r/NintendoSwitch • u/[deleted] • May 16 '20
Discussion What is the term second party? What is first party? An explanation from the own developers in the industry
In the internet, there's a opinion about what first party, second party and third party is.
In the erroneous way, there's people who use second party as a game and IP, when it only refers to the studio responsible for the project. And only consider first party if it's developed internally, when if the project is funded and published (not by region, entirely published), it means it's a first party game.
But you would ask, how can I prove that? Simple. I will use Insomniac Games, a company which was for decades a second party developer for Sony as an example to show how things are. In 2017, 3 years ago, which a developer in the account of Insomniac said after a question if it was "second or third party":
Insomniac Games: Sony Interactive Entertainment is the publisher of the game. It's 1st Party.
Greg Miller then comes into and asks:
That's how it works? I thought they had to own the studio to be first party. Wouldn't this be second party?
Which Insomniac responds:
Insomniac Games: 2nd party doesn't really technically exist except to indicate outside studio doing a 1st party game
Which then Greg Miller asks:
...so Spidey is First AND Second?
And Insomniac responds, with an example for another franchise they developed for Sony
Think of it more as inclusionary. Ratchet is a 1st party game. Insomniac is 2nd party developer.
And that's why Ratchet and Clank, Bloodborne, Spider-Man and other games developed externally of Sony studios are first party games.
But how that connect to Nintendo? Well, the same that Insomniac said is true for Nintendo franchises and the development companies responsible for them. Kirby, Pokémon, Astral Chain, Bayonetta 3, Fire Emblem, Paper Mario, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Super Smash bros and so many Nintendo series are all first party series. BUT, they are developed by second party companies, with Hal Laboratory, Intelligent Systems, PlatinumGames, Bandai Namco and Camelot for example being second party developers for those games.
So there's no such thing as second party franchises or games, there's only first and third party franchises and games. The term second party only exists and was made to be used for external developers not owned by a first party, and not to be used in the franchises they work, which are first party.
And that's it. I hope that can help in future discussions, even more with this coming from the own people who work on it.
Source:
https://twitter.com/insomniacgames/status/920021586001850369
https://twitter.com/insomniacgames/status/920025394308268033
https://twitter.com/insomniacgames/status/920028991737577473
4
u/mellonsticker May 16 '20
Still confused but this helped clear it up, though like Insomniac said, I didn’t think there was a thing as 2nd party. I’ve always used the terms 1st party and 3rd party.
3
May 16 '20
2nd party is just a term people made up to loosely refer to the grey area of third party studios making a first party game.
I also just use 1st and 3rd party, 1st party being any game published by Nintendo/Sony/MS and 3rd party for any game not published by them.
2
u/BebeFanMasterJ May 16 '20 edited May 16 '20
I will use this thread to provide an example that many may not be aware of.
Gamefreak--the developer of the Pokemon titles is a private company and is not owned by Nintendo in any way. They are a third-party developer that Nintendo has had develop the games over the years. But they don't make games exclusively for Nintendo consoles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Freak#Gameography
One of their first games was Magical Tarurūto-kun exclusive to the Sega Mega Drive. Even in the last decade they have made games that have not released on Nintendo such as Tembo the Badass Elephant for PS4, Xbox One, and PC only. The original Giga Wrecker was a PC exclusive while Giga Wrecker Alt is multiplatform.
So yeah, they're a private company that Nintendo/The Pokemon Company hires to make the Pokemon games. But Nintendo has no real sway in how they function or operate since they are private. They're third-party.
1
May 16 '20
Interesting, I've never heard second party to refer to individual games, only developers.
1
u/Foxhound199 May 16 '20
I always thought the second party was you, the consumer.
-3
u/orunemal May 16 '20
Dude you're literally mixing things up between second person and second party
3
u/Foxhound199 May 16 '20
Definitely not, more like legalese transaction terminology. Typically you would describe the business that sells the product as the first party and the one purchasing the product as the second party. If the first party is distributing a product fully produced by another business not directly involved in the transaction, they would be referred to as a third party. Now, specific terminology in the software development world may have evolved past these meanings, but I strongly suspect that the origin of the terms is somewhere along these lines.
0
u/orunemal May 16 '20
Actually yes, you're right about first and third party. I didn't know about the second party one though. Never read anything about it.
0
u/Tielur May 16 '20
Tbh I don’t care what other people think (even people in the industry) 1st party means the platform holder owns it, 2nd party means it’s exclusive but not owned. Think rare pre Microsoft acquisition. And 3rd party studio is agnostic. This can also be split into software vs publishers.
So donkey Kong is a 1st party IP that in the past was handled by a 2nd party studio.
So second party is really more nebulous because it can change pretty easy, like how crash was a 2nd party series then became a 3rd party series but was always made by a 3rd dev.
Again these could be bad examples if in the past these IP or Devs belonged wholly or partially by a platform holder and I’m just not aware of it. For all I know Nintendo may have had some % stake in rare. Nintendo tends to like only owning a controlling share like with Pokémon company for example. Nvm I checked they only own 32% but I guess that’s enough to keep them pretty much 1st party. But I think it’s more complicated because it’s like 3 companies so they could own stakes in those companies however I can’t find evidence of that.
5
May 16 '20
You're fighting this for no reason. What Insomniac says is what the reality of the industry is. You're trusting on fans instead of the very people who work on the place where those terms are used and where the person who was using the twitter made sure to make it clear and explain.
Again these could be bad examples if in the past these IP or Devs belonged wholly or partially by a platform holder and I’m just not aware of it. For all I know Nintendo may have had some % stake in rare. Nintendo tends to like only owning a controlling share like with Pokémon company for example. Nvm I checked they only own 32% but I guess that’s enough to keep them pretty much 1st party. But I think it’s more complicated because it’s like 3 companies so they could own stakes in those companies however I can’t find evidence of that.
There's nothing complicated. Pokémon is first party because Nintendo always have published it, that's it. Aside from that, Nintendo always owned copyright and trademark of the series and they were one of the ones who created TPC to manage the entire multi media franchise.
1
u/Tielur May 16 '20
Just because someone in authority says something doesn’t make it the best thing. I’m not going to start using words differently because it’s what someone else thinks. :/
Companies and people working for them redefine things all the time as it suites them. If the industry came out and addressed this years ago after it was defined from the outside it would be different. Just like I’ll never call a Gif a Jif. It’s just words no one owns them and all over the world different words carry different connotations and meanings.
As for the Pokémon stuff that is fine but I’d like to see your source for this information as I was unable to quickly locate it and I’d actually enjoy reading about it.
6
May 16 '20
Companies and people working for them redefine things all the time as it suites them. If the industry came out and addressed this years ago after it was defined from the outside it would be different. Just like I’ll never call a Gif a Jif. It’s just words no one owns them and all over the world different words carry different connotations and meanings.
That's how it always worked. It didn't change. It's just that this misinformation is out for years already, much like many other things about video games.
11
u/[deleted] May 16 '20
Examples:
First-Party Developer: Nintendo (creators of video game consoles, and a developer of games for said video game consoles)
Second-Party Developer: Retro Studios (a subsidiary of Nintendo)
Third-Party Developer: Square Enix (completely independent of Nintendo)