after another.
 
OP
OP
Lelouch0612

Lelouch0612

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,200
They don't need to be, but when talking about previous systems it's worth saying they had these exclusives. I wouldn't mind more DS-3DS like games being multiplat with Switch/PC/PS4/etc, but what's happening is not that they're going multiplat, they're just ceasing to exist.

Are you talking about AA games like Etrian Odyssey or even smaller games ?

A new AA IP like Octopath sold 1m WW in three weeks, I think there is a healthy market for JP AA games (Ys, Ushiro, Disgaea...).
 

KillerMan91

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,355
Like I wrote in other thread, most 3rd party Switch success take out of guard and they didn't had any or had small plans for Switch before that, so I suspecting that much more 3rd party Switch projects started in 2018. so we should have quite more 3rd party announcements in 2019. and 2020.
This 3 3rd party announcements are great start for 2019. lineup.

Also, Switch will most likely be Nintendo platform with best 3rd party support from SNES period.

Outside of some glaring omissions (GTA) GameCube got most western third party games. GBA also had very strong third party support even from west. From all Nintendo platforms GBA has the second highest percentage of its total sw sales coming from third parties (after SNES that has marginally higher)
 

MatrixMan.exe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,500
It's not bad but I honestly kind of wish the support was more in line with what handhelds historically got: exclusive games made for the platform instead of shoehorned ports.

It's harder to do that these days. Switch is weaker than the competition but it's not exactly cheap to make games for it, in the same way it wasn't for 360/PS3.

Making Nintendo handheld exclusives is becoming less viable and justifiable for 3rd parties in a world of increasing budgets and a thriving software market across all platforms.
 

CeroMiedo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,337
I also think people vastly overrate the budget a Switch game needs, but as long as people keep repeating this, I guess publishers will never try. I wished for Switch to save the AA japanese industry, but I feel like it's actually helping its death.
You mean AA like licensed kids games, visual novels and low budget dungeon crawlers or stuff like Monster Hunter World and compile heart games? It's getting them if it's the former, and not like switch is helping those things either since most of those licensed or low budget games ended up bombing together with the ps4 counterparts anyway
 

Deleted member 2793

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,368
Are you talking about AA games like Etrian Odyssey or even smaller games ?

A new AA IP like Octopath sold 1m WW in three weeks, I think there is a healthy market for JP AA games (Ys, Ushiro, Disgaea...).
In the range of Etrian and other DS/3DS IPs. Think 7th Dragon, Luminous Arc, Atlus several small scale titles (DeSu, Radiant Historia, Etrian Odyssey), Rune Factory, etc. This kind of game is disappearing.

Yes, some games still sell well, but the number of releases is decreasing fast and instead of new games we now are seeing more late/old ports (Ys, Disgaea, Shining Refrain, etc).
 

funky

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,527
Hasnt Mortal Kombat been on every Nintendo console bar the failure that was Wii u?

And Marvel is published Nintendo. It's the least 3rd party game a game could be.
 

Kage Maru

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,804
Really surprised about MK11. Good get for Nintendo as long as it looks and runs well enough.
 

Deleted member 32018

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 8, 2017
7,628
Do you have a source for that? I was kinda interested after seeing that trailer but I didn't see anywhere platforms were listed.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...tless-headed-to-consoles-and-mobile-next-year

Next year, however, that will change - as Dauntless will also launch for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One in April, and later in 2019 for Nintendo Switch and mobile. Dauntless will also be made available on the new Epic Games Store on PC.
 

9-Volt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,882
It's not bad but I honestly kind of wish the support was more in line with what handhelds historically got: exclusive games made for the platform instead of shoehorned ports.

What has happened to home consoles is happening to handhelds. Making exclusive games for older handhelds cost almost nothing, we got lots of great exclusives coming out often on every Nintendo handheld. Now it can't be the case, development costs has risen for handhelds too, making a exclusive for Switch is becoming no different feat than making one for PS4.

Ports are good thing though, many of them making their portable debut. This means a lot for many people.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,686
nintendo-doesnt-have-any-3rd-party-games-27680647.png


I just wanted an excuse to post this image
LOL
 

Mbolibombo

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,043
We're getting a lot more of high profile games for the Switch in 2019 from third parties than previously, I cant remember last time we saw this many before.

Doom Eternal, Mortal Kombat 11, Yokai Watch 4, DQ Builders 2, Crash Team Racing, Wolfenstein Youngblood, Digimon Survive, Tales of Vesperia Remaster, Grndia Remaster 1+2, Team Sonic Racin, Trials Rising and also a lot of third party developed games but published by Nintendo like Daemon X Machina, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 and probably more. Then there's the Final Fantasy and Resident Evil bonanza and some of the Jokers in Shin Megami Tensei V, Bayonetta 3 and DQXI...

It's never going to get all the games, but heck it's starting to look promising at the very least.
 

neon_dream

Member
Dec 18, 2017
3,644
No, Nintendo funded and published Bayonetta 2. It's first party, same as Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 (and Spider-Man on Sony's side).

First party games are company owned IP developed by the company or a developer contracted to the company.

Bayonetta isn't first party because the IP is owned by Sega/Platinum and the game was developed by Platinum. Nintendo holds distribution rights to the finished product because they funded and published it. Nintendo doesn't own the rights to Bayonetta as an IP, just Bayonetta 2 as a finished game.
 

thefro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,996
Definitely promising. Should be a couple really good years coming up for the system.

Hasnt Mortal Kombat been on every Nintendo console bar the failure that was Wii u?

The last time Nintendo got a MK on the same date with the other platforms was 2002.

Gamecube & Wii got a couple late ports and that's been it since.
 

ShinobiBk

One Winged Slayer
Member
Dec 28, 2017
10,121
These systems were filled with good exclusive content made specifically for them. Switch lacks this -- especially from japanese third parties. I honestly prefer that to some western games ports, but that's me.

That's just unlikely to ever happen again.
Switch games are just as expensive to make as games for the other consoles. There isn't really the option to make smaller scale projects for cheap like with the previous handhelds.
It would be nice, and we will see some fun exclusives like Octopath Traveler but expect them to be few and far between.
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
5,383
Outside of some glaring omissions (GTA) GameCube got most western third party games. GBA also had very strong third party support even from west. From all Nintendo platforms GBA has the second highest percentage of its total sw sales coming from third parties (after SNES that has marginally higher)

Switch will definitely have wider and longer support than GC, Switch is still less than 2 years on market and it getting stronger support how time pass (with good sales and increased install base). For instance GameCube has listed 660 games, while Switch in less than two years already have listed twice more.

Whats very encouraging for Switch is that getting support from 3rd parities like Bethesda or Blizzard that didnt support any Nintendo platform very long.
 

Zool

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,233
What is positive is for Crash Racing for Switch is that we talking about new game that comes on same date like other platforms.
Vita maybe had Mortal Kombat, but both 3DS and Wii U didn had Mortal Kombat game, so its big win for Switch in any case.
WiiU had Injustice, right?
 

K Samedi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,990
Its certainly looking good already, but not quite there yet. I wonder how it will evolve in the coming months, years and how a possible Switch Pro will affect third party ports. If Nintendo keeps iterating on a improved Switch every 2/3 years they will be able to keep up and get more support as time goes on.
 

Deleted member 2793

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,368
That's just unlikely to ever happen again.
Switch games are just as expensive to make as games for the other consoles. There isn't really the option to make smaller scale projects for cheap like with the previous handhelds.
It would be nice, and we will see some fun exclusives like Octopath Traveler but expect them to be few and far between.
Considering console games got boring to me when they started focusing more on cinematics and open world bloat than arcadey gameplay, puzzles, deep RPG systems ; this happening to Nintendo portables is terrible to me.

Guess I will tune out of this hobby faster than I expected.
 

LiquidSolid

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,731
First party games are company owned IP developed by the company or a developer contracted to the company.

Bayonetta isn't first party because the IP is owned by Sega/Platinum and the game was developed by Platinum. Nintendo holds distribution rights to the finished product because they funded and published it. Nintendo doesn't own the rights to Bayonetta as an IP, just Bayonetta 2 as a finished game.
Says who? Based on your logic, Banjo Kazooie, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker, etc weren't Nintendo first party games. Same thing goes with the original Crash and Spyro games for Sony or Gears of War 1-3 and Sunset Overdrive for Microsoft.

More specifically, why is Ratchet & Clank a first party game but Spider-Man not? They're made by the same developer, produced by the same WWS producers and funded and published by Sony. But R&C is a first party game and Spider-man is third party because one IP is owned by Sony and the other is licensed? You see how silly this is, right? It's not like these games fall under different departments or anything, there's literally no difference between them but the IP ownership.

To me, it's far more important to know who is funding and producing the games than who owns the IP. It doesn't matter if Sega suddenly takes Bayonetta multi-platform in ten years or whatever, what matters is Bayonetta 2 is never going to be ported to other systems because Nintendo funded it and owns the publishing rights. Unless some kind of weird deal happens anyway, like when Microsoft bought Rare or EA bought Bioware (since Mass Effect 1 was a Microsoft first party game).
 

Dekuman

Member
Oct 27, 2017
19,026
If Switch can run a game a Switch ver will be considered. They're in a good place now and we will get more announcements next year.
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
5,383
Says who? Based on your logic, Banjo Kazooie, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker, etc weren't Nintendo first party games. Same thing goes with the original Crash and Spyro games for Sony or Gears of War 1-3 and Sunset Overdrive for Microsoft.

More specifically, why is Ratchet & Clank a first party game but Spider-Man not? They're made by the same developer, produced by the same WWS producers and funded and published by Sony. But R&C is a first party game and Spider-man is third party because one IP is owned by Sony and the other is licensed? You see how silly this is, right? It's not like these games fall under different departments or anything, there's literally no difference between them but the IP ownership.

To me, it's far more important to know who is funding and producing the games than who owns the IP. It doesn't matter if Sega suddenly takes Bayonetta multi-platform in ten years or whatever, what matters is Bayonetta 2 is never going to be ported to other systems because Nintendo funded it and owns the publishing rights. Unless some kind of weird deal happens anyway, like when Microsoft bought Rare or EA bought Bioware (since Mass Effect 1 was a Microsoft first party game).

Technically, Banjo Kazooie, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker are all 2nd party games, not 1st party games.

-Sony sells a console. Sony also owns several video game development studios. A game made for the Sony console by a Sony developer is a 1st party game.
-Sony sells a console. Sony comes up with an idea for a game and they hire an independent studio to develop exclusively for the Sony console. This is a 2nd party game.
-I own a game studio. I make a game. I decide I want to put it on Sony's console, and only Sony's console. This game is a 3rd party exclusive.
 

Jaded Alyx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,378
Nintendo OWNS the Smash IP though.
Sony doesn't own Spider-Man.
Technically, Banjo Kazooie, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker are all 2nd party games, not 1st party games.

-Sony sells a console. Sony also owns several video game development studios. A game made for the Sony console by a Sony developer is a 1st party game.
-Sony sells a console. Sony comes up with an idea for a game and they hire an independent studio to develop exclusively for the Sony console. This is a 2nd party game.
-I own a game studio. I make a game. I decide I want to put it on Sony's console, and only Sony's console. This game is a 3rd party exclusive.

There is no such thing as "2nd party".
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
5,383
WiiU had Injustice, right?

Not just that, but also two Batman games, two CoD games, two AC games...but is difference is that Wii U had all those games in first few months after launch,
and than nothing.
Switch is quite opposite, didnt had nothing on launch but getting stronger support how time is passing, for instance Switch already has two Fifa and two NBA games, Wii U had only one Fifa and one NBA game.
 
Last edited:

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
18,099
Technically, Banjo Kazooie, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Conker are all 2nd party games, not 1st party games.

-Sony sells a console. Sony also owns several video game development studios. A game made for the Sony console by a Sony developer is a 1st party game.
-Sony sells a console. Sony comes up with an idea for a game and they hire an independent studio to develop exclusively for the Sony console. This is a 2nd party game.
-I own a game studio. I make a game. I decide I want to put it on Sony's console, and only Sony's console. This game is a 3rd party exclusive.
Technically second party doesn't mean that at all. What you are describing as second party is actually a third party studio working on a first party game.
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
5,383
Sony doesn't own Spider-Man.


There is no such thing as "2nd party".

Yes there is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_developer#Second-party_developer


Technically second party doesn't mean that at all. What you are describing as second party is actually a third party studio working on a first party game.

There is little complicate to see difference betwine 2nd party and 3rd party, maybe this clear things more:

Second-party developer is a colloquial term often used by gaming enthusiasts and media to describe game studios who take development contracts from platform holders and produce games exclusive to that platform.[8] As a balance to not being able to release their game for other platforms, second-party developers are usually offered higher royalty rates than third-party developers.[7] These studios may have exclusive publishing agreements (or other business relationships) with the platform holder, but maintain independence so upon completion or termination of their contracts are able to continue developing games. Examples are Insomniac Games (originally a 2nd party for Sony), Bungie (originally a 2nd party for Microsoft) and Rareware (originally a 2nd party for Nintendo).
 

Jaded Alyx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,378
"Second-party developer is a colloquial term often used by gaming enthusiasts and media "

No, there isn't. People use the term, but it's not really a thing anyone in the industry uses. A first party game is published by a first party. A third party game, is published by a third party. That's all there is to it.

Sometimes you get situations where a first party simply distributes a third party game in a specific region or whatever (i.e. Nintendo with Capcom games in Europe for a while). That's perhaps another thing, but generally, if it's published by a first party, it's considered a first party game.
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
5,383
"Second-party developer is a colloquial term often used by gaming enthusiasts and media "

No, there isn't. People use the term, but it's not really a thing anyone in the industry uses. A first party game is published by a first party. A third party game, is published by a third party. That's all there is to it.

Sometimes you get situations where a first party simply distributes a third party game in a specific region or whatever (i.e. Nintendo with Capcom games in Europe for a while). That's perhaps another thing, but generally, if it's published by a first party, it's considered a first party game.

Rare during N64 was obvious example of 2nd party studio.

Also, I dont think publish game means 1st party or 3rd party game, how game is developed determines (if its developed by 1st party studio or 3rd party studio), not who is publishing game. 1st party game means game developed by 1st party studio, 3rd party developed game means 3rd party game.