Which of the big three has the best first party and why?

[Benzychenz]

Nintendo and it isn't even close, especially in a year when they released both Breath of the Wild and Odyssey.

Sony has been shifting more and more to graphics heavy, cinematic, story driven games which does not appeal to me in the slightest. I definitely preferred their lineup back in the PS2 days.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Nintendo for me. I don't love even most of their properties but there are plenty I do. Sony puts out a good variety but I just forget about them. I won't knock them, but none of them really grab me. Gravity Rush is the only one that really stands out for me.

 

[HighFive]

Sony do have Bloodborne, Gran Turismo, Last of Us, God of War, Uncharted as main system seller, but it cant compete to Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Metroid, Animal Crossing, Donkey Kong as strong system sellers. Plus Nintendo is using all their asset to make derivative games from caracters of their franchise. Xbox will remain last with Forza, Gears of War, Halo, which are all feeling already a bit tired.

Nintendo just have a way to make caracters from their franchise entertaining.

 

[Deleted member 26104]

Not really analogous I'd say. Demon's Souls was funded by Sony, Sony owns the IP, Takeshi Kajji of SCE collaborated with Miyazaki on the core concept of the game, and it's built using Sony's PhyreEngine.

Bloodborne was again a Sony funded, Sony owned IP and from what I recall back when it was being made had SCE employees actually assisting on development in some capacity.

Bayo 2 is a Sega IP made by Platinum paid for by Nintendo. It's like the Crash remake moreso than Demon's Souls or Bloodborne.

Click to shrink...

Going by the traditional "firsty party" definition, they are not first party. If people want to use some other new definition where it's not just made by first party studios but funded by first party or "collaborated with" first party etc then sure, but that's not what is historically called first party. Doesn't matter how much sony paid for bloodborne, it was made by a third party company so it's not a first party game. PUBG isn't a first party game for Microsoft, is it? They've sent a whole team over to make the port and they're publishing it.

 

[JomanC137]

Nintendo is in it's own league, the quality of Odyssey and Breath of the Wild is unrivaled, and their games are all about fun and innovation which is what gaming is all about
That said, Sony also fills a significant void with their different, more serious games.
Microsoft is just insignificant, I thought having their games on W10 would make me get into them but there is still absolutely no game that interests me

 

[Deleted member 26104]

Zelda does repeated stories tho, save the princess.

GT5 didn't lose prestige, it sold 12m, 17m if you include prologue.

GT6 slowed in sales due to releasing post PS4.

Click to shrink...

GT5 absolutely lost prestige. It sold mammoth amounts of copies on brand name alone, but it absolutely destroyed the series to many former fans, myself included. After that mess the series absolutely lost a lot of "prestige". Many people, myself included, didn't buy GT6 100% because of GT5.

 

[Aters]

Does that mean things like Pokemon, Bayonetta 2, and Xenblade aren't Nintendo first party? They aren't made by Nintendo internally.

Click to shrink...

Xenoblade was made by a studio fully owned by Nintendo. Pokemon is made by a company that Nintendo holds half the stock. From Software is not owned by Sony, but Kadokawa. The difference is quite clear.

 

[Benzychenz]

Going by the traditional "firsty party" definition, they are not first party. If people want to use some other new definition where it's not just made by first party studios but funded by first party or "collaborated with" first party etc then sure, but that's not what is historically called first party. Doesn't matter how much sony paid for bloodborne, it was made by a third party company so it's not a first party game. PUBG isn't a first party game for Microsoft, is it? They've sent a whole team over to make the port and they're publishing it.

Click to shrink...

There's a difference between a first party game and a first party studio. Bloodborne is a first party game.

 

[eseqko]

I dunno, I'd say Nintendo, I don't see many people wanting Sony and Microsoft games on mobile or to go third party.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I mean, can you say for sure the R & D for Switch is easier than R & D for stuff like PS4 or Xbox?

It's not like consoles are like phones who gets changed every year so Sony / Xbox have to "focus on hardware power" all the time, whatever that means.



I mean, if we really breakdown the variety of games, I'm pretty sure Nintendo actually will be in the lead. I mean, if we take out "3rd person action game" from the equation, for example. Sony would lose a number of its marquee IPs such as Uncharted, God of War, The Last of Us.....

Click to shrink...

Take 3rd person action/adventure what have you out of it and Sony loses basically their entire stable bar Killzone and Gran Turismo.

You can't touch Nintendo for true legitimate variety.

 

[Jaxar]

Honestly, no. Maybe it's just nostalgia, but I can't see a way Nintendo isn't the king of first-party titles.

Click to shrink...

For someone like me (who respects) but has no interest in franchises like Mario and Zelda, I definitely don't see Nintendo as the first pick.

It's all subjective though. There is no right or wrong answer here.

 

[woodcutter]

Nintendo because I was born in 83 and I support my fellow elders.

 

[Deleted member 29676]

NIntendo because if Sony were to never make another first party title the only series I'd feel really bad about is TLOU. Other Sony first party games there are third party equivalents that I like just as much.

If nintendo were to stop making games the loss of Mario and Zelda mainline games alone would be terrible. No third party comes close to either.

I loved Halo 1-3 haven't really cared for much else Microsoft has done.

 

[Sky Chief]

Nintendo most consistently makes the best games but I love how Sony takes a lot of risks and is consistently bringing great new IPs so I'm going with Sony

 

[SilverArrow20XX]

Nintendo has the quality, but they're so slow with it. Yeah we got a ridiculously amazing Zelda and Mario game this year, but that's pretty much all I care about on the system so far. When's the next mainline Zelda or Mario for Switch? It's likely to not happen this generation at all.

Sony has the quality too, and they always have a few games every year. Maybe not as revolutionary as those Nintendo titles usually, but the quantity is a LOT more. When it comes to quality to quantity ratio, Sony blows Nintendo out of the water.

Xbox.......lol. Enough exclusives for me to buy one, but it's not even close.

 

[Minilla]

Sony, because I prefer their style and variety of games. Nintendos a great dev for sure but their cartoon type look doesnt do it for me. My wife loves them, so I get to see them played but just not up my street.

 

[Deleted member 26104]

There's a difference between a first party game and a first party studio. Bloodborne is a first party game.

Click to shrink...

A first party studio is owned by the console manufacturer. A first party game is a game made by a first party studio.

By the long ago defined definition, Bloodborne is a third party exclusive. It is not a first party game. It was not made by a Sony owned studio.

 

[woolyninja]

For me its easily Sony > Nintendo >>>>>>>> Microsoft

Sony has such a variety of first party games and they're almost always games I end up loving.
Nintendo simply lacks the quantity compared to Sony otherwise they'd be tied for first
Microsoft really needs to get their shit together though. If they didn't have Forza it would've been a quiet last couple of years.

 

[Tintin]

Uuuuuuhhhh.... did you bury your head in the sand or something and missing out stuff like Splatoon, Arms, Xenoblade, etc etc...?

Heck, who is the publisher that actually picked up Bayonetta 2? If that isn't a risk, then I don't know what is.

Also, people tend to disregard Nintendo by saying they're using the same IP over and over again. I always found this criticism to be rather empty, considering Nintendo as far as I know is the only one willing to make drastic changes to their marquee IPs in terms of gameplay---compare Skyward Sword and Breath of the Wild, for example, or Odyssey from previous Mario games.

What is the use of "New IP" if all you do with that "New IP" is the same "bloody 3rd person action game" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again?

Click to shrink...

Please do your research, Xenoblade is the only game that resembles Nintendo first party quality and it came out in 2012 for the Wii... the other games you mentioned are not even remotely close to the quality of something like Zelda or Mario.

Giving the funds to Platinum Studios to make a sequel for Bayonetta which was a multiplatform game originally doesn't count. I'm talking specifically about Nintendo first party unable to create new quality IPs. Your missing the point of my argument completely.

 

[Benzychenz]

A first party studio is owned by the console manufacturer. A first party game is a game made by a first party studio.

By the long ago defined definition, Bloodborne is a third party exclusive. It is not a first party game. It was not made by a Sony owned studio.

Click to shrink...

Uh no. A third party exclusive would be something like Persona 5. Sony didn't pay them to make it, they just made it for Playstation as that's where the market was.

Sony funded Bloodborne, they fully own the IP and everything related to it. They don't have to buy the whole studio just to say it's their game.

Like geez, Capcom has made Zelda games, Bamco made Smash 4 etc. They're still first party Nintendo games.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Giving the funds to Platinum Studios to make a sequel for Bayonetta which was a multiplatform game originally doesn't count. I'm taking specifically about Nintendo first party unable to create new quality IPs. Your missing the point of my argument completely.

Click to shrink...

I mean, sorry, but what? Splatoon itself is a phenomenon in Japan, and ARMS sold more than a miillion copies. Not to mention stuff like Animal Crossing which is also a phenomenon in itself. Under what measurements they didn't count as "new quality IPs"?

And previously you're talking about taking "risks", Bayonetta 2 fit that description perfectly, because even SEGA themselves didn't want to fund it and Bayonetta for all intents and purposes was dead before Nintendo decided to fund the entire thing.

You're simply making up "requirements" to fit your "Nintendo is unable to create new quality IPs" angle.

Obviously I voted for Sony. The only company that can make you feel true emotions. I get goosebumps everytime God of War theme plays and cried after hearing the beauty that was the Gehrman theme in Bloodborne.

Click to shrink...

Lol goddamn "true emotions", Really, we're entering real silly territory now. I mean, I like Sony's games more than Nintendo as they fit my style more and games like TLoU do filled me with feels but... can't help but to cringe seeing posts like this. I mean, how can we even differentiate "real emotions" and "fake emotions"? Does "real emotions" only account for feelings of sadness? How about feelings of joy that many players confided on having when they play games like Odyssey or Zelda? Are they being fake with their emotions or for some reason those feelings are disqualified?

Do you realize how silly you sound when you type stuff like that...?

 

[SilverArrow20XX]

Uh no. A third party exclusive would be something like Persona 5. Sony didn't pay them to make it, they just made it for Playstation as that's where the market was.

Sony funded Bloodborne, they fully own the IP and everything related to it. They don't have to buy the whole studio just to say it's their game.

Like geez, Capcom has made Zelda games, Bamco made Smash 4 etc. They're still first party Nintendo games.

Click to shrink...

That's what we call a second party game.

 

[Tintin]

I mean, sorry, but what? Splatoon itself is a phenomenon in Japan, and ARMS sold more than a miillion copies. Not to mention stuff like Animal Crossing which is also a phenomenon in itself. Under what measurements they didn't count as "new quality IPs"?


And previously you're talking about taking "risks", Bayonetta 2 fit that description perfectly, because even SEGA themselves didn't want to fund it and Bayonetta for all intents and purposes was dead before Nintendo decided to fund the entire thing.


You're simply making up "requirements" to fit your "Nintendo is unable to create new quality IPs" angle.

Click to shrink...

Splatoon, ARMs, Animal Crossing are not as big as Zelda or Mario, critically (Metacritic) or even commercially (units sold). It's cool that they're a phenomenon in Japan though.

As far as taking risks are concerned, I was talking specifically about Nintendo first party unable to make new quality IPs. I'm not sure why you're trying to shoehorn Bayonetta in since that's by Platinum Studios and only funded by Nintendo.

I wouldn't say I'm making up arguments, it's legitimate fact that Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, and Metroid up their sleeves. They cannot compete with Sony as far as the sheer number of diverse, quality IPs are concerned.

 

[astroglide]

I think you can make a case for all 3

Nintendo has some great revolutionary games. They don't appeal to everyone as they all tend to use the cartoony art style but they always do there own thing.

Sony has the most exclusives many amazing ones but Nothing has ever been a game changer the way microsoft or nintendo has.

Microsoft. Has the least but there exlusives have some of the best impact kind of like nintendo but in different areas.
Gears sets standard for Third person shooters halo for fps and forza is the standard for racing.

All 3 are good for me personally nintendo hasnt appealed to me much. I had a switch and it was the only console I have ever sold. There games dont do it for me but I see why people like them. Im more of a microsoft and sony guy. not a pc gamer

 

[Zushin]

Nintendo >>>>>>>>>>>>>Sony>>>>>>>MS

 

[Laughing Banana]

Splatoon, ARMs, Animal Crossing are not as big as Zelda or Mario, critically (Metacritic) or even commercially (units sold). It's cool that they're a phenomenon in Japan though.

As far as taking risks are concerned, I was talking specifically about Nintendo first party unable to make new quality IPs. I'm not sure why you're trying to shoehorn Bayonetta in since that's by Platinum Studios and only funded by Nintendo.

I wouldn't say I'm making up arguments, it's legitimate fact that Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, and Metroid up their sleeves. They cannot compete with Sony as far as the sheer number of diverse, quality IPs are concerned.

Click to shrink...

Right, I don't know how you would say this while acknowledging at the same time games like Splatoon is a multi-million seller and Arms sold more than a million copies. I mean, Animal Crossing New Leaf itself has sold over than 7 million copies (2.3 million copies sold in just a month and half after its launch, mind you), and yet for some reason it doesn't count because of........ what?

But sure, Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, I guess. I suppose the millions sold by their other IPs just don't count... for whatever reason.

 

[Champion]

Nintendo and I don't even think it's close.

 

[sd_falter]

Nintendo cos they bring the whimsy.

I like whimsy.

Also their mechanics driven approach means alot of their titles stay evergreen but I will say their imperative to always find new mechanics as a justification for sequels in a franchise can and has backfired in the past (*cough* star fox *cough*).

 

[Deleted member 26104]

Uh no. A third party exclusive would be something like Persona 5. Sony didn't pay them to make it, they just made it for Playstation as that's where the market was.

Sony funded Bloodborne, they fully own the IP and everything related to it. They don't have to buy the whole studio just to say it's their game.

Like geez, Capcom has made Zelda games, Bamco made Smash 4 etc. They're still first party Nintendo games.

Click to shrink...

Sony funding Bloodborne and owning the IP doesn't make it a first party game. Unless sony owned the company that made the game the game is not first party. This isn't or shouldn't be some wild revelation for people, this is how it has been literally for as long as video games have been being made.

First Party IP != First Party Game.

 

[Tintin]

Right, I don't know how you would say this while acknowledging at the same time games like Splatoon is a multi-million seller and Arms sold more than a million copies. I mean, Animal Crossing New Leaf itself has sold over than 7 million copies (2.3 million copies sold in just a month and half after its launch, mind you), and yet for some reason it doesn't count because of........ what?

But sure, Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, I guess. I suppose the millions sold by their other IPs just don't count... for whatever reason.

Click to shrink...

Do you ignore Metacritic and bury your head in the sand when reviews come out? Critical acclaim is lacking in those other Nintendo games that aren't Mario or Zelda.

 

[PurestGamer78]

Easily Sony for me just the diversity and adult themed games I enjoy.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Do you ignore Metacritic and bury your head in the sand when reviews come out? Critical acclaim is lacking in those other Nintendo games that aren't Mario or Zelda.

Click to shrink...

And does it really matter when those other IPs sold millions upon millions upon millions of copies? Which makes your whole "Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, Metroid" tangent moot, since millions of people also clearly valued their other IPs beyond those three. Also it's not like Splatoon, Arms, Animal Crossing, etc are critical failures too, by all means they're also good games.

It feels like you're just making arbitrary reasons to not include those games for whatever reason.

 

[Sander VF]

Splatoon, ARMs, Animal Crossing are not as big as Zelda or Mario, critically (Metacritic) or even commercially (units sold). It's cool that they're a phenomenon in Japan though.

Click to shrink...

Not a single Zelda game in existence has sold as much as Animal Crossing: New Leaf. BotW can surpass it, but that will be a first.

Splatoon 2's performance so far is in line with games like Mario Kart and BotW. The first game's performance was also in line with with 3D World. It's easily among Nintendo's better sellers already.

In terms of Metacritic, New Leafs meta is only a single point lower than Horizon: Zero Dawn.

 

[Deleted member 249]

Do you ignore Metacritic and bury your head in the sand when reviews come out? Critical acclaim is lacking in those other Nintendo games that aren't Mario or Zelda.

Click to shrink...

This is false. Fire Emblem has scored 90+ for its last two major installments; Mario Kart scored a 90+ with its last major installment. Metroid Prime has not had a single sub-90 game yet.
Incidentally, if 'lower than 90' is an argument to be used against Nintendo, no Sony franchise counts. At all. The closest thing is Uncharted, but there, The Lost Legacy and Golden Abyss drag it down.
This is a really stupid argument to be making.

 

[AndrewDean84]

I know opinions and all that, still shocked to see Nintendo so low as 2/3

 

[The Giant]

Does that mean things like Pokemon, Bayonetta 2, and Xenblade aren't Nintendo first party? They aren't made by Nintendo internally.

Click to shrink...

Bloody hell. Monolith Soft is an internal Nintendo studio. Nintendo has own Monolith Soft for 10-11 years now.

Next your gonna say that Naughty Dog isn't an internal Sony studio.

 

[Imitation Of Life]

I dunno, I'd say Nintendo, I don't see many people wanting Sony and Microsoft games on mobile or to go third party.

Click to shrink...

I constantly seeing port begging for Sony first party games.

 

[Abe Lincoln’s Ghost]

Sony has a larger selection of really great games, but Nintendo has a lock on iconic franchises that have stood near the pinnacle of their respective genres for decades.

 

[Tintin]

And does it really matter when those other IPs sold millions upon millions upon millions of copies? Which makes your whole "Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, Metroid" tangent moot, since millions of people also clearly valued their other IPs beyond those three. Also it's not like Splatoon, Arms, Animal Crossing, etc are critical failures too, by all means they're also good games.

It feels like you're just making arbitrary reasons to not include those games for whatever reason.

Click to shrink...

Lol I feel like we're talking in circles now. Anyway the reason I don't include them personally of course is because critically as well as commercially those other Nintendo game are not in the same league as Mario or Zelda.

My whole original argument was hoping that one day Nintendo could invest tons of resources and make a brand new, spectacular IP that could stand with Mario or Zelda. This is likely never going to happen which is a shame since Nintendo tends to work with what they already have.

 

[3rdbass]

Sony for the diversity in their games and they are more aimed at adults as well as Uncharted being my favorite game series of all time.

 

[massoluk]

I know opinions and all that, still shocked to see Nintendo so low as 2/3

Click to shrink...

Ah yup. Thought this poll would be more lopsided. Like they have been just releasing critically acclaimed games monthly this year

 

[potam]

The Nintendo magic is real. The bar they set for their mainline games is ridiculous.

 

[MrHeisenbird]

I dunno, I'd say Nintendo, I don't see many people wanting Sony and Microsoft games on mobile or to go third party.

Click to shrink...

Because people want to play Nintendo games without dealing with their behind-the-times hardware.

Personally I want Sony games and hardware. I really wish Microsoft had more of a first party presence.

 

[Deleted member 21326]

Nintendo by far.



Edit: forgot the why part.
Allways been a gameplay first guy, and Nintendo allways nails that. I care very little for sonys "cinematic" approach.

 

[Busaiku]

A first party studio is owned by the console manufacturer. A first party game is a game made by a first party studio.

By the long ago defined definition, Bloodborne is a third party exclusive. It is not a first party game. It was not made by a Sony owned studio.

Click to shrink...

By this logic, Fire Emblem isn't a 1st party game.

 

[Sander VF]

Because people want to play Nintendo games without dealing with their behind-the-times hardware.

Personally I want Sony games and hardware. I really wish Microsoft had more of a first party presence.

Click to shrink...

Switch is more recent than base PS4 in terms of hardware inside though

I can't disagree about Microsoft. It's regrettable they aren't even seen as comparable this gen.

 

[Calm Waterfall]

I'd say Nintendo has the best, but personally I prefer Sony's because they make a lot more games that appeal to my personal taste.

Click to shrink...

I will never understand this kind of response. If you prefer Sony games then they are the best to you. If you pick something over the other then you like and prefer the thing you picked more than the other.

 

[Sander VF]

By this logic, Fire Emblem isn't a 1st party game.

Click to shrink...

And Kirby

As well as Pokemon and smash.

Lots of bizarre dismissals from both sides in this thread. I guess that's the nature of list wars.

 

[Marukoban]

Splatoon, ARMs, Animal Crossing are not as big as Zelda or Mario, critically (Metacritic) or even commercially (units sold). It's cool that they're a phenomenon in Japan though.

As far as taking risks are concerned, I was talking specifically about Nintendo first party unable to make new quality IPs. I'm not sure why you're trying to shoehorn Bayonetta in since that's by Platinum Studios and only funded by Nintendo.

I wouldn't say I'm making up arguments, it's legitimate fact that Nintendo only has Mario, Zelda, and Metroid up their sleeves. They cannot compete with Sony as far as the sheer number of diverse, quality IPs are concerned.

Click to shrink...

Huh???
Just so you know last 2 entries of Animal Crossing has higher sales than any Zelda entry and at this point AC is bigger franchise than Zelda.

Also not sure why all these people keep bringing Metroid when it comes to Nintendo franchise.
Metroid is not even comparable to Nintendo's big hitters. Splatoon on Wii U already outsold best selling Metroid ever.
People spewing Mario, Zelda, Metroid has no clue about Nintendo IP.
If you want to talk about Nintendo heavy hitters, it should be Pokemon, 2D Mario, Mario Kart and Animal Crossing + Nintendogs, Wii Sport.

By this logic, Fire Emblem isn't a 1st party game.

Click to shrink...

'
Intelligent Systems is owned by Nintendo.
It is a first party studio.

 

[Tintin]

This is false. Fire Emblem has scored 90+ for its last two major installments; Mario Kart scored a 90+ with its last major installment. Metroid Prime has not had a single sub-90 game yet.
Incidentally, if 'lower than 90' is an argument to be used against Nintendo, no Sony franchise counts. At all. The closest thing is Uncharted, but there, The Lost Legacy and Golden Abyss drag it down.
This is a really stupid argument to be making.

Click to shrink...

Metacritic Scores:

For PS4
Uncharted 4 is 93
Bloodborne is 92

For Nintendo 3DS
Fire Emblem Awakening is 92
The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds is 91

For Nintendo Switch
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is 97
Super Mario Odyssey is 97

You say Fire Emblem has scored 90+ for its last two major installments... Are you sure?
Fire Emblem Warrior is 75
Fire Emblem Echoes: Shadows of Valentia is 81
Fire Emblem Fates: Conquest is 87
Fire Emblem Fates: Birthright is 86

You say Mario Kart scored 90+ with its last major installment... Hmm
Mario Kart 8 for the WIIU is 88
If you're thinking about the deluxe version of the game on Switch then you may as well add the Last of Us Remastered at 95 for Sony

You say Metroid Prime had not had a single sub-90 game yet... Okay
Metroid: Samus Returns is 86
Metroid Prime: Federation Force is 64

You say no Sony franchise counts is legitimate bait so I had to do the research for you. So I'm not sure who really is making the stupid argument and it's really comes across as condescending on your part...