For years among enthusiasts there’s been a debate over games made by independent studios published by a platform holder. It’s all semantics at the end of the day, but many have argued that unless the team is a subsidiary, the project simply can’t be first-party – it’s second-party instead. A title like Returnal would be a good example: it’s published by PlayStation, but developed by the external outfit Housemarque.
Speaking as part of an interview on the PlayStation Blog, PlayStation Studios boss Hermen Hulst reiterated what his predecessor Shuhei Yoshida used to say – it’s all the same to him. “You could, I guess, make a distinction between development teams who are part of Sony – like Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Media Molecule, Sucker Punch, and so on – and then development teams who are working with us like partners […] Haven, Firewalk, but also teams we’ve worked with over years, like Kojima Productions, FromSoftware,” he started.
“To me, in many ways, there really is no difference. They’re all PlayStation Studios. We are, at the end of the day, a creator-led organisation. Which to me means that we want to find the best possible development studios in the world and help them passionately pursue their ideas. To me, it’s important that PlayStation Studios is a place that allows creators to join us and do the best work of their career. That’s really what I’m after.”
Hulst later reiterated that PlayStation Studios has “more than 25 titles in development”, although as stated above, not all of these will be coming from internal, fully-owned subsidiaries. “Almost half of these are new IP,” he beamed. “The other half, they’re titles that are set in franchises that PlayStation fans already know and love. So, it’s quite a lot.” Exciting stuff!
[source blog.playstation.com]
Comments 35
Yeah when Sony are the publisher they usually overlook the project like they would a first party one, I think it also helps make the second party devs feel part of the team too.
Second party is a very gray area. Like, the platform owner does nor even need to have actual ownership of the IP. Banjo is famously a “second party” game that now belongs to XBox, for example.
Biggest difference between first and second party is, I guess, security. A dev might have many reasons to stay exclusive (might be too small to afford developing for all platforms at once, might be paid for exclusivity, hired to do a project for the platform, simply love the platform so much they stick with it, etc) but overnight that all can change if someone walks in with a big enough check and takes it all away.
You're a PlayStation Studio, you're a PlayStation Studio, YOU'RE ALL PLAYSTATION STUDIOS!
-Oprah
"Second party" is such a misnomer. Housemarque is a third party studio at the end of the day. They've never exclusively developed for Sony, nor are they owned by them.
Same as with Rare, they were third party. While they developed pretty much exclusively for Nintendo at one time, Nintendo only owned 49% of the studio, not a majority.
Factor 5, largely with Nintendo and PC for many years, were always third party.
Can't wait for the games, I really hope sony focus more on ps5 exclusives rather than cross-gen games. It's time we abandon the 7 years old console (for 1st party games).
@EVIL-C @Tharsman I see the difference between third and second party studios as (with Sony): IP owned by Sony, but studio is not. Atlus has developed Persona 4 for playstation in the past, but Sony do not own either, so Atlus is a third party still. An example anyway.
@Gravity_Bear If we use Rare again as an example, Nintendo owned the Donkey Kong IP, not Rare, but Rare was given DKC to develop.
Rare then made some original IPs like Jet Force Gemini and Banjo Kazooie exclusively for N64, but when Microsoft acquired Rare, Rare took their original IPs with them. Nintendo couldn't do anything about it. That's why I still classified Rare as a third-party Studio. Rare may have insisted any new IPs they make, they get to retain. Since they controlled 51% ownership, that would have helped their negotiations.
It's all so confusing, but for years I've found the term "Second party developer" silly and misleading.
@Gravity_Bear @EVIL-C Keep in mind that "second party" is a term made up by fans. It doesn't actually exist (in corporate talk), and you won't ever see a developer/publisher use it.
Technically the first party and "second party" are PlayStation and the end user, you. Any additional party involved in the relationship is referred to as third party, e.g. a developer making a game for PlayStation. A third party can make software exclusively for Sony.
There are a ton of grey areas, especially as to who owns the game, IP, does the marketing, etc., so it's definitely not always as clear as an external company making a game for Sony or an internal studio. Sometimes parts of the franchise are owned by the publisher, and the rest by the dev, see Pokémon for example, that a notorious game when it comes to ownership.
@EVIL-C Fair enough. I personally just use the term with other people to define studio and game/IP relationships.
It's usually two questions for me:
Who owns the IP
Who owns the studio
If only the first is true: Second party.
if neither is true: Third party
If both are true: First party
If time is taken into consideration, then they were a second party while working on it (eg. Quantic Dream), but they are third party now, because they are working on their own IP. BluePoint games would be considered a second party, because their next game will likely be a Sony IP.
Games exclusively made for one platform, but not owned by the platform owner would be thrown into third party, because extra platforms could be added (ignoring exclusive contracts) by the studio and the platform holder would have no say in it.
That's my thinking anyway.
To me, the most important aspect is the relationship and trust that Sony will develop with these "second-party" studios. Sony will trust these studios to develop a project they are passionate about and will support it, while the developer will trust Sony to give them the platform to flesh out their ideas and the user base to make the project a success.
@Octane It's an interesting topic. My reference to second party studios is usually quite simple and for studios that have developed things like Detroit: Become Human, Everybody's Golf, Returnal, Demon Souls, Bloodbourne, et cetera. Those are simply, Sony owns the IP and the studio has been contracted to make the game with Sony's money.
If the relationship is more complicated, then it likely won't fit into the above simplicity and not worth working out.
@Texan_Survivor I'd love to see it happen, but look how long Insomniac made exclusives for before Sony picked them up.
They're very very careful about which studios they buy.
Hopefully at least one of the two you mentioned joins the stable soon.
They're not same Hulst,second party is like friends with benefits,first party used to mean playstation exclusive nowadays means eventually pc version down the line and third party you get only 30% of the sales made.
@The_New_Butler "I'd love to know how many first party games are in development for PS4 and PS5 from Sony owned studios."
Most will be for both, at this point in the new platform's life.
@Gravity_Bear Everybody's Golf was a team up by the now stupidly-destroyed Japan Studio and Clap Hanz. Clap Hanz clearly have the IP as their golf game on the Apple Arcade looks and smells like the PS game that was exclusive for four generations previously, though I suspect the name Everybody's Golf (& Hot Shots Golf) stay with Sony - whatever use THAT is without the key dev team?
@The_New_Butler Sorry - misunderstood. I think most if not all the 25 games are going to be cross-generational with extra spangly bits for the PS4 Pro and extra special spangly bits for the PS5.
Just buy housemarque already.and bluepoint.sony sure taking theyre time.word up son
@sanderson72 yes, Japan Studios closing sucks. Very sad.
Clap Hanz have created something similar to Everybody's Golf, but not Everybody's Golf on Apple Arcade. It has to be different enough or else they could be infringing on design I suppose, but not sure, I don't know much about design copyright.
Mind you, we don't know, they might be developing another Everybody's Golf. Nothing says they (Clap Hanz) can't do more than one project. One can hope.
@Octane Thank you for spelling this out, it's what I came here to say. It's like first-person, second-person, third-person perspectives:
First-person: you see what the character sees.
Second-person: you see the character from the perspective of what they're interacting with.
Third-person: you see the character from some other perspective that is neither that if the character, nor that which they interact with.
So applied to a business, first-party is the business, second-party is their customers, and third-party is any other entity that has an interest in that relationship.
@Gravity_Bear Thing is Clap Hanz created the game and then had help from Japan Studio bringing it to PS platforms. That resource is no longer there so I can't see there being another one and that's the repercussions from the short sighted decisions from Ryan et al. Very sad as it's always be one of my 'go to' games on the PSP, Vita and PS1 to 4.
@Gravity_Bear Broadly I think that's a good definition. Though things quickly get far more complex as many deals are done that would mean the studio retains IP but cannot publish the game elsewhere as they had financial, development or marketing help from the console manufacturer. Is a game that can't be published elsewhere really third party even if they retain IP? Perhaps a third question.
In Sony's specific case this is often have significant development support from one or several of their other studios (check out the credits to MANY of these games)
Regardless this could all be a moot point - as someone recently educated me - 'second party' doesn't actually exist, despite it being a term we all use, and vaguely understand!
@The_New_Butler The key thing he said was PlayStation STUDIOS has over 25 games in development.
This was always clear as both first and third/second party published by PlayStation Studios not just first party titles.
"I'm starting to think this is more marketing spin from Sony."
It's ALL marketing spin from Sony... but what else to expect, it has always been, and always will be. That's not good or bad, it just is.
Expecting ANYTHING else would be madness
@sanderson72 I've actually always wondered how much input games like Everybody's Golf actually gets (or got) from Japan Studios and XDEV. I know there's a long credit list, but a lot of games have these from Sony and Clap Hanz have been making these games for a while. So it might not be as difficult as it might seem.
I believe they did say about keeping a number of staff for what essentially would be XDEV Japan (part of the worldwide XDEV Team).
But never mind, it is likely we won't get another one. Just depends on who organises the games to be made. There was just a lot of potential left.
@The_New_Butler I can see why you think that. I certainly prefer Phil Spencer's seemingly more direct and gamer focused approach (though of course it's all spin too) to Jim Ryan's more business one (though I don't dislike/hate him like so many seem to - a strong Sony business is good for gamers).
But ultimately they've all got enough skin in the game to make things great for us and compete, and personally I don't think there's ever been a better time to be a gamer. Whichever system you go for has great benefits and we all win.
@themightyant well, this seems to be a fun topic. I do feel like I've heard something similar to Second Party relations, actually it's probably external studio relations that I've heard. Would actually be interesting to listen to the staff room chatter, probably eye opening.
@themightyant "personally I don't think there's ever been a better time to be a gamer". Maybe in America! The best time to be a UK gamer was 12 months ago when we got fully finished classic games at a reasonable price. As a digital ps5 owner (waiting on my third replacement duelsense in 6 months to arrive) i have zero hype for gaming at this time and would caution anybody i care for to wait for the ps5 slim before jumping in.
The tech is good (if not reliable) , but the ecosystem surrounding it is shockingly bad at the moment.
@Loftimus Interesting. That's mostly not my experience at all.
I've not had any major software or hardware issues. Except R2 springs failing (a quick, cheap home fix) and everything has worked fine since day 1 for me and many others.
I'm not saying your issues don't exist but they can't be THAT widespread or the outcry would be far more than the current internet whimper, especially as the net amplifies even the smallest faults. What was your DualShock issue?
I'm also wondering what you meant specifically about the ecosystem being shockingly bad?
Regardless if people aren't used to early console adoption (slow exclusives rollout, higher potential for hardware issues, etc.) i'd always suggest waiting if they can. But i've had no issues nor seen any widely reported that ring alarm bells to say 'Don't buy'.
Where I agree is on the £70 prices, i'm in the UK too, though the smart money for over a generation has been to buy physical and wait several months for games to drop in price. A little patience goes a long way. Can't help you on Digital i'm afraid, you are at their mercy.
My statement "personally I don't think there's ever been a better time to be a gamer" was related to the strength of all 3 major consoles, each in their own way, a busy release calendar (if leaks are to be believed), lots of games at low or free prices (PS+, Game pass, Play at Home), backwards compatibility with last gen - often with a significant boost, load times virtually vanishing and lockdowns generally leaving gamers with time to play
@themightyant i agree it is subjective. Xbox (currently) has nothing out for series x. Ms support as usual has been shocking, so maybe next year. Switch is (currently) an overpriced, (minimal) remaster machine for Nintendo, so no thanks. And back to Sony who see this gen as an opportunity to squeeze as much cash as they can out of us as they can....
This is a site for playstation, so i expect enthusiasm for the platform, but in the real world i get a very different picture painted for me by the people that i talk to. I agree with them. In my 35 years of gaming. This is the worst time to be a a gamer.
@themightyant as for duelsense i had the floppy trigger and got that replaced (i've got sausage fingers, so not messing about), now i've got drift so i'm waiting for my third pad to clarify.
@Loftimus Again not my feeling at all, but completely agree about subjectivity. (Also have 35+ years of gaming.)
Is it really worse than
Game prices have been steadily falling (compared to inflation) they were always going to jump up at some point. Still cheaper than they were in NES/SNES generation despite development time and budgets being orders of magnitude larger. (as is the industry, i'm aware of all the pro/con arguments. While I don't like the price hike, I accept it)
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/07/the-return-of-the-70-video-game-has-been-a-long-time-coming/
@themightyant yet you don't mention market growth which is over 1000% larger than it was back then. Which means profit margins rise and the consumer cost for the product should fall. Inflation plays its part of course but if developers cant set a budget and innovate within it, then they should take the hit, not the consumer.
@Loftimus I did. "...time and budgets being orders of magnitude larger. AS IS THE INDUSTRY..."
As I said i'm aware of all the arguments, it's complex and nuanced and not clean cut, plenty of valid pros and cons, but i'm not interested in having that debate yet again, there's more than enough room for differing viewpoints.
Ultimately I have accepted the price increase, even if I don't like it. But I will vote with my ever more selective wallet.
I wouldn't mind if there was 'Consistency' across the board. If its 'good' enough for Sony to do 'deals' with independent studio's to either buy up 'exclusivity' or commission a project, then its 'good' enough for Nintendo, MS or any other Publisher.
I often see comments citing numerous games to bulk up the list of 'exclusives' on one Platform, but then turn around and dismiss 'similar' games on another. Its a bit like whether or not Games releasing on PC counts towards the 'console' exclusives - how MS now has NO exclusives because they are released on PC but then proceed to cite games like Nier and Nioh as 'exclusives' despite the fact they too were on PC.
Personally, I don't care if the Studio is First, Second or Third Party, all that matters to me is that I can play the Games I want to play. I don't care if Housemarque are 1st, 2nd or 3rd party developers, If the game is limited to PS, then I still need a PS to play it. Its a Murky world anyway with IP rights, Publishing rights etc etc - as we know with Sunset Overdrive...
I find it interesting he mentioned Kojima Productions, and FromSoftware,.
We might hear more about them working on a PlayStation IP soon 💪
@The_New_Butler
'caveats to the '25 games'
In the latest blog post he says 'PlayStation Studio have more than 25 titles in development ' and the question was about PS4 or PS5 games.
Hulst was very clear he sees development of Sony IP from other studios as being part of the creativity for PS Studio brand.
So one of them could be from Kojima studio for instance.
The main caveat comes from the misreporting by the press.
The previous source report came from wired a few days ago.
That was reported as 25 titles in development for PS5. (Whether they correctly reported for PS5 or just speculated that part is another story)
Then the the majority of the press (including PushSquare amplified that report as '25 PS5 exclusives' which was a blatant lie.
@HotGoomba When you're here with us, you're FAMILY.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...