Epic lawsuit shows Sony asks publishers for compensation if MTX / playerbase ratio falls below certain amount compared to the cross-platform revenue

DongBeetle · May 3, 2021

Could someone tell me why a multibillion dollar corporations financials should be relevant to me when forming an opinion on shit like this? Lmfao. Anyways, the having to share information about ALL your revenue with Sony really sucks ass and I'd bet that it's responsible for some missed cross play opportunities. Fight it all they want, crossplay is where everyone will end up in the end

catswaller · May 3, 2021

Mindwipe said:
Literally 90% of the posts for the first four pages literally misunderstood the situation.

They didn't, just lots of bleeding hearts for sonys decidedd they must not really understand if they find this fee objectionable.
As if it's ok to pin a variable extra fee on devs for crossplay as long as its variable.

catswaller · May 3, 2021

Minarik said:
Oh neat, mods coming to the defense of a multi-billion dollar company when nobody really misunderstood what was going on. Thanks for the hard work.

This is very common for two multi billion dollar companies in particular.

Chippewa Barr · May 3, 2021

aronmayo said:
This Corsi guy is an absolute piece of shit who clearly knows nothing about gaming, let alone enough to be the Director of Developer Relations. This is not the Sony from the late-PS3/early-PS4 days, this is ultra arrogant Sony at its absolute worst. Sorry but get the fuck out of here with that shit, Sony. I am fuming 😤

I mean I don't agree with his take on crossplay either but...

...not to mention, he left like 2 years ago lol

Minarik said:
Oh neat, mods coming to the defense of a multi-billion dollar company when nobody really misunderstood what was going on. Thanks for the hard work.

What is even happening in this thread?! Accusations and molten-core-of-the-Earth hot takes in here lol...place has gone bananas lately!

Lube Man · May 3, 2021

Shiba said:
Mostly fighting games but it's getting better.

I hope this is not the reason then... developers shouldn't have to suffer for Sony's gain.

nonoriri · May 3, 2021

Sameer Sedlar said:
This is kinda making me go crazy, how is that related to Cross-Play exactly ?, are we talking here about Cross Play as in PS4 players playing with\against Xbox\PC players ?, or is Sony talking about Cross Play in terms of shared play where one can have access to his exact character\items\weapons across different platforms ?, I am a bit confused.

In the case of Fortnite, it was both (play with people on other platforms + access your same character) and it's the assumption that the shared account (cross-save) was the big sticking point. That's why with games like Genshin Impact, you can freely play with anyone on any platform but you can't take your progress from PS4 to PC. If you want to have cross-platform access to your account, Sony wants you to pay up.

Japanmanx3 · May 3, 2021

Minarik said:
Oh neat, mods coming to the defense of a multi-billion dollar company when nobody really misunderstood what was going on. Thanks for the hard work.

Who's alt is this?

Patapuf · May 3, 2021

These are the worst types of "business is going business" situations.

Few devs, especially smaller devs, are going to risk to have to share MTX revenue with sony if their game unexpetedly take of on a non-Sony platform.

And thus, many games that could benefit from a unified community, just won't have them.

Antrax · May 3, 2021

Nintendo said:
The percentage of PSN revenue should be at least 85% of PSN gameplay share.

This is a correct way to phrase that ratio of ratios.

What's especially irritating about this is that the devs have limited control over this ratio. Maybe Nintendo or Xbox or iOS has done something in their ecosystems that is incentivizing additional spend in their consumers (we've had MS speak to this with Game Pass; GP subscribers spend more money on average than regular Xbox owners). So now you have to eat a penalty because they're dropping more cash on your title than PlayStation owners are, again, through no fault of your own

EvilBoris · May 3, 2021

collige said:
Doesn't Sony need access to all the cross platform revenue and player stats in the first place to come up with this number? Are developers contractually obligated to share their PC/Xbox revenue with Sony or something?

Yes. It says that in the slide

catswaller · May 3, 2021

Patapuf said:
Few devs, especially smaller devs, are going to risk to have to share MTX revenue with sony if their game unexpetedly take of on a non-Sony platform.

Plus games that already have huge playerbases elsewhere face a definite constant fee for supporting crossplay on ps4.

EvilBoris said:
Yes. It says that in the slide

Yeah, and this is huuuuuge market intelligence.

elyetis · May 3, 2021

nonoriri said:
In the case of Fortnite, it was both (play with people on other platforms + access your same character) and it's the assumption that the shared account (cross-save) was the big sticking point. That's why with games like Genshin Impact, you can freely play with anyone on any platform but you can't take your progress from PS4 to PC. If you want to have cross-platform access to your account, Sony wants you to pay up.

Yeah this definitely seems to explain why Genshin impact has such limitation only on sony's platform.

Cels · May 3, 2021

if some form of this cross-platform revenue share slide is still in effect today, that would explain some games' reluctance to allow cross progression, because if a player buys MTX on a non-sony platform, yet is allowed to bring that MTX over to PSN without any money going in Sony's pocket, that's going to increase the likelihood of the partner having to pay a royalty to Sony.

A couple examples include Apex Legends (which has crossplay but not cross progression) and Overwatch (has neither crossplay nor cross progression)

Deeke · May 3, 2021

Kalem said:
Actually thread-mark worthy if you can pinpoint which. Even if I have to buy it.

On Page 3 there's few Sony documents but they're purchase-only on PACER. They're fully redacted apparently.

EntelechyFuff · May 3, 2021

Podge293 said:
Well this document has definitely existed since I believe 2019.....why has it never been mentioned before?

My observation isn't about the fact that NDAs exist and restrict what people can say. Both things are true.

Rather it's more about specific consequences being described, such as indies going out of business or opting out of cross play due to this contract language.

"NDAs exist" is doing a lot of lifting here. I could say this contract is why Final Fantasy 14 is still a PS exclusive, and who could prove me wrong? It's not a useful conversation or based on anything but my own idle thoughts. But it pollutes the quality of the conversation and can take on a life of its own when repeated enough.

EvilBoris · May 3, 2021

catswaller said:
Plus games that already have huge playerbases elsewhere face a definite constant fee for supporting crossplay on ps4.

Yeah, and this is huuuuuge market intelligence.

Indeed. There may even be standard contracts on place with Nintendo or Microsoft that prevent that data from being shared too. Which again is a neat way to stop this from happening. Create a set of criteria that is mostly implausible and unachievable because you don't really want to do it .

Jonscrambler · May 3, 2021

Lol at the "partners" having to send Sony monthly reports on what they make on other platforms, what power to have

Sapo84 · May 3, 2021

catswaller said:
Plus games that already have huge playerbases elsewhere face a definite constant fee for supporting crossplay on ps4.

Did you read the linked article? If there is a huge playerbase elsewhere most of the playing time will be elsewhere, there would be no reason for the ratio to differ from 1.0
The clause is done in this way to prevent another platform from offering cheaper MTX and thus generating more revenue there, it's not about big vs small playerbase.

Wilf Netherton · May 3, 2021

The math works out such that the opportunity to trip this provision increases as a game performance on PSN falls. For example, if a game's PS4 player share is 95% while the PSN revenue share is 90% the publisher doesn't have to pay. If a game's PS4 share is 10% while the PSN revenue share is 5% then the publisher will have to pay the fee. Note that the game's total revenue may be exactly the same in each case and the real difference in players-to-dollars may be exactly the same, but the game that can't find an audience on PS4 has to pay the penalty.

Patapuf · May 3, 2021

Patapuf · May 3, 2021

Sapo84 said:
Did you read the linked article? If there is a huge playerbase elsewhere most of the playing time will be elsewhere, there would be no reason for the ratio to differ from 1.0
The clause is done in this way to prevent another platform from offering cheaper MTX and thus generating more revenue there, it's not about big vs small playerbase.

Imagine you do a late port of a service game. Chances are new players might spend a bit more on dlc/mtx because there's more of them to buy --> dev can't implement cross progression with Playstation because it'll cost him a lot of money.

the-pi-guy · May 3, 2021

Patapuf said:
Few devs, especially smaller devs, are going to risk to have to share MTX revenue with sony if their game unexpetedly take of on a non-Sony platform.

And thus, many games that could benefit from a unified community, just won't have them.

I don't think that's really relevant?

If the game takes off on another platform, they aren't going to pay more royalties.
The royalties only happen if gamers on other platforms are spending substantially more.

Podge293 · May 3, 2021

EntelechyFuff said:
My observation isn't about the fact that NDAs exist and restrict what people can say. Both things are true.

Rather it's more about specific consequences being described, such as indies going out of business or opting out of cross play due to this contract language.

"NDAs exist" is doing a lot of lifting here. I could say this contract is why Final Fantasy 14 is still a PS exclusive, and who could prove me wrong? It's not a useful conversation or based on anything but my own idle thoughts. But it pollutes the quality of the conversation and can take on a life of its own when repeated enough.

And so can "someone would have said something by now "

But right here in this thread based on that slide we've conclusive proof that NDAs do exist and keep people silent.

Deleted member 18400 · May 3, 2021

Patapuf said:
Few devs, especially smaller devs, are going to risk to have to share MTX revenue with sony if their game unexpetedly take of on a non-Sony platform.

Just out of curiosity are there are lot of multiplayer games with MTX that are made by small indie studios? I cannot think of any off the top of my head outside of maybe Rocket League? Just seems like a strange statement.

At the end of the day if the developers don't want to pay Sony they will have to take a stand and refuse to publish on Playstation, or at the very least not offer cross save.
Players and companies will have to speak with their wallets.

Zyae · May 3, 2021

Mindwipe said:
Literally 90% of the posts for the first four pages literally misunderstood the situation.

thats not true at all, it is effectively a tax on cross play/progression. People understood it.

Sapo84 · May 3, 2021

Patapuf said:
Imagine you do a late port of a service game. Chances are new players might spend a bit more on dlc/mtx because there's more of them to buy --> dev can't implement cross progression with Playstation because it'll cost him a lot of money.

That's why 0.85 ratio doesn't trigger the share.
Even in those extreme situations the revenue share will probably either don't kick in or be a minimal fee.
We would need concrete data on revenue by platform to really be sure if it's something that can likely happen.

RedHeat · May 3, 2021

Zyae said:
thats not true at all, it is effectively a tax on cross play/progression. People understood it.

No, it's not. It's related to micro-transactions and other such things on different platforms.

aronmayo · May 3, 2021

Precious Tritium said:
What a suit

Whataboutism at its finest in here. Yikes.

Cels · May 3, 2021

Jonscrambler said:
Lol at the "partners" having to send Sony monthly reports on what they make on other platforms, what power to have

it's a case of might makes right, or in this case, you make the platform, you make the rules

Klotera · May 3, 2021

Really, line-item fees based on certain parameters are pretty common in B2B contracts across lots of industries, as are clauses to allow auditing to make sure they are complying. This only seems like a huge deal because we don't often see behind the curtain as consumers.

Honestly, this clause is nothing crazy. I'd be curious if this even ever gets triggered, given that there's 15% of leeway in the ratio of platform playtime to revenue generated. Seems you'd have to have one platform way, way out of proportion to have this be a real problem.

TheJackdog · May 3, 2021

Minarik said:
Oh neat, mods coming to the defense of a multi-billion dollar company when nobody really misunderstood what was going on. Thanks for the hard work.

Yeah this is pretty gross. Expected at this point.

Can't this place be safe from that? Cmon mods

nonoriri · May 3, 2021

Antrax said:
This is a correct way to phrase that ratio of ratios.

What's especially irritating about this is that the devs have limited control over this ratio. Maybe Nintendo or Xbox or iOS has done something in their ecosystems that is incentivizing additional spend in their consumers (we've had MS speak to this with Game Pass; GP subscribers spend more money on average than regular Xbox owners). So now you have to eat a penalty because they're dropping more cash on your title than PlayStation owners are, again, through no fault of your own

They have limited control but Epic certainly had the data about how transactions were occurring on their platforms. Epic wouldn't have agreed to this if there wasn't a benefit for them. They could have been cool with Sony not doing cross-system saves or even play and still made cash but the risk was worth the reward. On the opposite end, Genshin pretty strongly indicates that Miyoho has decided to NOT to agree to this.

elyetis said:
Yeah this definitely seems to explain why Genshin impact has such limitation only on sony's platform.

And in the case of Genshin, there's no real benefit to Miyoho paying since it's not like you can buy specific skins or weapons which would tempt friends do to the same nor is the MP a big focus. Sucks for me but I get why they said no. They wouldn't see the level of benefit Epic does.

Chumunga64 · May 3, 2021

geez, this is awful

how hard is it to not be terrible about this

Kalem · May 3, 2021

Deeke said:
On Page 3 there's few Sony documents but they're purchase-only on PACER. They're fully redacted apparently.

Yeah, I was wondering if those were the relevant ones. I may purchase them. Not sure the legality of posting them for here tho if I did

hechicero · May 3, 2021

its always non playststion gamers furrowing their brows being overly outraged at sony.

playststion gamers are mad at sony cause now we have to play against pc players.

henhowc · May 3, 2021

Zyae said:
thats not true at all, it is effectively a tax on cross play/progression. People understood it.

Sounds you didn't understand it.

aronmayo said:
Whataboutism at its finest in here. Yikes.

I mean your post was pretty silly...

Mr_F_Snowman · May 3, 2021

Lube Man said:
Embarassing post. What makes you think others don't have contracts in place?

Another embarassing post.

Why is it embarrassing exactly? Its a blatant move from a company exploiting its position in the market acting like a monopoly to disincentive competitive pricing across markets. Its embarrassing you'd even think to defend it.

Whether MS / Nintendo / Steam have similar policies doesn't alter the fact its bullshit.

It is 100% a disincentive to have a competitive market and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the EU investigate it seeing as it very likely to contravene Eu competition law

catswaller · May 3, 2021

hechicero said:
its always non playststion gamers furrowing their brows being overly outraged at sony.

playststion gamers are mad at sony cause now we have to play against pc players.

everybody owns a playstation dude theyre the most popular console by far

MatrixMan.exe · May 3, 2021

You know the thread has jumped the shark when people are coming in here to now accuse mods of corporate apologism for simply changing the thread title to something that's far more accurate, factual and less incendiary as the original title. I feel a bunch of you just say this stuff because you can, with zero conviction, not because you actually mean it.

Infernostew · May 3, 2021

catswaller said:
Plus games that already have huge playerbases elsewhere face a definite constant fee for supporting crossplay on ps4.

We have no idea if this contract with Epic is the same that they have with other developers or if smaller devs are even held to this MTX deal.

Mr_F_Snowman · May 3, 2021

Peltz said:
Eh.. the consumer isn't responsible for compensating the store though. It's the developer in this case. And if the developer does not find the terms reasonable, they're under no obligation to agree to them.

It's to disincentivize a developer from saying from within the game on PS4 "hey, don't buy the content through PSN, instead, log into your PC where we get a higher cut, then log back into PS4 to access the content."

It's not amazing, but I've seen worse.

I never said it would be the consumer owing the compensation in those examples

Necromorph · May 3, 2021

ToadPacShakur said:
At least get blocked by someone worth getting blocked by, like Moriarty

Colin? why? i know the existence of some drama with some reviewer (i don't know the entire story) but Warren's bias is annoying af.

Minarik · May 3, 2021

We really gonna pretend this site doesn't doesn't lean towards one gaming company in particular?

People aren't misunderstanding the issue. In it's simplest terms, it's a cross-progression tax. Why the fuck should Sony get a cut of anything done on someone else's platform?

Deleted member 20831 · May 3, 2021

Is there a sequence of chronological events, after Apple and Epic court battles begun?
Documents revealed from this company and that, etc, etc

Kinthey · May 3, 2021

Sapo84 said:
That's why 0.85 ratio doesn't trigger the share.
Even in those extreme situations the revenue share will probably either don't kick in or be a minimal fee.
We would need concrete data on revenue by platform to really be sure if it's something that can likely happen.

This ratio doesn't seem impossible to trigger for me when people have stopped spending much as much PSN while it's still fresh on the other platform. That it's something the developer has to worry about at all is not good

Deleted member 68874 · May 3, 2021

Anything that gets in the way of cross play is gross.

kubev · May 3, 2021

I wonder if this has anything to do with why so many games get released on PlayStation and Switch while skipping an Xbox release. For the longest time, I would've assumed it was the differences in audiences, but we do tend to miss out on a lot of free-to-play games on Xbox to the point that I'm now questioning this. I'd be curious to know how successful games with a lot of microtransactions are on Switch.

SDR-UK · May 3, 2021

kubev said:
I wonder if this has anything to do with why so many games get released on PlayStation and Switch while skipping an Xbox release. For the longest time, I would've assumed it was the differences in audiences, but we do tend to miss out on a lot of free-to-play games on Xbox to the point that I'm now questioning this. I'd be curious to know how successful games with a lot of microtransactions are on Switch.

Don't forget that MS were a barrier in terms of actual free to play. I'd wager that played a bigger part in F2P games skipping Xbox.

Absolute · May 3, 2021

Minarik said:
We really gonna pretend this site doesn't doesn't lean towards one gaming company in particular?

People aren't misunderstanding the issue. In it's simplest terms, it's a cross-progression tax. Why the fuck should Sony get a cut of anything done on someone else's platform?

it's the most popular console and that's reflected in the users on this site. Saying the mods have a bias is completely unfounded and dumb.

aronmayo · May 3, 2021

henhowc said:
😬 Lots of people loved this guy for his build the list stuff 🤷🏻‍♂️. This seems to be an extreme reaction.

I want to play games with my friends and this guy says "no, because I want money please". I'm pointing out that this is a shitty move and not consumer or developer friendly. It's predatory, monopolistic behaviour and shouldn't be tolerated by consumers. Why is it unreasonable to criticise this person strongly?

I really don't think people should be defending this guys wrongdoings by saying "yeah but he did this other good thing once" when this is clearly a bad move designed to punish the developers and consumers for the sake of earning money.

Epic lawsuit shows Sony asks publishers for compensation if MTX / playerbase ratio falls below certain amount compared to the cross-platform revenue

Alt-Account

One Winged Slayer

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

Saw the truth behind the copied door

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

User requested account closure

Prophet of Truth

Account closed at user request