Shower thought. Who's the 2nd party?

[Jae Tee]

We hear of first parties mostly as a parent company owner such as Nintendo for the switch. We also hear of third parties as non-owner supporters such as SEGA for the switch. But who is the second party?

 

After giving it some thought I came to the conclusion that it would mean the customer, but shouldn't they be third and non-owner supporters second? Or maby it's the retailer's that are second and customers are fourth.

[PlayStation 2]

In terms of developers, second-party developers would generally be developers where the console manufacturer has a notable stake in a developer but doesn't outright own them, like Nintendo with Rare before 2002. Although I'm not really sure what you're talking about here, if you aren't talking about developers.

[minibois]

50 minutes ago, Jae Tee said:

We hear of first parties mostly as a parent company owner such as Nintendo for the switch. We also hear of third parties as non-owner supporters such as SEGA for the switch. But who is the second party?

 

After giving it some thought I came to the conclusion that it would mean the customer, but shouldn't they be third and non-owner supporters second? Or maby it's the retailer's that are second and customers are fourth.

1st party: creator of the console

3rd party: company that is independent of the console creator, that creates games for the system. 

 

I think that is something everyone agrees on. So it only makes sense '2nd party' falls somewhere between these two.

A separate company, but which is partially owned by a console maker/the console maker published their games.

 

The easiest example is probably Game Freak, as their games are only released on Nintendo platforms and often their publisher is Nintendo too.

In the past Rare was like this too, now Rare is considered a Microsoft 2nd party. Retro is like current day Rare.

 

First part would be something like Nintendo EAD. Third party is something like EA, Activision-Blizzard, etc.

[Sauron]

2nd party developers are usually developers that are contracted by the console manufacturer to produce a game for their system. If Nintendo gave me a bunch of money to make a Mario game for the Switch I wouldn't be 1st party because I'm not Nintendo, but I wouldn't be 3rd party either because I was specifically commissioned by them to make a game for their system rather than someone who made their own game that just so happens to run on Switch.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

In general:

First party is you, or the entity whose point of view you are adopting. Second party, or more typically, the counterpart, is the entity you (or the entity the story is about) are interacting with. Third party is everyone else.

Hence, "first" and "second" parties are interchangeable in any situation, simply by switching the point of view, while third parties are those not directly engaged in the action

 

Now take that structure to your particular case of interest. As a customer, a console manufacturer may be my counterpart or "second party", while their suppliers are "third parties" to me, as they only participate indirectly in my dealings with the company. In business contexts, however, it may be confusing because "third parties" are often parties that a company directly makes business with (e.g., when speaking of outsourcing), but are treated as such as they are "third parties" from customers perspective.

 

I don't know whether it's the same in English, but in Spanish a car insurance contract covering your damages to other are called "third party insurance" contracts, since the insurance company and its customer are the first two parties, while the third parties from the contract's perspective are all those you may crash or run over with your car, regardless of their ties to the insurance company or you, if any.