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

Drek · Nov 10, 2017

CaviarMeths said:
It's developed by Platinum, but it does apply to this thread as it is a first party game.

Outside of the first/second party game debate it was cited as an example of Nintendo being able to provide a good storyline/narrative in their games. Nintendo had nothing to do with the story/narrative in W101, so it isn't an example of what they can produce from a storyline standpoint.

-PXG- said:
Nintendo.

Sony's games value production over game play. They look nice, but lack substance and lasting appeal. 10, 20 years from now, hardly any of Sony's IPs will matter or will be remembered. Nintendo's will.

A Crash remake just recently sold quite well. It was first published in 1996 by Sony, developed by a now Sony owned studio, so 21 years old.

Gran Turismo still sells buckets. It was first published in 1997, so 20 years old.

Uncharted 4 and Lost Legacy are some of the best games this generation. The first Uncharted game was released a little over 10 years ago.

WipEout was first released in 1995 and saw it's most recent iteration in 2012, with a PS4 collection released this year. That's 17 years between new iterations, 23 years total and still being serviced. F-Zero first released in 1990 and had it's last new entry in 2004, 14 years of total life and untouched for nearly as long at this point. So which IP there has stood the test of time?

First Ratchet and Clank release: 2002. Last release: 2016. So 14 years and still counting.

Twisted Metal first released in 1995, it's last release was 2012 and I'd argue that many people who had a PS1 or PS2 at their peak will remember TM2 and Black quite fondly for years to come.

God of War first released in 2005 and has a major new release scheduled for early 2018.

So 10-20 years of relevance seems to be pretty much already proven by their existing catalog, and their first party studios are dramatically better now relative to era than they were in the PS1 and PS2 eras.

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Raijinto said:
Get a load of this. Woowie.

Have you ever considered the possibility that creating stellar 3D platformers is a mighty difficult task to do and that most publishers and even developers do not consider the merits to be worth it when they're just going to end up overshadowed by the next Mario game anyway? Because to hear you talk it's because it's a bad game and every 'AAA' studio is doing much better with what they're already doing.... might want to go to Metacritic to check up on that one.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg of this comment. We've got 'Splatoon is a fad' or words to that effect, hrgr evil motion controls, unbelievably insinuating that most publishers would turn their nose up at the "Sweet, Sweet Mario Kart moolah" you know, Nintendo's 2nd highest selling exclusive franchise by a landslide this century (are you even thinking at this point).

And to top it all off you even take a swipe at Pikmin- the EXACT same game I and others knew people like you would do because you are slighted at cute games being better than the games you like. I am 99.9% certain you have never played Pikmin 3, yet you come out with *that* nonsense anyway because of your irrational hatred of a company.

I liked this comment anyway. It's exactly the type I think of whenever Nintendo do something- anything- well and there's always someone out there who is genuinely offended by that success.

You can't even give them credit where it is so blatantly, obviously due, like 65% of us here can see. It's something else to be sure.

Oh and of course lmao at "this needs to stop".

My point, quite clearly, is that Nintendo are not an industry leader who other publishers attempt to follow. I made absolutely no commentary whatsoever on the quality, style, or success - financially or otherwise - of any Nintendo title. Regardless of the reasoning, no-one else in the industry is attempting to follow Nintendo. If I'm wrong, that should be an easily refutable claim.

You wanna answer those points, that I actually made, then sure, we can chat. You want to put words in my mouth? Not interested.

Drek said:
Outside of the first/second party game debate it was cited as an example of Nintendo being able to provide a good storyline/narrative in their games. Nintendo had nothing to do with the story/narrative in W101, so it isn't an example of what they can produce from a storyline standpoint.

A Crash remake just recently sold quite well. It was first published in 1996 by Sony, developed by a now Sony owned studio, so 21 years old.

Gran Turismo still sells buckets. It was first published in 1997, so 20 years old.

Uncharted 4 and Lost Legacy are some of the best games this generation. The first Uncharted game was released a little over 10 years ago.

WipEout was first released in 1995 and saw it's most recent iteration in 2012, with a PS4 collection released this year. That's 17 years between new iterations, 23 years total and still being serviced. F-Zero first released in 1990 and had it's last new entry in 2004, 14 years of total life and untouched for nearly as long at this point. So which IP there has stood the test of time?

First Ratchet and Clank release: 2002. Last release: 2016. So 14 years and still counting.

Twisted Metal first released in 1995, it's last release was 2012 and I'd argue that many people who had a PS1 or PS2 at their peak will remember TM2 and Black quite fondly for years to come.

God of War first released in 2005 and has a major new release scheduled for early 2018.

So 10-20 years of relevance seems to be pretty much already proven by their existing catalog, and their first party studios are dramatically better now relative to era than they were in the PS1 and PS2 eras.

Phellps · Nov 10, 2017

I think Sony and Nintendo are a tie. It's hard to compare them because they're wildly different, but I think where Nintendo's games usually excel in sales and cultural impact, Sony's have great innovation and technological prowess.

On Nintendo's side you have three pillars that have stood the tests of time; Mario, Zelda and Pokémon. These games are older than two decades and they still move millions and millions of copies whenever a new installment comes out. Two of them also really like taking their own formulas and shaking them until it becomes something else, with both Zelda and Mario sometimes changing completely every time a new game comes out. But, still, they manage to keep their roots intact, and people instantly recognize the game for its gameplay alone.

Sony has the Naughty Dog games, which are, as we all know, technical marvels, always providing incredible visuals and action pieces, and also incredible stories in the case of The Last of Us. Sucker Punch, created inFamous, which was one of the strongest selling points of the PS3 last gen, and one of the first selling points of the PS4 as well. And Santa Monica, the creators of what is probably Playstation's strongest IP, God of War. Overall, Sony has the great habit of letting its studios run looser than the odd publisher would, allowing them to explore creativity and pushing towards technical advancements to promote their console. This provides Sony with variety; so it has games ranging from gameplay focus (inFamous, God of War) to story-driven cinematic experiences (Heavy Rain, Beyond) to a mix between the two (The Last of Us). Not to mention Sony's smaller studios that keep developing innovative and fresh games like Journey, Flower, The Unfinished Swan, Dreams, and so on.

Raijinto · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
My point, quite clearly, is that Nintendo are not an industry leader who other publishers attempt to follow. I made absolutely no commentary whatsoever on the quality, style, or success - financially or otherwise - of any Nintendo title. Regardless of the reasoning, no-one else in the industry is attempting to follow Nintendo. If I'm wrong, that should be an easily refutable claim.

You wanna answer those points, that I actually made, then sure, we can chat. You want to put words in my mouth? Not interested.

And I responded, quite clearly and straight away right at the start, as to why there is obviously not going to be an expensive collectothon 3D platformer released anytime soon. The onus to respond to the response is on you I'm afraid :)

EDIT: oh and please elaborate on the sarcastic "sweet Mario Kart moolah" while you're at it. And don't forget to reference this too. I'm dying to hear your justification for that one:

-PXG- · Nov 10, 2017

Gran Turismo and God of War are arguably Sony's biggest IPs and most recognized, no doubt.

But as the OP mentioned, Nintendo can consistently produce high quality games. Most of the their IPs don't have long droughts between releases. F-Zero being the longest.

Ask anyone in the world what "Nintendo" is or what "Super Mario" is. That level of ubiquity says something about Nintendo's mark in people's minds. No other gaming company has anything close to that.

CaviarMeths · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
This is a nonsense that needs to stop. Nintendo's first party output hasn't had a serious influence on the wider industry in decades and no-one is trying to catch up with them. Their last major gift to the industry was hardware: the now all-but-abandoned motion control phenomenon; a blind turn for the entire industry which I think did more harm than good.

On the software side, their biggest releases in the last five years represent no kind of benchmark for any other major publisher or developer anywhere in the industry. How many non-Nintendo platformers are there going to market now trying to ape the Super Mario formula? How many big-budget AAA racers are trying to score some of that sweet, sweet Mario Kart moolah? How many massive shooter franchises taking their cues from Splatoon? What-a-about all those Pikmin-a-likes?

Nothing, none, nada. In fact the inverse is more true, with Nintendo updating many their longtime franchises with now popular industry standards like crafting, stamina consumption and open-world design.

Now compare that to a small, slightly obscure PS3 title called 'Demon's Souls'. It not only redefined a genre, it arguably created a brand new one and has since spawned countless clones and become a gaming benchmark where terms like 'Souls-like' and 'The Dark Souls of...' are part of the common vernacular. Consider the explosion of hero-shooters since Overwatch, the inevitable tide of battle royale games and modes we'll be seeing in the coming years.

Nintendo are not and have not been influential in the software sphere for sometime now. Their games exist in their own peculiar bubble, carving out a living on IP alone where no serious competitors even bother to get into the ring. What does one even benchmark Super Mario Odyssey against? Sonic Forces? Yooka Laylee? No, it's uniformly been benchmarked against every previous release, in the same way BotW has mostly been critiqued (lack of dungeons, story, music) against it's previous incarnations rather than it's contemporaries.

Nintendo don't lead, neither do they follow very often. They dance to their own tune and whether you love that or hate it, it doesn't need to be dressed up.

Not to go all detective, but a fun game is seeing hilariously salty ass posts like these and cross-referencing with that "Do you think Switch will be a success?" thread on GAF back in January.

Raijinto · Nov 10, 2017

CaviarMeths said:
Not to go all detective, but a fun game is seeing hilariously salty ass posts like these and cross-referencing with that "Do you think Switch will be a success?" thread on GAF back in January.

Don't be silly, of course this person saw the Switches initial success right away, no way did they say any nonsense like 'portables are dead' or 'Nintendo are totally irrelevant" or "Mario/Zelda x million rehash is not enough to sell consoles" or "it's just a fad/starving/honeymoon" etc.

Can't believe that would come from *this* user. They obviously know what they're talking about.

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Raijinto said:
And I responded, quite clearly and straight away right at the start, as to why there is obviously not going to be an expensive collectothon 3D platformer released anytime soon. The onus to respond to the response is on you I'm afraid :)

EDIT: oh and please elaborate on the sarcastic "sweet Mario Kart moolah" while you're at it. And don't forget to reference this too. I'm dying to hear your justification for that one:

I tabled a proposition: Nintendo aren't influential as they are not commonly aped by other publishers and developers. You said 'that might be because of reason x, y or z'. I say, yes, it might well, be, but that doesn't change the fact that we both agree on the fact that they aren't. Reasons for this could be myriad and complex, but it doesn't change the apparent truth of my statement.

The 'Mario Kart moolah' comment is supported by this graph, not refuted. We know it's a hugely successful IP and yet no-one tries to copy it. It's not considered influential despite it's success. And that's my point, Nintendo are many things, but influential in the modern software market, demonstrably, is not true.

Raijinto said:
Can't believe that would come from *this* user. They obviously know what they're talking about.

I mean, I get you think you're being clever, but 'this user' actually worked for Nintendo for quite a few years, so I'm not coming from a place of ignorance even remotely.

brandywine · Nov 10, 2017

He was also waging a personal crusade in the BOTW review thread.

Inuhanyou · Nov 10, 2017

Nintendo obviously, not even a question.

Sony is no slouch though, and i really enjoy their content which complements their third party portfolio

MS have not had good first party outlook since last gen. Out of their 3 main franchises, Gears basically ended at 3, Halo ended at Reach, and only Forza continues.

And for me, Horizon is the only success story of modern MS in the first party arena outside of perhaps Killer Instinct.

Barn · Nov 10, 2017

I'm reading all of Prithee's comments in Jim Sterling's Commentocracy voice.

Raijinto · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
I tabled a proposition: Nintendo aren't influential as they are not commonly aped by other publishers and developers. You said 'that might be because of reason x, y or z'. I say, yes, it might well, be, but that doesn't change the fact that we both agree on the fact that they aren't. Reasons for this could be myriad and complex, but it doesn't change the apparent truth of my statement.

The 'Mario Kart moolah' comment is supported by this graph, not refuted. We know it's a hugely successful IP and yet no-one tries to copy it. It's not considered influential despite it's success. And that's my point, Nintendo are many things, but influential in the modern software market, demonstrably, is not true.

You're doing a bang-up job at dodging my point entirely. So as not to result in a total derail I think we'll just have to agree to disagree, I believe Nintendo to be great and quite influential indeed, whilst you believe that the highest quality and most successful 1st party publisher by several metrics is irrelevant. It feels ridiculously silly to me just typing it out so I'm obviously not going to be won over by you anytime soon, especially considering what you've purported thus far.

And lmao if you were salty in the BoTW review thread too. Don't have anything on that but I assume 'Belda' may have figured in the debate? :)

Deleted member 21326 · Nov 10, 2017

Barn said:
I'm reading all of Prithee's comments in Jim Sterling's Commentocracy voice.

Iol xD

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Raijinto said:
You're doing a bang-up job at dodging my point entirely. So as not to result in a total derail I think we'll just have to agree to disagree, I believe Nintendo to be great and quite influential indeed, whilst you believe that the highest quality and most successful 1st party publisher by several metrics is irrelevant. It feels ridiculously silly to me just typing it out so I'm obviously not going to be won over by you anytime soon, especially considering what you've purported thus far.

And lmao if you were salty in the BoTW review thread too. Don't have anything on that but I assume 'Belda' may have figured in the debate? :)

This isn't a discussion, you're not even trying. We agree Nintendo aren't influential. You think that's justifiable, I don't really have a position either way. I'll leave it there.

Kamisori · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
My point, quite clearly, is that Nintendo are not an industry leader who other publishers attempt to follow.

That's a joke? I mean, on the hardware side, they all follow Nintendo at some point (analog stick, vibration, motion gaming, even asymetric gameplay).

On the software side it's harder to see it but we've been able to see the influence at some degree. Moreover there isn't (so many) straight-up copies of Nintendo games because publishers know that they don't have the skills or the company culture to do them.

In the most obvious, Smash Bros is still by far the most popular brawler game available (and Sony tried to copy it with PS All Star Battle), Darksiders for example is clearly inspired by Zelda, you have also the "Metroidvania" genre, the aesthetic of the avatar of many modern casual games copied from the Wii brand, and many seasoned videogame industry veterans who said that Breath of the Wild has fundamentally changed the approach of the open world design today.

Deleted member 26104 · Nov 10, 2017

CaviarMeths said:
No, that's not how it works. If the platform holder owns the IP, then it is a 1st party game. It can have 3rd party development, but the game itself is owned by the platform holder and is, by definition, 1st party. You own it = it's yours = 1st party.

Gears is 1st party
Bloodborne is 1st party
Smash is 1st party

Pokemon is a unique case, as Nintendo fully owns the trademark, but only 1/3rd of the IP. It is, for all intents and purposes, still 1st party though. I think Nintendo even owns a majority stake in Creatures Inc., one of the other owners of the Pokemon IP.

It is how it works, or at least how it has worked for the large majority of the last 30 odd years. Owning the IP has nothing to do with the game being first party or not. If the platform holder didn't make it it's not first party, or at least not in the traditional first/second/third party definitions.

Garf02 said:
1st Party is not who makes em buy Who OWNS the IP, GF saving grace as a developer is his stake on the pokemon company and the deal when it was started that only em can make main line RPG Pokemon games, that deal aside Nintendo owns any and all rights to main line Pokemon RPG

As above, by the long standing definitions first party games are made by first party studios, end of story. Third party developers can't make first party games.

There is no separation between X party developer and X party games. If you're a 2nd party Dev your game is 2nd party if it's exclusive to the console manufacturer. If you're third party the game is third party. You can't have a first party Dev make a third party game, or a third party Dev make a first party game.

Owari · Nov 10, 2017

Grim Patron said:
Microsoft. Nothing comes close to Forza Horizon and Gears.

Joke post?

Those poll results are pretty much spot on.

moose84 · Nov 10, 2017

TheDave545 said:
For me its gonna have to go to Sony, more varied 1st Party titles and spanning different genres.

Uncharted, Horizon, Last of Us, Detroit, God of War, Days Gone... you honestly consider that to be a varied lineup of different genres?

Mario (3D platformer), Zelda (adventure), Splatoon (team based shooter), Metroid (Metroidvania), Arms (1 v 1 fighter), Starfox (arcade space shooter), Xenoblade (RPG), Mario Kart (kart racer), Pikmin (RTS adventure), Super Mario Maker (2D level designer) - now that's variety!

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Kamisori said:
That's a joke? I mean, on the hardware side, they all follow Nintendo at some point (analog stick, vibration, motion gaming, even asymetric gameplay).

On the software side it's harder to see it but we've been able to see the influence at some degree. Moreover there isn't (so many) straight-up copies of Nintendo games because publishers know that they don't have the skills or the company culture to do them.

In the most obvious, Smash Bros is still by far the most popular brawler game available (and Sony tried to copy it with PS All Star Battle), Darksiders for example is clearly inspired by Zelda, you have also the "Metroidvania" genre, the aesthetic of the avatar of many modern casual games copied from the Wii brand, and many seasoned videogame industry veterans who said that Breath of the Wild has fundamentally changed the approach of the open world design today.

You should probably ready prior comments where I said the same things. This is a software thread, hence the focus on software.

Raijinto · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
This isn't a discussion, you're not even trying. *We agree Nintendo aren't influential.*'You think that's justifiable, I don't really have a position either way. I'll leave it there.

And to think you just a handful of minutes ago had a go at me for "putting words into your mouth" this is as dishonest as you can get TBH. We clearly do not agree and I specifically said as much in my last comment and yet you say... this. Lying basically.

For shame.

CaviarMeths · Nov 10, 2017

TehPotentialz said:
It is how it works, or at least how it has worked for the large majority of the last 30 odd years. Owning the IP has nothing to do with the game being first party or not. If the platform holder didn't make it it's not first party, or at least not in the traditional first/second/third party definitions.

There are no real "traditional" 2nd party definitions because it's a made up term.

1st party = it's yours
3rd party = it's not yours

It's really that simple.

Drek · Nov 10, 2017

-PXG- said:
Gran Turismo and God of War are arguably Sony's biggest IPs and most recognized, no doubt.

But as the OP mentioned, Nintendo can consistently produce high quality games. Most of the their IPs don't have long droughts between releases. F-Zero being the longest.

Ask anyone in the world what "Nintendo" is or what "Super Mario" is. That level of ubiquity says something about Nintendo's mark in people's minds. No other gaming company has anything close to that.

1. Top 100 Brands in the World

Sony is #58. I kept hitting "Find > Nintendo" and didn't get a result, but maybe just something wrong with my browser.

2. Are you claiming Sony doesn't consistently produce high quality games? All evidence of late points to the contrary.

3. I would argue that Playstation as a brand is as ubiquitous as "Mario" and "Nintendo". Gran Turismo has traditionally had more sales impact and recognition than every non-Mario IP in Nintendo's stable.

4. I don't see how it's a positive that Nintendo has stapled the Mario brand on literally every kind of game they'll make while Sony willingly moves on to new IPs and new genres even when a studio has found success with an existing product. Nintendo makes good Mario games, but they're good because they're good, not because Mario is in them.

KiNolin · Nov 10, 2017

It depends for which point in time you are asking. The SNES Mini made it clear to me once again that Nintendo nowadays is a shell of their former selfs, like most Japanese developers after HD became a thing (especially when it comes to the amount of games). Meanwhile Sony's been putting in lots of muscle. I don't even care for a majority of their biggest budget titles, but I can recognize their efforts and the quantity in which they happen.

YukiroCTX · Nov 10, 2017

Overall, I quite enjoy both Sony and Nintendo's first party/exclusive games but so far this generation, I've vastly preferred Nintendo's efforts the most. Consistently higher quality and innovative and so far for switch has been a really great stream of games.

Sony has had a decent lineup of games but they're far more inconsistent in quality and far more spread out as well. It took a year and a couple months before there was a really solid game ( Bloodborne) and in the meanwhile, they were releasing fairly mediocre to awful games like Killzone, Knack, Infamous, The Order and while I love Driveclub, it was released in a shoddy state with lack of content. I enjoy Sony's efforts in SP games particularly story driven games , their exploration in different genres but a lot of the times it doesn't work out but at least there's an attempted effort and sometimes there are great games like Until Dawn, Horizon, UC, Gravity Rush,TLG and Tearaway.

LordOcidax · Nov 10, 2017

nib95 · Nov 10, 2017

It is an interesting point Prithee is bringing up though. Just how influential has Nintendo actually been to game design in the last decade or so? I'd argue probably not that influential since as he mentioned, popular video games are not really apeing that sort of design or those sorts of genres anymore, plus the mechanics with respect to platformers, kart racers etc, are sort of already well established. Even Nintendo itself is sort of re-riding or re-imagining mechanics it created itself decades ago. So in terms of influence, I suppose there could be a distinction made between how influential Nintendo game design used to be, versus how influential it still is today. Perhaps Nintendo's influence is felt more in indie development etc, than it is in popular modern-day AAA development?

Interestingly, I think two of the most influential franchises in recent memory are Call of Duty and Uncharted. Call of Duty for the mass instant and constant gratification, unlock and reward emphasised multiplayer it popularised, and Uncharted for its push towards more cinematic, character/story focused, movie-like, massive set-piece orientated gameplay.

Beegeous · Nov 10, 2017

For me it's Nintendo.

Others like Microsoft have put out some great games - I loved the OG Gears of Wars trilogy and PGR on 360 and love Forza on Xbone - but they don't have that something that playing a Nintendo game does. When I first played the first 15 mins of BotW at the Switch roadshow back in Feb I was left gobsmacked but I don't think I truly understood why.

Zelda was a series that I'd grown up adoring. One of the first 'hard' games that I ever finished was Link's Awakening back in 1995 so to see the series evolve from LA through to Ocarina, to Wind Waker to Twilight Princess on Wii had been a journey, and now to jump into a new Zelda game that promised what people wanted; an open, living world in which you could go anywhere and practically do anything was a dream come true.

In writing this I think I might know what a good chunk of Nintendo's something is. To me it's that these series' have been around for a long, long time and that the majority of iterations either create a new way of gaming (SMB, Mario 64, Ocarina of Time) or moves toward perfecting a formula (SMW being the definitive 2D platformer, BotW being for me the best ever open world game). With that, whenever I pick up a Nintendo game I'm expecting something great and more often than not I'm not disappointed.

Drek · Nov 10, 2017

moose84 said:
Uncharted, Horizon, Last of Us, Detroit, God of War, Days Gone... you honestly consider that to be a varied lineup of different genres?

Mario (3D platformer), Zelda (adventure), Splatoon (team based shooter), Metroid (Metroidvania), Arms (1 v 1 fighter), Starfox (arcade space shooter), Xenoblade (RPG), Mario Kart (kart racer), Pikmin (RTS adventure), Super Mario Maker (2D level designer) - now that's variety!

So you'll pull out Star Fox, a game made by an external studio where the last iteration was a piece of shit, but overlook MLB: The Show, Everybody's Golf, Ratchet and Clank, LittleBigPlanet, Tearaway, Ico/SotC/TLG, Sound Shapes, Stardust and the other Housemarque games, Soul Sacrifice, the Siren franchise, Motorstorm, Driveclub, and Gran Turismo, etc.

That's just stuff with relatively recent iterations I can recount from memory, FYI.

Nintendo spends 3/4ths of it's efforts on the same IPs in the same genres and 1/4th of it's effort making something new. They generally make something compelling when they do put out something new, like Splatoon, or at least ok, like ARMS. Sony is more like a 50/50 split and they aren't shy to move away from a successful IP at the peak of it's success, unlike Nintendo. They also help produce a lot more lower budget zany ass shit for apparently the fun of it, which Nintendo has yet to do.

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Raijinto said:
And to think you just a handful of minutes ago had a go at me for "putting words into your mouth" this is as dishonest as you can get TBH. We clearly do not agree and I specifically said as much in my last comment and yet you say... this.

For shame.

Me:

How many non-Nintendo platformers are there going to market now trying to ape the Super Mario formula?

You:

Have you ever considered the possibility that creating stellar 3D platformers is a mighty difficult task to do and that most publishers and even developers do not consider the merits to be worth it when they're just going to end up overshadowed by the next Mario game anyway?

If this is not you explaining why there are so few non-Nintendo 3D platformers, then I'm not sure what it is. It also serves as a tacit acknowledgement that my initial statement was true.

This statement was made in support of an argument that Nintendo aren't influential in the modern software sphere. Now, for me, being influential means that others are inspired by you - that they follow your lead. That you have an 'influence' over their output.

You can't table any example of that - you've not even tried. You just argued that I was a hater or whatever. Nintendo aren't influential in the modern software market. That was my original statement, not in response to you, but another. Now you can respond to that and we'll talk examples or we can leave this here.

Silvard · Nov 10, 2017

Raijinto said:
And to think you just a handful of minutes ago had a go at me for "putting words into your mouth" this is as dishonest as you can get TBH. We clearly do not agree and I specifically said as much in my last comment and yet you say... this. Lying basically.

For shame.

Sorry to butt in, but while I'm not PritheeBeCareful, I can see the point they're making and I think it's perfectly valid.

They're saying that Nintendo isn't setting widely followed industry trends software wise.

You're saying that this is because other developers can't compete with their quality. But that's not refuting their point. You're agreeing with them.

There's more examples of Nintendo following industry wide trends (like open world and such) than viceversa. And that's not a commentary on the quality of their output.

Kamisori · Nov 10, 2017

PritheeBeCareful said:
You should probably ready prior comments where I said the same things. This is a software thread, hence the focus on software.

Yet from hardware they influence the software (and the gamedesign). The analog stick (and the way Nintendo did it) was a revolution to allow the character to move in a 3D world for example. The thing is when Nintendo introduce a new hardware feature, they show to the industry how to use it properly and in way only few people thought it before.

And i also talked about the software side of the influence of Nintendo.

tzare · Nov 10, 2017

For me it is sony, but it could be a tie with Nintendo.
But my personal tastes favour Sony output.

If i had to describe both, i'd say Sony has more varied games and genres, as well as a wider appeal, from cartoony to realistic style. They seem to me that also have some freedom and allow for not commercial experiences, like Bound, for example
Nintendo on the other side is less varied, especially with the 'looks' . They lack the typical AAA 'realistic looking & story driven' western game for example.But also are more focused and their games are probably more consistent, they use ,mostly, known formulas they perfect and evolve , so their quality is very high and solid.

Joltik · Nov 10, 2017

Man, it's weird to see someone say "no one tried to copy mario kart" when over the past several decades I've seen countless character based kart-like racers being released, with the recent one I know of being Sonic Racing Transformed. Some of them were inferior to Mario Kart and some surprassed it.

However, none of them were ever as huge as a pop icon as Mario Kart.

Deleted member 26104 · Nov 10, 2017

CaviarMeths said:
There are no real "traditional" 2nd party definitions because it's a made up term.

1st party = it's yours
3rd party = it's not yours

It's really that simple.

I mean sure in terms of every term in every language in the world being "made up". First/second/third party are real defined things, they even refer to themselves that way.

Bennibop · Nov 10, 2017

Definitely Sony they are more than happy to take risks on new IPs. Nintendo a close second though but they take very few risks imo.

Microsoft are just to reliant on existing ips and have almost bled them dry, hopefully they have learned a lesson but they seem focused on loot and microtransactions and are not interested in taking risks especially with single player only. I have my fingers crossed the Sea of thieves works out.

Killingmoon · Nov 10, 2017

Drek said:
1. Top 100 Brands in the World

Sony is #58. I kept hitting "Find > Nintendo" and didn't get a result, but maybe just something wrong with my browser.

2. Are you claiming Sony doesn't consistently produce high quality games? All evidence of late points to the contrary.

3. I would argue that Playstation as a brand is as ubiquitous as "Mario" and "Nintendo". Gran Turismo has traditionally had more sales impact and recognition than every non-Mario IP in Nintendo's stable.

4. I don't see how it's a positive that Nintendo has stapled the Mario brand on literally every kind of game they'll make while Sony willingly moves on to new IPs and new genres even when a studio has found success with an existing product. Nintendo makes good Mario games, but they're good because they're good, not because Mario is in them.

You do realize that Sony is more than the PlayStation brand? They're a multinational conglomerate; of course they're going to be one of the top 100 brands in the world.

As for Nintendo putting Mario on every kind of game they make, that's a conscious decision. Nintendo knows the strength and brand recognition of their IPs; that is why if they have a new gameplay mechanic, they more often than not try to see which of their established IPs will fit it. That is how Mario became such an iconic figure and how it became such an enduring mascot across the decades -- they've established him to be a character that transcends genres, and that is a great move. See Mickey Mouse.

Silvard · Nov 10, 2017

Kamisori said:
The thing is when Nintendo introduce a new hardware feature, they show to the industry how to use it properly and in way only few people thought it before.

I think this certainly used to be the case over 10 years ago, but not anymore.

King Dodongo · Nov 10, 2017

Nintendo, they have the most talented development teams on earth, and it shows. Also they take more risks than many admit. And they consistently make new ips. ARMS, Dillon's Rolling Western, Codename Steam just to name a few.

PritheeBeCareful · Nov 10, 2017

Kamisori said:
Yet from hardware they influence the software (and the gamedesign). The analog stick (and the way Nintendo did it) was a revolution to allow the character to move in a 3D world for example. The thing is when Nintendo introduce a new hardware feature, they show to the industry how to use it properly and in way only few people thought it before.

And i also talked about the software side of the influence of Nintendo.

The single analogue stick was a breakthrough technologically, but the dual analogue stick which now dominates the modern gaming market was a more influential realisation of that initial potential and revolutionized gaming. There have been dozens more refinements since then. Clickable thumbsticks, analogue triggers and more. I won't dispute that historically at the very least, in the hardware market, Nintendo have been quite influential, but not always. They followed Sony when it came to disc based media, for example, and both MS and Sony in the single biggest gaming refinement of the modern age: online gaming. An arena where even their most ardent fans would admit they're still a way behind.

In the last ten years, since the Wii success began to wane and motion controls showed themselves to have only a short-lived popularity, that influence is rarely felt.

Today, Nintendo's major competitors are pushing more for visual fidelity and VR experiences. I do not see the Switch format being significantly aped by any major hardware developer. Software-wise, as we've already said, their games are harder to argue as influential and they won't have the revolutionary impact on the market that games Dark Souls and Overwatch have had.

Odd examples, will always exist, like Darksiders and PlayStation's All-Star Battle Royale, but as for creating industry leading terms like 'hero shooter', 'loot and shoot' and 'souls-like', they don't have that sway anymore.

RedShift · Nov 10, 2017

TBH I find it hard to see how it can be anything but Nintendo, but apparently lots of people don't feel that way.

Looking at any list of 'best games of all time', Nintendo first party games dominate them. And it's not like they're all old games either, they're spread over all generations.

ADee · Nov 10, 2017

(list taken from Wikipedia so there's probably some errors)

Sony's first year's output on the PS4:

Retail
- Killzone: Shadow Fall
- Knack
- Infamous Second Son
- Driveclub
- MLB 14: The Show
- The Last of Us Remastered

PlayStation Network
- DC Universe Online (Published by Sony Online Entertainment)
- Doki-Doki Universe
- Escape Plan
- Flow
- Flower
- Resogun
- Sound Shapes
- The Playroom

Nintendo's first year output Nintendo Switch:

2017

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
1-2-Switch
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe
Arms
Splatoon 2
Pokkén Tournament DX
Fire Emblem Warriors (Published by Nintendo outside Japan)
Super Mario Odyssey
Snipperclips Plus
Xenoblade Chronicles 2

And on 3DS:

Sony had a decent game with Infamous and a great port with The Last of Us.
Nintendo... Oh boy where do I start, 2 GOAT games this year, Pokémon, Mario Kart 8 (Port), Splatoon 2, Xenoblade 2, Metroid and my favourite serie Fire Emblem got a new entry as well.

For me atleast there's no contest who's the king of the first party, and that is Nintendo.
Sony however has done great this year, there's no denying that but it's on a console which have been out for quite some time.

MidnightBarber · Nov 10, 2017

As a child I would have said Nintendo.

As an adult Forza Horizon is the most appealing, for me.

Hakai · Nov 10, 2017

Nintendo. Just the fact that they could make some of their IPs relevant since the beginning, transtioning said IPs from 2D to 3D, is to me enough evidence that they have the best first party output.

Deleted member 24550 · Nov 10, 2017

I mean.

It's not really a question. Nintendo has by far the biggest first party library (700 games and counting). They have "Mr. Games", and a quantity of all time classic stables that run laps around most of the competition combined, and even then release genre-creating games like Splatoon on a whim. The top 25 highest rated games of all time have 9 Nintendo first party games, 1 MS first party game and 0 Sony first party games. The answer is obvious.

That said, I respect the shit out of Sony for expanding the potential of games and the willingness to foot the bill. Games like Shadow of the Colossus, Journey, Heavy Rain, Unfinished Swan (though I realize only the first is an actual first party game) have done a lot to make gaming interesting for people after they become (mentally) an adult. Too bad the PS4 so far has been severely lacking in this regard.

Microsoft... the last interesting exclusive they published was Mass Effect 1 in my opinion, now almost exactly 10 years ago.

NightOnyx · Nov 10, 2017

I would say Sony has the better lineup, with their many first party studios being pretty consistent. Naughty Dog in particular I think is the top studio among all the first party studios for every console. That's just my opinion though.

Despite that, I think Nintendo has the better one-two punch of Zelda and Mario. You can probably throw Pokémon in there too, but I feel like Mario and Zelda in particular is hard to top as far as a company's first party franchises go.

Microsoft is a distant third since this generation. Forza is really good, but Halo and Gears are not what they used to be, even though they desperately want them to be, which is the also their biggest problem.

Rai_11 · Nov 10, 2017

Even though Sony has super high quality games, Nintendo knows it's first party the best. M$ first party is pretty much non existent.

Chackan · Nov 10, 2017

Sony for me. Their exclusives are amazingly awesome for me!

ivb · Nov 10, 2017

Right now Nintendo, with Sony as a close second. They are the only ones delivering new and varied experiences to their systems, specially Nintendo.

But I think the kind of business model Microsoft is after goes in detriment of first parties. At least for now.

alexbull_uk · Nov 10, 2017

Between Mario (+Kart), Zelda, Smash Bros. Etc, etc. I think it has to be Nintendo.

kubev · Nov 10, 2017

I'd say that Sony has the best first-party content, even if it doesn't particularly appeal to me. I think Sony just tends to set a high standard for its games, and Sony isn't afraid to take chances on some really unique experiences. Nintendo has quality down, for the most part, but Nintendo also plays it far too safe, in my opinion. Microsoft's exclusives tend to appeal most to me, even if I don't necessarily feel that they're the best. It's refreshing when Microsoft makes some really weird and unexpected moves, even if the end results don't really appeal to as many people as I'd hope. Unfortunately, Microsoft tends to let people down by shutting projects down. That said, I'll take Forza Horizon 3 over pretty much anything that Microsoft or Nintendo would develop. That game's just incredible.

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

Which of the big three has the best first party?

Sony

Nintendo

Microsoft

User Requested Ban

self-requested ban

self-requested ban

User Requested Ban

self-requested ban

User requested account closure.

User Requested Ban

User requested account closure

User Requested Ban

self-requested ban

Prophet of Regret

Contains No Misinformation on Philly Cheesesteaks

User Requested Ban

Resettlement Advisor

User requested account closure

Resettlement Advisor

User Requested Ban

Ac

Prophet of Truth