FillerDmon said:
@Bih-Kira, I think the difference is in recognizing whether something is First Party, or Second Party, even though that isn't exactly a term used much in the industry, due to the fact that the publishing company retains such a level of control over the second party that it is basically part of them. Most of the above are on a technical level Second Party, but such things normally aren't recognized as such. Not quite fully Nintendo, the way Mario, Link, Samus, and Pikachu and friends are, but close cousins. Hell, even Donkey Kong was born from and still made by a Second Party Company, so he's like a First Cousin Once Removed.
Wii Part is part of the "Nintendo Wii" series, including Wii Fit, Wii Sports Resort, and other "Wii" games.
No, it's actually a well defined line between first and second party.
First part is something that is owned by the company. Monolith Soft is owned by Nintendo, they are as much first part as Nintendo EAD.
Game Freak is second party. They are not owned by Nintendo, but they make games almost exclusively for Nintendo. Naughty Dog was a Sony second party developer from 1996 to 2001 until Sony bought them.
First party is owned by the company, second party isn't, but they are an exclusive developer. Rare Software was a Nintendo second party developer for a long time until they were sold to Nintendo. Honestly, saying that Monolith Soft isn't a 1st party developer is like saying Retro games isn't a first party developer, or that Sakurai isn't a Nintendo developer because he doesn't work for Nintendo EAD.
So all of the games I've listed are Nintendo first party games, made in the past what? 7 years? Also bunching up all the Wii games is extremely unfair. Some of them are so different from each other hat they only touching point is that they use Miis. You can't tell me that WiiFit and WiiParty are the same IP. They are fundamentally different games. I accept Wii Sport, Party and Sport Resort being under the same umbrella because they are party games consisting of many mini games.
And it's extremely unfair to say that they aren't 1st party games because they didn't derivative from existing IPs, but then later complaint that they only make new games based on their existing IPs. You're saying new different games don't count, but then say they don't make any new games. "Why aren't they making new games? No, all the new games don't count because I said so!"
Yes, Nintendo is extremely slow to adopt new things and they usually make new games by seeing if it can be an existing IP and making new IPs only if they can't use a old one. But that's not a reason to deny all the cool new stuff they make, that people ignore. You know why they make a lot of Mario games and advertise those games the most? Because people don't buy the non-Mario and Zelda games. Pandora's Tower was a freaking awesome game, it sold bad. The Last Story was a nice JRPG, didn't sell good. Xenoblade did well and people showed they want more of it, Nintendo made Xenoblade X. Last F-Zero sold badly, Nintendo took it as people not wanting more. Even Miyamoto was surprised that people want more of the game when it sold so badly, which is the reason he said to wait for it, it might happen.