CEO of HOUSEMARQUE: we are truly thankful to our publishing partner Sony, who has given us an opportunity to work on something very risky.

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
Wow Bo_Hazem Bo_Hazem how many returnal threads have you made now? Cant wait to see your same enthusiasm when goty halo infinite releases 😜

 

MHubert

Member
If Apple paid to develop the apps, it's apple software, if not, its X company software
Yes, but 'Apple software' or not, it is developed by a third party developer.
Jesus christ you people are fucking stupid

Returnal is not owned by the third party, therefore it is not a third party game

This is basic english
It doesn't matter who owns the IP... And again, you just assume that you know the intricasies of the deal between Housemarque and Sony. Its not like these exclusivity deals are the same in every instance.
 
Last edited:
It's pretty sad that you can show a publisher something that looks fun and a bit different(let's be honest it's in no way groundbreaking) it's considered risky. Returnal looks super fun. Hope it does well.
 

Eliciel

Member
Sony might have found a new raw diamond for the AAAA Terrain. First step taken, make them shine, Cerny and Hulst, make them shine.
 
Last edited:

killatopak

Member
It's pretty sad that you can show a publisher something that looks fun and a bit different(let's be honest it's in no way groundbreaking) it's considered risky. Returnal looks super fun. Hope it does well.
Well, I haven’t seen a AAA rogue-like before so it may count as risky simply for that.

Also, every new IP with AAA budget is risky especially for devs that haven’t even made a single AAA game.
 

nerdface

Banned
Wow Bo_Hazem Bo_Hazem how many returnal threads have you made now? Cant wait to see your same enthusiasm when goty halo infinite releases 😜

You won’t see half this many threads about the actual gameplay. Just LLC troopers jerking it to their favorite REBRANDING of the same transistors.

You have to see it to believe it.
 
Yes, but 'Apple software' or not, it is developed by a third party developer.

It doesn't matter who owns the IP... And again, you just assume that you know the intricasies of the deal between Housemarque and Sony. Its not like these exclusivity deals are the same in every instance.

Sony owns the copyright and trademark for returnal

That makes Returnal a first party IP. I'm not assuming anything here.

That's litterally just the argument

Same with Apple. Not sure what point you're trying to make
 
Last edited:
Yep. Can be an in house-product or another contract work with a 3rd party at that point.

I´m done with you troll playing dumb.. Ignored.

Here's another for you

Returnal is made by Housemarque

Returnal 2 is made by Naughty Dog

Is the franchise first party or third party
 
Last edited:
Name dropping Treasure. Nice!

Can't wait to play this game. I pre ordered last week on Amazon and for some reason it says I won't get it until May 18th. Taking that as a good sign that sales are healthy...
 

killatopak

Member
Reading the op it doesn't seem like this has a real AAA budget
I have no answer to that. I don’t really know how much their budget it without them divulging it.

Maybe you think so because it only has 75 developers? I actually don’t know how many developers it needs to meet the standard AAA game.

Technically this is correct, but no one ever uses the phrase 'first party software' when alluding to IP ownership rights.
Well, Bayonetta 2 is considered first party by Nintendo themselves. As long as it’s licensed and published under their name, that seems to be the case. They don’t own the ip nor the developer here.
Same deal with Spiderman which Marvel owns and is licensed to Sony.

This isn’t the case with other games published by Nintendo in west because they are published in Japan by other companies. Bayonetta, Spiderman and Returnal will be published an licensed worldwide wholly by Nintendo and Sony.

 

MHubert

Member
Sony owns the copyright and trademark for returnal

That makes Returnal a first party IP

That's litterally just the argument here

Same with Apple. Not sure what point you're trying to make here
My point is that you are stretching the term(s) first/third party to mean something it is not intented to:

"That makes Returnal a first party IP"
- This distinction is just something you make up. First/Third party is meant to distinguish between internal and external relationship of units, of operation, within an organization.
 
My point is that you are stretching the term(s) first/third party to mean something it is not intented to:

"That makes Returnal a first party IP"
- This distinction is just something you make up. First/Third party is meant to distinguish between internal and external relationship of units, of operation, within an organization.

How am I stretching anything? I'm using it as it's intended in its simplest form

Which is

First party refers to the hardware manufactuer which is Sony

Third party refers to the external developer which is Housemarque

If a piece of software is owned by the first party, that makes it ding ding first party software
 
Last edited:

sublimit

Banned
Are they Sony first party? That is what people are talking not funding tiny games. Do we need to go over the first party release list coming upcoming yet again? Remasters and sequel city that people gave other companies shit for doing the same thing.
Don't try to spin. Returnal is a game 100% funded by Sony. If what Schreier said had any merit a game like Returnal wouldn't exist now.
 

Klayzer

Member
How am I stretching anything? I'm using it as it's intended in its simplest form

Which is

First party refers to the hardware manufactuer which is Sony

Third party refers to the external developer which is Housemarque

If a piece of software is owned by the first party, that makes it ding ding first party software
Dude. Stop taking the bait. Nothing from them is gonna change what the definition means actually.
 
For the people who don't get why this game is risky:

1. It's a gloomy horror-esque game with psychological elements. Definitely not everyone's cup of tea, most people want "fun" games where the games leave them with a good feeling inside.

2. You play as an old woman who looks like a lesbian. Self-explanatory.

3. It's a roguelike. Despite selling millions of copies, it's still a rather niche genre, primarily because they're rather difficult and repetitive. Mostly for PC autists.

4. High production values. This ties in with point 3, roguelikes being niche is the reason why the production values in those games have been fairly low so far. Spending 50m dollars or so on a roguelike is risky af.
 

synce

Member
The only thing risky about this game is how similar it is to everything else on the market. Roguelike is one of the most popular genres currently, especially with indies. Ugly protagonists have also been trending for years. Not seeing where the risk is otherwise.
 
How am I stretching anything? I'm using it as it's intended in its simplest form

Which is

First party refers to the hardware manufactuer which is Sony

Third party refers to the external developer which is Housemarque

If a piece of software is owned by the first party, that makes it ding ding first party software
Yeah I would call returnal second party
 

MHubert

Member
I have no answer to that. I don’t really know how much their budget it without them divulging it.

Maybe you think so because it only has 75 developers? I actually don’t know how many developers it needs to meet the standard AAA game.


Well, Bayonetta 2 is considered first party by Nintendo themselves. As long as it’s licensed and published under their name, that seems to be the case. They don’t own the ip nor the developer here.
Same deal with Spiderman which Marvel owns and is licensed to Sony.

This isn’t the case with other games published by Nintendo in west because they are published in Japan by other companies. Bayonetta, Spiderman and Returnal will be published an licensed worldwide wholly by Nintendo and Sony.

Sorry, I only see it referenced as a 'primary Nintendo Product(s)'?
How am I stretching anything? I'm using it as it's intended in its simplest form

Which is

First party refers to the hardware manufactuer which is Sony

Third party refers to the external developer which is Housemarque

If a piece of software is owned by the first party, that makes it ding ding first party software
That is how you are stretching the term. You keep insisting that it is meant to describe IP copyrights.
Like, can't you at least provide some sort of evidence for your claims? So far, Haggard has provided plenty of sources that refutes your claim.
 

killatopak

Member
Yeah I would call returnal second party
Maybe.

I don’t think that term exist in the industry though. Based on what I found using my google-fu, it seems the term was made by the media in the 90s because they want to define someone like Rare who isn’t owned by Nintendo but only made Nintendo published games.
Sorry, I only see it referenced as a 'primary Nintendo Product(s)'?
That’s from an earning’s report. All games here are published by Nintendo.



As you can see, the only non first party games have the asterisk as they have a different publisher inside Japan. For all intents in purposes, those without asterisks are first party games while those without are third party games.
 
Last edited:

DonF

Member
Congrats house marque. Still have fond memories of playing resogun on ps4s release. It's still a joy to look at.
 

fragganaut

Member
From OT....
Although we managed to release one of the best reviewed new game of 2017 according to metacritic, we were certainly left disappointed with the sales leading me to declare #arcadeisdead and ending our long standing commitment to the arcade genre. Giving up on the genre didn’t mean that we’d be giving up on our deep commitment to fast-twitch action gameplay. Instead, we wanted to take on the challenge to figure out how we could translate our arcade 2D gameplay expertise into a 3rd person action game. On the other hand, it was still very uncertain, if we’d be able to move past the prototype phase and convince Sony to keep on funding a new, unproved concept. The concept was ridiculously ambitious and looking back we as a company really weren’t totally appreciating the challenge ahead of us and how hard it could be to tackle it.

In the age when game publishers are taking less and less creative risks, we are truly thankful to our publishing partner Sony, who has given us an opportunity to work on something very risky and has given fantastic support during the whole project. We are forever grateful for having this opportunity.

I think this is a somewhat emotional statement from the developer, which is rather unusual. I really appreciate it. But I'm not sure whether HM just showing it's honest gratitude or them trying to get closer to Sony hoping to get bought eventually or ... their good bye letter to Sony.

Just a feeling, but Sony seems to not use it's full advertising/marketing power for this game. They have done more for R&C in the last days then for Returnal.
 
Sorry, I only see it referenced as a 'primary Nintendo Product(s)'?

That is how you are stretching the term. You keep insisting that it is meant to describe IP copyrights.
Like, can't you at least provide some sort of evidence for your claims? So far, Haggard has provided plenty of sources that refutes your claim.

Evidence of what? That Returnal is owned by Sony?

Haggard provided definitions that he didn't even read or understand lmao
 
Last edited:
I think this is a somewhat emotional statement from the developer, which is rather unusual. I really appreciate it. But I'm not sure whether HM just showing it's honest gratitude or them trying to get closer to Sony hoping to get bought eventually or ... their good bye letter to Sony.

Just a feeling, but Sony seems to not use it's full advertising/marketing power for this game. They have done more for R&C in the last days then for Returnal.

Sony should buy Housemarque if HM is up to it.

This will bring a lot of goodwill riding on the possibly not only a great game but well received game critically. I'm worried that Jim is still waiting for the sales number to open Sony's wallet.
 
Inb4 "its too expensive, pass" and "ugh, what's wrong with her face? Pass" comments leaking into this thread.

On topic:

I'm happy for them. They deserve a shot at joining the big leagues, and I'm glad they have been given just that.

You weren't in before the whole "Roguelikes suck ass" though, which they do.
 

fragganaut

Member
Sony should buy Housemarque if HM is up to it.

This will bring a lot of goodwill riding on the possibly not only a great game but well received game critically. I'm worried that Jim is still waiting for the sales number to open Sony's wallet.
I fully agree, Sony should buy Housemarque and I hope they have secured the option in their contract because otherwise I would fear that HM current success could make them a lucrative target for other Platforms.
 

yurinka

Member
I think "risky" is a bit exageratted, tho the game looks promising.
Bullshit. It's their first AAA so had to grow and work in a different workflow, and it's their more expensive game ever, it's a new IP, it's the first time they make a narrative 3rd person over the soulder camera game with cinematics and so on, and it's mixes for the first time that with bullet hell arcade gameplay, and also mixes that with roguelike features. And on top of that the main character is an old, ugly lady.

To make a game is difficult and risky, and every single one of these things makes it extra risky. So yes, this is a very risky project. Most publishers would never greenlighted it for being too risky.

Are they Sony first party? That is what people are talking not funding tiny games. Do we need to go over the first party release list coming upcoming yet again? Remasters and sequel city that people gave other companies shit for doing the same thing.
This isn't a tiny game, it's a AAA game. It's a 6 year long project where robably over 1000 people worked on it. In this kind of games the lead studio staff is 10% or less the total amount of people who worked in the game.

No it isn`t.
Housemarque is not a Sony studio.
Returnal is a "Sony funded" 3rd party PS exclusive.
It's PlayStation Studios game, so technically 1st party game. A 1st party company publishes and funds, a 3rd party studio develops. Which is commonly known as 2nd party.

He thought so generic .. avatar shooting things .. If we continue to adore simple games with PS2 gameplay, this will be the only thing we will continue to get.
Please tell me one single PS2 game that mixes AAA 3rd person over the soulder camera action game with bullet hell shooting arcade gameplay mixed with roguelike and horror stuff and so on. For me it's something new, I never saw it before.


Sony definitely felt the PR pressure from Jason Schreiers article lol. Jim Ryan, Hermen Hulst and now Returnal dude are doing some funky interviews.
Not that I mind it much, but it is indeed funny.

Returnal reviews today. I hope it can get a good a really good score (like higher than 75) and the game looks fresh and would be a welcome addition to console exclusives we currently lack so much (from all 3 main players !).
Well, as usual Bloomberg was spreading lies throwing shit to Sony. This game is one of many facts and examples that Sony also bets on smaller teams, new IPs and risky concepts an different ideas other than sequels of their few best selling AAA blockbusters.

In fact they are the big publisher and platform holder who bets more on a wider range of game types, game sizes and bets more than anyone on new IPs.

Another thing I disagree with in these topics in general is the assumption that being creative and innovative is always more risky than sticking with what you know.

I don't think this true at all e.g. I think if guerilla and suckerpunch released sequels to killzone and infamous would have been more risky than what they ended up doing.

What if in this timeline both games underperformed would we being seeing guerilla and suckerpunch restructuring instead of expanding?

We saw this with days gone and the order 1866 both games criticised for not innovating and now we're not seeing sequels. No doubt it can go the other way like with Death Stranding but its difficult to know how a game will be received until its released
A sequel of a successful game is always way less risky than to create a new AAA IP, because there's an existing fanbase there who will buy the game and you know that prety likely unless it's garbage they will like. On top of that, the sequel already has a solid base regarding gameplay, features, story, setting, characters, world building and so on.

It's a huge amount of work you don't need to do on a sequel, and that you know it already works. And when there are some thing in the previous game that didn't work, you as dev know that they are so can address them easily.

In a new IP you are building everything from scratch, so there are way more things that can go wrong.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom