English vs English

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Third party is published by someone other than the platform owner.

 

Third party is developed by someone other than the platform owner and the studios they own.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Faiblesse Des Sens

[Alex Heat]

Second party is a colloquial term, sure, but I don't think that would really make it illegitimate.

[CorgiShinobi]

What Alex said. It's colloquial, but it helps distinguish games through developer/studio. The games are still technically "first party," but Sony isn't exactly the ones developing some of their biggest exclusives. So say The Last of Us is "second party" because more people would call it a Naughty Dog game rather than a Sony one though Sony owns the property and is a Sony exclusive.

 

It pretty much slipped out, the term. The more I thought of Sony's "exclusives," the more I thought it was because of many different studios. Whether they're owned by or have a publishing contract, there's a lot of variety to the first party games because of their "second" nature. Still, it's all just terms and I think we all know what was said.

[deanb]

The Last of Us is first party, Sony own Naughty Dog and have done since early PS2 days.

 

And yeah, second party is a perfectly legitimate term. Could call it "commissioned" I guess, but there's a first party, and a third party, so it stands to reason there can be a second party.

[Thursday Next]

It get's the point across. At the end of the day that's the aim right?

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

It get's the point across. At the end of the day that's the aim right?

 

What's the fun in that?

 

My beef with the term is that a studio can be both second and third party under the definition based on the game. They're always third party. They're always separate from the publisher. They just happen to be making an exclusive.

[TheMightyEthan]

The studio may be a third party, it's the game that's second party. Also there can be third party exclusives, that's determined based on who the publisher is.

[TCP]

I always thought of second party as studios that are mostly but not entirely owned by a first party company. Example would be Game Freak who only puts out Nintendo stuff but they're not a part of Nintendo like Nintendo EAD studios or even Retro are. Maybe I'm just completely misinformed. There is a first time for everything, you know.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I always thought of second party as studios that are mostly but not entirely owned by a first party company. Example would be Game Freak who only puts out Nintendo stuff but they're not a part of Nintendo like Nintendo EAD studios or even Retro are. Maybe I'm just completely misinformed. There is a first time for everything, you know.

 

So they're technically a third party studio. Also wow they only have 85 employees. That's a lot of money made per employee. Not as high as Valve level but that's probably second best.

[TheMightyEthan]

I've seen studios that have long-term exclusivity agreements with a platform owner referred to as "second party", and I think that makes sense.  Think Thatgamecompany's three game deal with Sony.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I've seen studios that have long-term exclusivity agreements with a platform owner referred to as "second party", and I think that makes sense.  Think Thatgamecompany's three game deal with Sony.

Oh you mean that company that doesn't make games exclusively for Sony anymore and was never owned by Sony? I just don't see the need for something that's usually temporary.

[deanb]

If Sony owned them, they'd be first party. Like Naughty Dog, Geurrilla, Polyphony etc. And no shit company ownerships aren't forever and ever. Bungie made Microsoft's best selling franchise, didn't mean they were tied to them for life. And also doesn't mean they weren't ever a first party studio just because years later they went independent.

 

Does the platform holder own the studio making the game? First Party

Does the platform holder not own the studio making the game, but has commissioned the game/owns the rights? Second party

Has the platform holder got fuck all to do with the making of the game apart from licensing it for their platform? Third party.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

And also doesn't mean they weren't ever a first party studio just because years later they went independent.

 

 

In TGC's case they were never owned by Sony though. Unlike Bungie which were.

[TheMightyEthan]

I know they weren't owned, that's the point.  If they were owned they'd be first party.

[deanb]

Thatgamecompany were a second party developer for Sony though. They were funded by Sony, they worked in Sony's offices, the games they made are published by Sony, and exclusive to Sony consoles. To say they were a third party developer, such as the likes of DICE or Rockstar, or many other examples, is severely pushing the term "third party".

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

"Limited third party."

[TheMightyEthan]

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Modifying current term>using new term

[Thursday Next]

"Second Party": Two words. Four syllables. Twelve characters. Everyone knows what you mean.

 

"Limited Third Party": Three words. Six syllables. Eighteen characters. Nobody apart from FDS knows what you are on about.

 

Ignoring the time taken in arguing semantics with a pedant, "Second Party" is much more efficient way of making the point.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Thursday Next

[Mr. GOH!]

"Second party" isn't a new term, it's the use of a logical intermediate ordinal that, if FDS had his way, would be missing from the set of terms vis a vis descriptions of game development agreements. 

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

"Second Party": Two words. Four syllables. Twelve characters. Everyone knows what you mean.

 

"Limited Third Party": Three words. Six syllables. Eighteen characters. Nobody apart from FDS knows what you are on about.

 

Ignoring the time taken in arguing semantics with a pedant, "Second Party" is much more efficient way of making the point.

 

Fuck the point I want to be technically correct. The best kind of correct.

[deanb]

http://www.hardscrabblefarm.com/ww2/britain.htm
 
A gold mine.

The British have phrases and colloquialisms of their own that may sound funny to you.  You can make just as many boners in their eyes.

The British are used to this system and they like it, and all your arguments that the American decimal system is better won't convince them.

 

To say: "I look like a bum" is offensive to their ears, for to the British this means that you look like your own backside

 

England's largest river, the Thames (pronounced "Terns") is not even as big as the Mississippi when it leaves Minnesota.

The Terns? I'm gonna guess a balls up in writing it up if it was written down as a "Tems"?
 

You will find that English crowds at football or cricket matches are more orderly and polite to the players than American crowds.

heheheh
 

 

The British don't know how to make a good cup of coffee. You don't know how to make a good cup of tea. It's an even swap.

Well...

[deanb]

So one for Mason:

 

In the UK. Well England at least but I've not heard of it being different elsewhere, when you get on a bus you say where you're going, "town centre", and the bus driver tells you the price, and you pay and it spits out a ticket and you go n sit down and get off at your stop. The price is based on the distance/stops between where you got on and where you get off. For example this journey is £1.45.

 

Ticket machine looks like this:

 

You can buy day, weekly and monthly passes, or be a student(secondary and further, not aware of it for HE), or OAP and you just flash the pass/ticket at the driver and doesn't matter much on where you're going.

 

Here's an OAP with their swipe card, it's RFID or something:

 

(I should maybe note I've never actually seen one with a passenger side screen though)

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

You tell them the destination? Do they not run on routes? So it's like... a big cab?

[TheFlyingGerbil]

it's a fixed route, with several fixed bus stops along the route. you tell him which stop on the route you want to get off at. he charges accordingly.