Talk:Second-party developer

Incorrect

I recognize that this useage is widespread, but it's incorrect. The second party is the consumer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.113.251 (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I first came across the term in the 1980s. Second party software is software that is developed by the user him/herself.

Yes. A third-party developer can make a first-party game published by the console manufacturer (see Epic and Gears of War or Insomniac and Resistance), but that doesn't make it anything other than a third-party developer. This article has no reason to exist. NekoFever (talk) 00:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. It's used because it looks farther than 1 and closer than 3. The usage is wrong and this article should not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.186.212.11 (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bungie & Rare

Bungie is a wholly-owned subsid of MS Corp...witness the MS Corp copyright on the bottom of bungie.net and the references to being MS employees by staff on the site.

Rare is also a wholly-owned subsid of MS Corp, might be under the MS Game Studios banner, not sure, but on Rare's official site, both the company profile, which states they "joined" MS Game Studios, and the press page, which discusses a distro agreement with MS' "Rare game studio". (The Rare bio on this very site says the Stamper bros sold their 51% stake, followed by Nintendo selling their 49% stake.) They do still develop for GBA, which will presumably stop once Microsoft decides it wants a handheld too.

Definition of second-party

I found a really good defintion of second party on this site: A second party developer is part owned by a specific console producing company but is not financially supported by that company. The 2nd party developer has creative control over their product, but the parent company, which will publish the product, may have some input. An example of a second party developer would be Rare, who are part-owned by Nintendo. Obviously that was before Rare was purchased by Microsoft, but it further shows how Rare & Bungie are currently not 2nd-party.

Microsoft

If Microsoft doesn't currently have any second-party developers, should we just remove MS from the list of examples? Optichan 22:17, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Flawed examples

None of these companies are second parties. Factor 5 developed only for the GameCube because it's the system the developers were most familiar with. Incog and Naughty Dog are wholly owned by SCEA.

Can someone come up with an actual example? A Man In Black 06:14, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about Factor 5? It used to be second party for Nintendo with N64. I don't know about now anymore. Figured they were. If not then Nintendo doesn't really have any notable second-party developers anymore. They sold Rare, Silicon Knights broke away, Retro is wholly-owned, Left Field was dissolved. I can't think of anymore - Nintendo has changed from having second-parties to having partnerships with other devolopers. The latest Star Fox and F-Zero as examples. K1Bond007 00:06, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Factor 5 wasn't tied to Nintendo contractually or owned by Nintendo; they simply developed for the GC because they liked developing for the Gamecube. The difference between second- and third-party is only a matter of semantics, anyway. A Man In Black 05:17, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidiary

If 2nd party is an erroneous term, then this topic should be deleted and merged with subsidiary, and all searches for second party developer should go to said article. Or the topic of subsidiary should have a passage in it that says "In the gaming industry, subsidiary development studios are sometimes colloquially referred to as "second party." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinitysend (talk • contribs) 22:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]