Who has the most talented 1st party - N, S, X, or Valve?

Not gameplay, that is storytelling.

Tough one between Nintendo and Valve. Sony right after. But games like Half Life and Portal are just simply amazing.

you don't remember the train level? or fighting off a chopper while the building you're in is crashing? shooting to save someone while an ancient civilization is crumbling? climbing up a derailed train? running and shooting at a truck that's trying to mow you down? also, I may be wrong on this, but I know the multiplayer was one of the few third person shooters at the time that allowed climbing.

I remember all of this, but it was all just regular gameplay married to some pretty epic setpieces- the gameplay itself was not revolutionary at all, it was the same old thing (in fact, it was basically going by the CoD 4 mentality).

Once again, there was nothing wrong with that at all, Uncharted 2 was an amazing game, and one of the top ten of last generation, but it's erroneous to claim that it had any sort of 'revolutionary' gameplay.

game·playˈgāmˌplā/nounnoun: gameplay; noun: game-play

1. the tactical aspects of a computer game, such as its plot and the way it is played, as distinct from the graphics and sound effects.

I don't get the love affair everyone has with Nintendo. I love a lot of their games for nostalgia purposes and love playing Wii games with people over but that's it. They don't make games that I can enjoy when I feel like just sitting down alone and gaming.

For me, it's Valve. I put so many hours into TF2, CS and DOTA.

At the cost of the lack of identity.

I went with valve. HL and sequels are some of greatest games ever I feel, add l4d and its all gravy

Nope. There was a interesting interview I listened to which clarified sonys policies towards exclusives. They purposefully dont rely on heavly marketing 1 franchise like ninty do with mario or ms do with halo. Back in the ps1 days their macot was crash but they stopped that because they didnt want that image, ms for example has to release a halo game on every console it ever releases but sony doesnt. Look at how many new ip they created last gen

And that right there causes more problems. How many said that they wanted see Crash and/or Spyro in PSABR? And what did that game lacked? Charm (well, on the technical level there were a handful of flaws but that's not the point).

I see many Sony IPs but the majority of them do lack identity or are less unique. And don't pull the Naughty Dog card on me, because that's been overused. And I'm still seeing some same IPs in the PS3 and Vita, Sony is not so different from the rest.

Quantity=/=Quality

Not going to pretend Valve is a good substitute for a first party studio, especially since much of their work has appeared on Sony and/or MS consoles. So that's right out.

MS has the rights to some popular franchises, but I don't think many would argue they as a whole are on the level of Nintendo or Sony, and they don't make the cut here.

(Though I do wonder if we might see a sizable boost in first party capabilities and IPs under Spencer. He seems to "get it" about everything else XBox that the old regime never did. Wouldn't shock me to see money shifting away from TVTVTV as contracts expire and that money going into studios and franchises. By the end of the gen it would be interesting to see where MS is. If they don't beef up first party under Spencer, they never will.)

SO that leaves Nintendo and Sony, and it's actually a tougher call than I'd first assume. Nintendo has the title nailed down of "most first party classics all time", but that's not what TC is asking. He wants to know who's "most talented" which requires a more focused look at recent output, and at least puts Sony in the running.

I guess I can't say definitively one way or the other, because I haven't played anything on Nintendo's most recent Console or Handheld (though considering how many Nintendo machines I own, that probably says something about how desirable their recent games seem...). My hunch is that the answer varies between different recent timescales (1,3,5,10 years) and on whether we are talking consoles, handhelds, or both. Both outfits have given me so many enjoyable games, it's impossible to think of gaming without either group.

Nintendo for me. I'm mainly a PC gamer, but I don't see how a studio that only makes FPS games can be considered the most talented. Don't get me wrong, I loved HL2, Portal series, and Killing Floor, but I view talent as also requiring some different styles of games. Then again, this isn't really a fair comparison as Valve is just a single developer while Nintendo, Sony, and MS all have multiple first party studios making different games. Valve shouldn't have been in this discussion.

Also, nobody can touch the quality of Nintendo's products. They're one of the few companies now days that actually takes their time to make sure their games are as good as can be bug wise and gameplay wise. I also own a PS3 and PS4 and would put Sony's first party in second place. Some great games from them as well.

More variety?

Less than a decade between releases?

Less focus on money gabbing online focused games?

Resourses actually fairly spread between game development and Steam maintenance?

VALVe is sitting by the sidelines, scratching its gold coated balls

Valve... wut? Are you serious? Half-Life is all they have done worth mentioning and even so its an above average franchise, nothing special at all. L4D is as generic as it comes and Portal is highly overrated. You cant be serious.

Comparing Valve as company to the big three I can understand due to steam. Now comparing Valve games to the likes of Sony and Nintendo is laughable to say the least.

Nintendo consoles pretty much live on first party.

Sony and MS wouldn't be able to do that. Anyone how says otherwise is a fool.

Its a fact.

Out of curiosity, what games exactly have Sony made? Through what brand do they make games? Sony Online Entertainment? Because Sony is quite a bit like Valve in that both deliver mediums, not games.

Microsoft has MS Studios, Nintendo makes games under there name, Valve makes games under there name but does Sony actually develop their own games?

Nintendo, by far.

Valve hasn't made an impressive single-player game in a while.

Nintendo, no question.

I would say Valve is a contender but recently they're more about supporting Steam than actually releasing games. Not necessarily bad, but it seems like they only ever release one game every few years.

Considering Half-Life 2 is my favourite game of all time (and Portal 2 being in my top 5), I'd have to go with Valve. But I also have a soft spot for Naughty Dog.

I'm assuming Valve is on there because Steambox?

Is Valve seriously getting brought into the debate as the PC's "first party dev" now?

That's not gameplay my friend . Those are just scripted set pieces (COD have that too) . Gameplay wise Uncharted is just a linear cover based shooter .

Well I've never had a PS3 so I can't really choose, but I'll do it anyways. I really doubt Sony would be my top though since I'm not a huge fan of Sony's type of first party games. Xbox is by far the worst of them all imo. Valve is pretty awesome, but they have way too few games, and haven't made any meaningful franchises to me in a while.

Obviously I chose Nintendo. Nintendo franchises are rather consistent in quality and the closest to being games (if that's even a thing) over all the other guys.

no... you are actually playing the game. gameplay is about how you experience the game. COD is not even a third person shooter..

Can't believe I'm doing this but , there you go :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay

Gameplay is the specific way in which playersinteract with a game, and in particular with video games. Gameplay is the pattern defined through the game rules, connection between player and the game, challenges and overcoming them, plot and player's connection with it.Video game gameplay is distinct from graphics, and audio elements.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_storytelling

.

Interactive Storytelling (IS) is a form of digital entertainment in which users create or influence a dramatic storyline through actions, either by issuing commands to the story's protagonist, or acting as a general director of events in the narrative. Interactive storytelling is a medium where the narrative, and its evolution, can be influenced in real-time by a user.

There is difference between gameplay and storytelling through scripted events .

wtf are you talking about man? the train sequence where you shoot your way through different enemies on different cars on a moving train is not a scripted event! you can't simple just do nothing and win...

Train mission is level design . You are still just taking cover and shooting people .

Nintendo by FAR.

Naughty Dog contributed Didly Squat to the medium, lol "Storytelling", be serious.

And I'm not in the habit of supporting Exclusives, what good does that do

lol I think you completely missed my point, but that's fine

@SolidGame_basic

I played that section... Gears of War has on too.... In fact in Gears it was much more fun.....

Nintendo: Best designers.

Sony: Best engineers.

Valve?!?: Best PR managers and service managers.

Also Valve, seriously? PC has no first party developer, seeing as no one really owns the system. And ultimately that is what I love about it.

I may have but you are missing my point too . I'm not saying Uncharted is not a good game or overall experience is bad . I'm just saying that gameplay is related to genre of the game .

For example in RPGs : You kill enemies to gain XP , then you use it to upgrade character . You explore to find currency to buy items , you pick loot to craft yourself a weapon , gadgets or armor , Engage with other characters to shape the outcome of storyline etc . That's gameplay .

In Action Adventure Games like Uncharted : You take cover and shoot enemies , you can engage in hand to hand combat . You do platforming & solve easy puzzles to proceed in level , and collect treasure by exploring .

Nintendo, not sure why Valve are on the list. You can include any publisher in that case.

Sony owned studios ARE Sony. Its like saying Spider-Man movies arent owned by Sony because of Columbia Tristar. Sorry but Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica Studio, Media Molecule, Sony Japan, Sucker Punch, Guerrilla Games, etc, etc, ARE Sony. They are all part of the same company

dont pull the naughty dog card haha thats like saying dont talk about miyamoto and wtf are u talking about lacking uniqueness, how many games in the market are like rachet and clank/sly/little big planet/heavy rain ? and of course sony is going to release 1 or 2 games of their established franchise each gen, unlike ninty whos whole gen is spent on rehashing the same tired franchises since 1980 for when ever nes came out. seriously no one cares about ninty except hardcores who play their games for nostalgia or parents who buy the console for kids.

their franchises dont have no where near the variety of sony. the wii was an anomaly, look at the chart, their console sales have gone down every gen except last gen. they need more variety

@ghostwarrior786

Don't Worry about Heavy Rain... Quantic Dream is Independent.

so? david cage is the lead and he has strong relationship with sony because they let him do what he wants, m$ refused heavy rain which is why it was sony exclusive. they then signed a exclusivity deal for a few games. even if heavy rain did release for xbox u really think it will break 1 million on xbox? no way, only games that sell on that console are shooters

@ghostwarrior786

Okay... Just making sure.

Its kinda like Bungie with Microsoft or Sega and Nintendo.

DOTA 2 and Counter Strike: GO are two of the most popular games on Earth, if that's not worth mentioning to you, then i don't know what would be. They're also quality, polished games with seemingly endless length.

Sony? Lol. Blizzard and Nintendo shits on them from high up. Valve, Blizzard and Nintendo are what i would call 'the big three'.

Between Nintendo and Sony, I would have said Nintendo once, but SCEJ has some seriously talented dudes, just team ICO alone places them ahead for me, that's not even mentioning naughty Dog,

I'm surprised majority picked Nintendo. I would pick Valve over Nintendo. Their games are a whole new level over Ninty's.

@ghostwarrior786 said:

@PsychoLemons said:

@ghostwarrior786 said:

@PsychoLemons said:

@ghostwarrior786 said:

ninty only good at making kiddy franchises and m$ only do shooters. sony has a good blend of everything

At the cost of the lack of identity.

Nope. There was a interesting interview I listened to which clarified sonys policies towards exclusives. They purposefully dont rely on heavly marketing 1 franchise like ninty do with mario or ms do with halo. Back in the ps1 days their macot was crash but they stopped that because they didnt want that image, ms for example has to release a halo game on every console it ever releases but sony doesnt. Look at how many new ip they created last gen

And that right there causes more problems. How many said that they wanted see Crash and/or Spyro in PSABR? And what did that game lacked? Charm (well, on the technical level there were a handful of flaws but that's not the point).

I see many Sony IPs but the majority of them do lack identity or are less unique. And don't pull the Naughty Dog card on me, because that's been overused. And I'm still seeing some same IPs in the PS3 and Vita, Sony is not so different from the rest.

Quantity=/=Quality

dont pull the naughty dog card haha thats like saying dont talk about miyamoto and wtf are u talking about lacking uniqueness, how many games in the market are like rachet and clank/sly/little big planet/heavy rain ? and of course sony is going to release 1 or 2 games of their established franchise each gen, unlike ninty whos whole gen is spent on rehashing the same tired franchises since 1980 for when ever nes came out. seriously no one cares about ninty except hardcores who play their games for nostalgia or parents who buy the console for kids.

their franchises dont have no where near the variety of sony. the wii was an anomaly, look at the chart, their console sales have gone down every gen except last gen. they need more variety

I'm pretty sure Sony is more than just Naughty Dog, is what I'm trying to say because so far that's what Cows use that as their defense. Then again it's not like any other companies are no different. I grew tried of Rachet after 'A Crack in Time' where it is becoming a 'Franchise Zombie' to me. In fact. it kind of reminds me of Twisted Metal back in the PS1 era. Heavy Rain= Press X to not Die. Little Big Planet? I would have liked it more if it weren't for the god damn floaty physics. Terraway was pretty good. God of War got stale. Same with Killzone. Puppeteer was good. etc, etc

Anyways, don't claim that Sony is different in terms franchises, whenever it's the same or not and also saying that other companies don't have more than three IPs.

Don't know about you but it seems like they are doing fine with the 3DS, the Wii U on the other hand...