|
Post by Kriven on Sept 19, 2007 18:52:09 GMT -6
Fire Emblem is also first-party >.<;
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 19, 2007 19:09:13 GMT -6
Fire Emblem is also first-party >.<; No, FE is not made by Nintendo. It's published by Nintendo. Not made by Nintendo. So it would only be first party under a techinicality, but they still need permission to use FE characters.
|
|
|
Post by Kriven on Sept 20, 2007 16:42:34 GMT -6
No they don't, FE Chars are copyrighted and owned by Nintendo as a company oO So technically they're second party, Nintendo still doesn't need permission as they own the rights to second party franchises (or Kirby would be dead.)
More-so, they don't take up third-party slots regardless of "First" or "Second" party.
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 20, 2007 16:57:08 GMT -6
No they don't, FE Chars are copyrighted and owned by Nintendo as a company oO So technically they're second party, Nintendo still doesn't need permission as they own the rights to second party franchises (or Kirby would be dead.) More-so, they don't take up third-party slots regardless of "First" or "Second" party. No, I'm fairly sure that they'd be considered owned by the company that wrote the damn game. Though, yeah, they would be considered more of a second party than third party. But I can still think of more characters I would like to see than another fighter from FE.
|
|
|
Post by Kriven on Sept 20, 2007 20:32:01 GMT -6
If that were the case Nintendo wouldn't own Kirby, Metroid, any of the Kongs aside from DK and DKJR, Or F-Zero, to scrape the top without thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 21, 2007 11:07:45 GMT -6
If that were the case Nintendo wouldn't own Kirby, Metroid, any of the Kongs aside from DK and DKJR, Or F-Zero, to scrape the top without thinking. Kirby, Metroid and the Kongs are all liscensed and created by Nintendo. Just because they hire someone else to develop the game doesn't make it third party. They still own legal rights to the characters.
|
|
|
Post by Kriven on Sept 21, 2007 13:31:04 GMT -6
And they own legal rights to FE in the same manner
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 21, 2007 14:10:27 GMT -6
And they own legal rights to FE in the same manner No. Someone else wrote and designed FE. Then Nintendo produced it.
|
|
|
Post by Kriven on Sept 21, 2007 15:05:46 GMT -6
Which makes it first party Point is, FE is within the first-second party frame, which makes any distributive rights over the characters and elements Nintendo's and Nintendo's alone.
|
|
|
Post by Deviette on Sept 23, 2007 15:46:53 GMT -6
Kirby, Metroid and the Kongs are all liscensed and created by Nintendo. Just because they hire someone else to develop the game doesn't make it third party. They still own legal rights to the characters. Someone else wrote and designed FE. Then Nintendo produced it. Ryuu, you make no sence, you've just said that because they hired someone else to make they still own it .... unless it's FE. You should really think through your arguments before posting them. And also admit that you're wrong rather than just saying again and again that you are right when you so cearly aren't
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 23, 2007 16:11:45 GMT -6
Kirby, Metroid and the Kongs are all liscensed and created by Nintendo. Just because they hire someone else to develop the game doesn't make it third party. They still own legal rights to the characters. Someone else wrote and designed FE. Then Nintendo produced it. Ryuu, you make no sence, you've just said that because they hired someone else to make they still own it .... unless it's FE. You should really think through your arguments before posting them. And also admit that you're wrong rather than just saying again and again that you are right when you so cearly aren't In regards to my first post you quoted: the previous Kong games(platformer, not Konga) were created by Rare, but Nintendo owns the characters. Metroid Prime was created by a company based in Texas, but Nintendo still owns legal rights to the characters. However, someone else designed and wrote FE while Nintendo produced the series. And, in case you didn't notice, I said that FE would be considered in the middle ground of second party, most likely. Also, why are you resurrecting a dead argument?
|
|
|
Post by Aleu on Sept 23, 2007 16:27:54 GMT -6
Excuse me! Lemme try and clear up a few issues, to the best of my knowledge:
Creation, Design are slightly different from Production and Development, which is also different from Publishing.
Creation and Design: Are the ones who came up with the original content, especially in a series of games. They own the original rights to the characters, and usually are the developers (the programmers and artists and such) for games that involve those characters and settings.
Development and Production: Refers to the programming and such and such of a certain game. This is usually the job of the creator, but sometimes they can allow an outside company to make a game with the copyrighted material. The original company retains the copyright, but gives the other company express permission to use the material, usually in exchange for a cut of the profits or somesuch.
Publishing: Is an entirely different thing. The publishing company is the company that promotes the game and handles stuff such as sales, marketing, and the like. It is sometimes done by the company that developed the game, which is called "Self-Publishing." Usually, however, it's given to another company, such as EA Games or... stuff like that. It's important to remember that a publisher can be a developer AND creator as well. Nintendo is one of those.
A good example would be the Riviera/Yggdra Union games. Both were created and developed by Sting, but published by Altus. Hence, both companies have their name on the game, but Sting is the owner of the copyright. Altus can't use any Riviera/Yggdra Union material without their express permission, or else they'll have lawsuits raining on their heads.
Now. Fire Emblem was created by Intelligent Systems, developed by the same, and published by Nintendo. However, Intelligent Systems is a dev team inside of Nintendo itself, hence the copyrights to the game belongs to Nintendo.
Kirby was created and developed by HAL Labs, which is a second-party developer of Nintendo. Their second-party status means that they're technically and independent studio, but they've got a contract with Nintendo. This means that the copyright to Kirby may or may not belong to HAL Labs, depending on the terms of the contract. However, since HAL Labs CREATED the SSB games, it doesn't really matter.
Okay, a little clarification here. Since HAL isn't technically a part of Nintendo, it can't technically use Nintendo's copyrights without its permission. I doubt they had a hard time obtaining it, though...
Metroid was created by Intelligent Systems as well, so the same deal as with Fire Emblem applies.
Shigeru Miyamoto created Donkey Kong, so I believe there's very little to be said there. RARE was the DEVELOPER but not the creator, and hence not the copyright holder.
In case anyone's curious, Satoshi Tajiri created Pokemon with his company Game Freak, who's also a second-party developer for Nintendo. So there would have had to been some intercompany wrangling done there to secure Pikachu, but given the way that Game Freak's been throwing out liscensing for Pokemon, I doubt it was very hard.
Sorry it was so long! If I got anything wrong please don't hurt me! ^^
Bottom Line:
Fire Emblem and Metroid were created by Intelligent Systems, who's a dev team inside of Nintendo.
|
|
|
Post by Ryuu on Sept 23, 2007 16:40:42 GMT -6
You see, Aleu points out my misconception and now I see where I was wrong. Because he gave evidence(lots of it), and not just said NO U. I was under the impression that Intelligent Systems was its own company and not a part of Nintendo. Also, I probably should have used different wording when I said that Rare made DK. I meant created in the sense that they programmed the game and such.
|
|
|
Post by Aleu on Sept 23, 2007 16:53:02 GMT -6
|
|
Vayne Divinaire
Junior Roleplayer
I now have Photobucket! I'm so happy! :)
Posts: 39
|
Post by Vayne Divinaire on Sept 25, 2007 18:37:53 GMT -6
In case anyone's curious, Satoshi Tajiri created Pokemon with his company Game Freak, who's also a second-party developer for Nintendo. So there would have had to been some intercompany wrangling done there to secure Pikachu, but given the way that Game Freak's been throwing out liscensing for Pokemon, I doubt it was very hard. What about the company "The Pokemon Company"? I've seen that label on the more recent games (yesh, i playz themz, they r PWNAGE funz) and i think they may be a division of Nintendo. Does anyone know anything about this? Sorry about sorta-off-topic by the way...
|
|