As that game is one of the only Sony "first-party" titles I care for, definitely makes the conversation even more lop-sided in Nintendo's favor for my taste lol.
-
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.
Which of the big three has the best first party and why?
- Thread starter Deleted member 249
- Start date
As that game is one of the only Sony "first-party" titles I care for, definitely makes the conversation even more lop-sided in Nintendo's favor for my taste lol.
OP
OP
I mean, technically, this is wrong. Without going into the smaller, digital only fare, in the (roughy) last ten years, Nintendo has worked on the following new IP:
- Splatoon
- ARMS
- Wii
- Xenoblade
- The Last Story
- Pandora's Tower
- Tokyo Mirage Sessions
- The Wonderful 101
- Nintendo Land
- Tamogachi
- Nintendogs
- Codename STEAM
- 1-2-Switch
As for risk taking: I would argue risking alienating an established fan and diluting your brand's equity by dramatically changing a bankable series' setup is far riskier than setting up a largely homogenized new IP. Look at the backlash Metroid: Other M and Skyward Sword got- both could have sunk their franchises, thankfully Nintendo followed those games up with better titles that won fans back.
Sony is by far the most exciting to me. Most Nintendo games don't really appeal to me that much anymore. MS... well the few franchises they have don't really interest me and they seem to be going even further away from what I like.
Btw, first party games are those owned by the platform holder, regardless of which studio works on them. Ratchet & Clank is a first party game developed by an independent studio. Bloodborne, The Order and Detroit as well.
Btw, first party games are those owned by the platform holder, regardless of which studio works on them. Ratchet & Clank is a first party game developed by an independent studio. Bloodborne, The Order and Detroit as well.
I mean now I guess that changes things,
Actually Pandora's Tower, The Last Story, Wonderful 101, Codename Steam, TMS, and so on are not Nintendo first party games.
Actually Pandora's Tower, The Last Story, Wonderful 101, Codename Steam, TMS, and so on are not Nintendo first party games.
Okay. Arms, Splatoon, and if you count it as first party (i dont) the xeno series. My problem with this argument over the years is that the people who state this still dont take the plunge and get a ninty console.
Edit: forgot Nintendo bought Monolith Soft
Nintendo first party is basically unapproachable in terms of quality. Prime Sega could put up a good fight (and best them in several areas) but as far as I'm concerned Sony and Microsoft have always been mostly about 3rd party support (even the exclusive games I really like are rarely true first party)
OP
OP
They are as much Nintendo games as Bloodborne is a Sony game.
I'd say if any game has zero chance of being released on another system without Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft's approval we may as well categorize them as 1st party. A lot of these 2nd and 3rd party games were actually funded by these publishers so technically they own the rights to them which makes it their game. But then again that wasn't the OP's question so I digress.
Biggest problem with Sony's IP is they are just there and has never been influential enough or memorable enough. If you ask people what are biggest IP from Sony, most likely they will answer Uncharted, TLoU. Those 2 are conceived within the last 10 years, whereas Sony's older IP like Wild Arms are practically abandoned and dead (still salty about this). Even their recent attempts like Freedom Wars don't go anywhere. In my opinion it's due to Sony rather than being innovator/leader is more of a follower, and in most cases they are not even very good at that. I can't even name an IP where Sony either starts a genre or introduce a new gameplay element that is adopted by other developer. That's why I don't understand how people here can say Sony innovates or take more risks.
Even though I grew up with PS, I would give my vote to Nintendo for being a great developer that others in the industry look up to and take notes from. Not to mention their outputs are different from other AAA publisher.
Even though I grew up with PS, I would give my vote to Nintendo for being a great developer that others in the industry look up to and take notes from. Not to mention their outputs are different from other AAA publisher.
It's Sony for the variety of their games. 1886 and Horizon to push the graphic, Bloodborne to show off ultimate gameplay and TLOU to drive some mature stories. Not to mention some unique games by Janpan Studio like The last gaurdian.
And Sony has great second party games too. Most PS4 gamers are craving the Spiderman.
Nintendo games are a hell of fun but I think Sony wins for more mature titles.
And Sony has great second party games too. Most PS4 gamers are craving the Spiderman.
Nintendo games are a hell of fun but I think Sony wins for more mature titles.
Yeah, anybody who thinks stuff like Majora's Mask, Skyward Sword, Sunshine, Xenoblade X, and others aren't risks is crazy.
It's basically them saying "Oh you liked that thing? Well here's another thing that's different and weird and you probably won't like it. We also made it just because we freaking felt like it and thought it'd be fun, even though our good sense would have had us do otherwise."
Sony's first party definitely aligns most with my tastes in games, so that's where my vote went....however, there is no denying that Nintendo puts out 1st party games that are consistently very high quality...
I love the Forza series...and Halo (even though I've been disappointed since H3)...but they just don't compare to Sony's lineup to me
I love the Forza series...and Halo (even though I've been disappointed since H3)...but they just don't compare to Sony's lineup to me
I would say it's pretty easy to say the Uncharted series fits that bill of introducing a new gameplay element, it changed the playstyle of several franchises, Gears, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Dead Space, Star Wars. The meme about 'Everything being Uncharted" at the E3 showcases a few years back were accurate.
Nintendo.
Their stuff is super polished, future proof by being mechanically driven and almost always retains its own identity by avoiding "me too" projects that try and ride fleeting industry trends.
Their stuff is super polished, future proof by being mechanically driven and almost always retains its own identity by avoiding "me too" projects that try and ride fleeting industry trends.
And in this one post you make your agenda very clear. Why would you love to be able to remove these games from the table just to suit your argument or position.
But sometimes those second- and third-party games do get rereleased on other systems. Like most of the Capcom Five, or Flower. First-party games tend to stick around, since the platform holder owns the IP. Now, that may not be of real importance to anyone but console warriors, but then again, this thread has stirred up just that kind of discussion...
Sad to see microsoft with barely 2% of votes.
While they are nowhere near the best, they have LOTS of IPs that had awesome first party offereings with amazing potentials for sequels even if they are almost never used like Blinx and pratically the entire RARE catalog.
That poster was mentioning IPs.... except maybe TMS (it is a crossover, it is complicated) they are all Nintendo IPs
While they are nowhere near the best, they have LOTS of IPs that had awesome first party offereings with amazing potentials for sequels even if they are almost never used like Blinx and pratically the entire RARE catalog.
That poster was mentioning IPs.... except maybe TMS (it is a crossover, it is complicated) they are all Nintendo IPs
An aggregate of scores from all the same dozens of sites is honestly the « best » way we've got to compare things in the most impartial way. Well in fact the best thing (and the most important) is our own judgement, but the point still stand.
Barely any of those games you listed are first party though. Horizon and Uncharted are, but none of the others are.
No, Bayonetta 2 doesn't count because it's not made by a first party studio. Bloodborne isn't first party either, neither is Demon's Souls.
Never said otherwise, but it's still the best way to compare all of this all things considered. Show me a most impartial way of comparison if you don't think aggregate scores are.
I get why Microsoft is the lowest in the polls, but holy crap that's low!
Nintendo.
OP summed it up too well.
Nintendo.
OP summed it up too well.
OP
OP
The most objective and subjectivity free way to do this would be sales, but that leads us to ad populum, and fuck that.
Bayonetta 2 is a SEGA IP developed by a third party studio but financed by Nintendo
It is closer to SF5 than Bloodborne
Bloodborne is a first party IP developed by a third party studio financed by Nintendo
It is closer to Wonderfull 101 than Bayonetta
Sales measure quality of a product? I honestly don't think so.
To add to this, the numbers of reviewers has only increased over the years and yet the critic response has overall remained unchanged.
Nintendo had a really good out put of games this year. I hope they continue their momentum and release more AAA games next year... bi monthly if they can like they did in 2017 o.o
I can't even remember what Sony released beside horizon this year but the amount of games slated for PS4 from Sony's publishing is really looking bright. Detroit, last of us 2, Spiderman, ghost of tshiuma, god of war reboot all look fantastic that's one hell of a stacked lineup for Sony in 2018 even if some of those games gets delayed
With Mario and Zelda already out this year what can nintendo release next year to compete with such massive AAA games from Sony o.o
Pokemon switch seems so far away so does Metroid prime 4 maybe animal crossing maybe? But that game doesn't have the coolness factor as the games Sony's launching or announced lol
A new smash and kart also seem so far away. Nintendo needs more AAA ip to make the switch stand out in the months it received AA games like Kirby and yoshi
I can't even remember what Sony released beside horizon this year but the amount of games slated for PS4 from Sony's publishing is really looking bright. Detroit, last of us 2, Spiderman, ghost of tshiuma, god of war reboot all look fantastic that's one hell of a stacked lineup for Sony in 2018 even if some of those games gets delayed
With Mario and Zelda already out this year what can nintendo release next year to compete with such massive AAA games from Sony o.o
Pokemon switch seems so far away so does Metroid prime 4 maybe animal crossing maybe? But that game doesn't have the coolness factor as the games Sony's launching or announced lol
A new smash and kart also seem so far away. Nintendo needs more AAA ip to make the switch stand out in the months it received AA games like Kirby and yoshi
OP
OP
I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that if you want a judgement free assessment devoid of any opinion and subjectivity, sales is the best metric you have (it sold more=more people like it=it must be better). I reject this line of thinking myself, because I don't think any assessment of art or media can be devoid of subjectivity totally in the first place.
I would say that Sony not relying on old franchises and moving forward with new and exciting IPs every gen is what makes them successful.
Also, when most people say that Sony takes risks it's more about giving studios freedom to pitch new ideas and release new ips, even if they currently have healthy/successful franchises. They are also open to unique experiences like QD, TeamICO, ThatGameCompany and Media Molecule games (among others). They adquired Media Molecule and they've been working on a pretty unique and ambitious game that possibly no other platform holder would invest on.
Same argument could be made against the trend of making new IPs that just retread on tired gameplay mechanics. Why does Days Gone look like every other open world third person game ever made?
Nintendo easily; multiple games among the best of all time that are generally still alive and high quality, and good releases even on their worst consoles success-wise.
Sony is second place with multiple great series both old and new, but I've say their highs and general quality aren't as consistent as Nintendo's.
Microsoft now? Lol. I'd almost feel bad if it didn't seem like they're intentionally going out of their way to kill off what good they have.
Sony is second place with multiple great series both old and new, but I've say their highs and general quality aren't as consistent as Nintendo's.
Microsoft now? Lol. I'd almost feel bad if it didn't seem like they're intentionally going out of their way to kill off what good they have.
Exactly ! That's why I said the in the end the most (only?!) important thing is our own judgement.
There aren't any impartial ways to compare works of art. That's why we have criticism. It's an inherently subjective endeavor.
Well.. it's not a contest of who has the most or notable ip, it's the best. They can't contend.
ITT people don't understand what first-party is.
Bottom line: if the IP is owned by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft, then they're first-party. If they're just developed by another studio as an exclusive to that console/publisher, then that's a third-party EXCLUSIVE. An IP owned by N/S/M can be developed by a third-party developer (ex: Pokken) but they're still first-party. An IP can be exclusive to a platform (ex: Bloodborne) but they're not first-party.
Bottom line: if the IP is owned by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft, then they're first-party. If they're just developed by another studio as an exclusive to that console/publisher, then that's a third-party EXCLUSIVE. An IP owned by N/S/M can be developed by a third-party developer (ex: Pokken) but they're still first-party. An IP can be exclusive to a platform (ex: Bloodborne) but they're not first-party.
OP
OP
I agree- although I would say that to only rely on our own opinions and judgements would essentially make us close minded. We should always rely on what we feel, of course, but simultaneously, we should be open to listening to others, as well.
OP
OP
Sony definitely owns Bloodborne, that makes it a first party game by your own definition and metric.
EDIT: Fuck me, another double post...
Bloodborne is part developed by SCE Studio Japan. Though FromSoftware was at the helm, it was a collaborative effort between the two studios, which is part of the reason the game uses the SCE developed Phyre engine.
Bloodborne IP is owned by Sony though. It's a first party game.
Bloodborne and Demon Souls are Sony IPs as well. My point is this 2nd party talk is pretty pointless. Those titles are Nintendo games and those titles are Sony titles. I doubt they treated those games any differently then there internally developed games.
Of all the IPs you posted, Xenoblade is the only one that resembles Nintendo first party quality and it released back in 2012 for the Wii. Again, I really want Nintendo to be fresh again but I only have to look forward for new takes on their established IPs which is unfortunate for me personally.
I'm not sure why you're calling setting up a new IP homogenized? Creating completely brand new experiences is what keeps the industry going and is far different than making sequels which if anything tend to be more homogenized.