Support NeoGAF

[Lunatic_Gamer]

For the longest time, it was assumed first-party games were those published by the platform holder and made by internally owned studios, while second-party titles were those titles still published by the platform holder but made by non-owned studios.

In an interview with Sacred Symbols+(paywalled), ex-PS Studios boss Shuhei Yoshida mostly put to bed the debate with a full breakdown. We’d summarise it like this:

First-party:
A game published and fully funded by Sony. Usually owns the IP.

Second-party:
A game published by Sony with partial or full funding coming from an external company. Usually doesn't own the IP.

Partner title:
A game published and developed by an external company launching first or earlier on PlayStation platforms.

Third-party:
A game published and fully funded by an external company.

“So, when games are made by a developer, [even an] independent developer, and published by PlayStation, we call them first-party games.”

He explained: “For example, before Housemarque was acquired they [were an] external developer and our external producers managed relations. But we funded the game and released the game as first-party, even though it was externally developed.”

Yoshida continued: “We call second-party when an independent company created the game and funded it or joint funded it, so the IP is still owned by that company. A recent example is Rise of the Ronin by Koei Tecmo. PlayStation published that game so we call it second-party.”

He concluded: “And then third-party exclusives we call partner titles, so some games like Final Fantasy 16 came out on PlayStation first and that was a third-party exclusive, so that’s the terminology.”

It all gets a bit complicated, and you can see how there may be some exceptions to the rules where different contracts are in place. (For example, Death Stranding 2: On the Beach is a game published and fully funded by PlayStation, but it doesn’t own the IP, so it sits somewhere between first-party and second-party really.)

Sony Clarifies the Difference Between First-Party, Second-Party, and So On

Now you know

www.pushsquare.com

 

[March Climber]

Second-party:
A game published by Sony with partial or full funding coming from an external company. Usually doesn't own the IP.

Would Demon's Souls PS3 fall under this?

 

[Hero_Select]

 

[PauloRoberto]

Would Demon's Souls PS3 fall under this?

No, Sony owns Demon Souls IP.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It has always been easy to understand all of this. I would just add the parent title / money-hatted title = marketing deals, exclusive missions / DLC first on PS

 

[PauloRoberto]

In this logic, Stellar Blade is a second party and Wukong is a accidental Partner title :-D

 

[MaxwellParrish]

Would Demon's Souls PS3 fall under this?

I think that Demon's Souls, under this definition, was first party. Sony own the IP and I believe the game was fully founded by them, with From acting only as a developer. I could be wrong

 

[March Climber]

No, Sony owns Demon Souls IP.

I think that Demon's Souls, under this definition, was first party. Sony own the IP and I believe the game was fully founded by them, with From acting only as a developer. I could be wrong

The wording is interesting to me. Has there been a stipulation where Sony has partially funded the development of a game, published it, and then said 'no, it's not ours?'

 

[DanielG165]

Did folks really need this explained?

 

[nial]

Shuhei Yoshida is not 'Sony'. He doesn't even work there anymore.

 

[bitbydeath]

Partner title:
A game published and developed by an external company launching first or earlier on PlayStation platforms.

 

[Guardian Monkey]

I own a PS5. I own Sony.

 

[Radical_3d]

Did folks really need this explained?

 

[Kilau]

Third-party:
A game published and fully funded by Sony on PC.

 

[Topher]

Did folks really need this explained?

Some still won't get it.

 

[PauloRoberto]

The wording is interesting to me. Has there been a stipulation where Sony has partially funded the development of a game, published it, and then said 'no, it's not ours?'

Stellar Blade ?

 

[nial]

I would suggest just saying first-party (as in published by SIE) and third-party (as in published by a different company). Rise of the Ronin and Stellar Blade are already different enough cases, and even Death Stranding 2 is fully funded by Sony, so it doesn't even apply there.
This is also an example of a game from an IP owned by Sony, that was 100% funded by the external developer.

Buzz!: The Schools Quiz - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Snowdonhoffen]

The wording is interesting to me. Has there been a stipulation where Sony has partially funded the development of a game, published it, and then said 'no, it's not ours?'

I guess Death Stranding fits that category now.

 

[adamsapple]

Yoshida continued: “We call second-party when an independent company created the game and funded it or joint funded it, so the IP is still owned by that company. A recent example is Rise of the Ronin by Koei Tecmo. PlayStation published that game so we call it second-party.”

Rise of Ronin is not first party.


Heisenberg007

Stellar Blade is scheduled for 2023. Death Stranding 2, Lost Souls Aside, and Rise of the Ronin are all expected to hit 2024. All first-party.

Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade, Death Stranding 2, Lost Souls Aside, Convallaria, Helldivers 2, are all first-party titles. They are published by SIE and co-developed by xDev, which is an in-house first-party studio.

And why Helldivers 2, Stellar Blade, Rise of the Ronin, etc. are all first-party PlayStation Studios titles.

The same people who'll say that Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade, or Death Stranding are not 1st party games will convince us that Forza Horizon 1-4, Ori, Microsoft Flight Simulator, etc. are first-party games.

 

[Kings Field]

 

[Gorgon]

 

[Dr. Wilkinson]

Shuhei Yoshida is not 'Sony'. He doesn't even work there anymore.

He was there for 35 years, bro. In senior leadership. Literally the guy who would know

 

[ReyBrujo]

Way to increase your portfolio without actually increasing your portfolio.

 

[nial]

He was there for 35 years, bro. In senior leadership. Literally the guy who would know

He only was in senior leadership for 11 years, tho.
Not saying that he doesn't know, but framing it as something a current Sony representative said is odd.

 

[Sooner]

I don't know why people care. Like last year, something like six out seven GOTY contenders were on PS5, with five being exclusive or console exclusive, yet PS5 had a terrible year because only a couple were first-party games.

Really, why does is matter?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I don't know why people care. Like last year, something like six out seven GOTY contenders were on PS5, with five being exclusive or console exclusive, yet PS5 had a terrible year because only a couple were first-party games.

Really, why does is matter?

It's a new phenomenon.

When I was a kid growing up, no one cared who made the games we played. Other than Nintendo and maybe Square... no one gave a shit

 

[Magic Carpet]

Now define AAA

 

[Mr Moose]

Sony Clarifies​

In an interview with Sacred Symbols+(paywalled), ex-PS

Hmm.

 

[Blank Space Invader]

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

The wording is interesting to me. Has there been a stipulation where Sony has partially funded the development of a game, published it, and then said 'no, it's not ours?'

Stellar Blade and Death Stranding since they sold the IP to Kojima. IMO Bloodborne belongs in that list, because Sony isn't doing anything with the IP without From involvement.

The basic concept is that Sony provides resources to other studios so they make games that otherwise wouldn't happen.

 

[Woopah]

At best second party is a sub-set of first party. No one judges a console or platform on its second party output.

Shuhei is right that it is all about who publishes and funds the game, not who owns the studio.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Basically, First party is any SIE published game that comes in through PlayStation Studios (Either from owned studios or co-development projects from independents). And Second party is an SIE published game that's not produced by PlayStation Studios (Stellar Blade being a notable example).

 

[Woopah]

Basically, First party is any SIE published game that comes in through PlayStation Studios (Either from owned studios or co-development projects from independents). And Second party is an SIE published game that's not produced by PlayStation Studios (Stellar Blade being a notable example).

XDEV staff were Producers on Stellar Blade though.

 

[Jubenhimer]

XDEV staff were Producers on Stellar Blade though.

Interesting. But the game itself wasn't branded as a PlayStation Studios production like most of Sony's other PS5 games though. Maybe because the IP belongs to Shift Up?

 

[Woopah]

Interesting. But the game itself wasn't branded as a PlayStation Studios production like most of Sony's other PS5 games though. Maybe because the IP belongs to Shift Up?

It's possible things are only branded as PS Studios when the main developer is a PS Studio. But XDev doesn't only work on those games.

It's like how Nintendo EPD works on Zelda and Mario Kart, but they also produce things that could be considered "second party" like Bayonetta 3, Fire Emblem Warriors or Pokémon Scarlet/Violet.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

In this logic, Stellar Blade is a second party and Wukong is a accidental Partner title :-D

WuKong is what happens when the install base difference is so loop-sided that Sony is no longer willing to pay for time exclusives. As in the benefits for paying timed exclusivity is minimal compared to doing nothing. Wu Kong is right now being a de-facto Sony exclusive despite no money changing hands.

This is actually much similar to the situation with Playstation1. PS1 barely had any in-house 1st party games, but it has a huge amount of third party titles that are exclusive to it because the same games couldn't run on the Nintendo platform. Sony didn't pay for the exclusivity, they didn't need to.

 

[saintjules]

Lunatic_Gamer Sony didn't clarify this, Shu did.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Lunatic_Gamer Sony didn't clarify this, Shu did.

A former senior Sony leader said it. Unless you think the meaning changed since he retired, he is still right.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Rise of Ronin is not first party.


Heisenberg007

 

[Embearded]

For me, for 1st party you need to own the IP. Really own it, not like the Death Stranding deal with X years of exclusivity etc.

I guess every platform holder could have a different definition.

 

[ToadMan]

Fine.

I guess about the only thought I get from this is that it doesn't draw a distinction between studios 100% owned by Sony and those not - it's just IP/funding/publishing criteria. Kind of opens the idea that Sony could sell off a portion of their studios, contract the work out to anyone, and call it first party. We typically said first party was specifically done by Sony owned studios in the past but this definition undermines that. But anyway, it seems like this distinction is getting less relevant.

It seems like a matter of time until one of MS studios works on Sony "first party" content lol.


Can we obtain a better definition of AAA vs AA and the rest now?

 

[squidilix]

In this logic, Stellar Blade is a second party and Wukong is a accidental Partner title :-D

Baladur's gate 3 too

 

[Killjoy-NL]

In this logic, Stellar Blade is a second party and Wukong is a accidental Partner title :-D

Well yeah, that was always the case.

 

[farmerboy]

Ok, now tell me the difference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins. That's another one I don't get

 

[Three]

2nd party is only a loose colloquial term and doesn't really exist formally. A game published by a company is a first party game to that company, the developer(s) of said game could be either first or third party, it doesn't matter.

 

[rkofan87]

I think that Demon's Souls, under this definition, was first party. Sony own the IP and I believe the game was fully founded by them, with From acting only as a developer. I could be wrong

then what is with the atlus logo on the us ps3 box cover???????????????????

 

[Three]

For me, for 1st party you need to own the IP. Really own it, not like the Death Stranding deal with X years of exclusivity etc.

I guess every platform holder could have a different definition.

Sony owned the Death Stranding IP before transferring it recently so that would have been a first party game for 4+yrs up until recently. Gears of war IP was owned by Epic before selling it for 4+yrs so that would have been "2nd" /3rd party. It didn't really change the status of those games.

What people need to realise is that the "nth-party" definition requires/describes a relation between 2 things and its importance is only to the person/company's point of reference. The same as you would refer to something being first person or third person there is no "second person".

 

[BbMajor7th]

It's a general framework, which generally has exceptions. Being overly focused on labels is something we could do less of, for sure.

 

[rkofan87]

what about rise of ronin?

 

[MaxwellParrish]

then what is with the atlus logo on the us ps3 box cover???????????????????

Sony though that the game would not have any success in the West and didn't want to distribute it so it licensed out the North American publishing to Atlus and, later, the PAL territories to Bandai Namco .