So I'm sure you are totally with Ms when they trying to push away steam with uwp and making de facto the only console directly compatible with PC the xbox right?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Fortnite Crossplay XB1 - PS4 | Seems like the ball is in Sony's court ... Again - MOD EDIT: READ OP
- Thread starter Klobrille
- Start date
So I'm sure you are totally with Ms when they trying to push away steam with uwp and making de facto the only console directly compatible with PC the xbox right?
Sony had no comment. Sony never pushed for it either. We're talking about a 3rd party who made a game with cross-play between consoles and both essentially denying it.
How do you theoretically go about playing on the psn with Xbox live users? I take it you would need to sign into a Xbox/MS portal?
"I want cross-play, but I understand why Sony doesn't."
"You're a corporate apologist who doesn't give a damn about consumer rights!"
Recap in a not 100% line for line nutshell~
Gotta love these cross-play topics \o/
"You're a corporate apologist who doesn't give a damn about consumer rights!"
Recap in a not 100% line for line nutshell~
Gotta love these cross-play topics \o/
It would not surprise me if this is being held up by legal agreements etc. that were written/created at a time when none of the 3 console companies thought about cross play. Last gen nintendo hardly even had an online presence and Microsoft was famously against the idea.
Now it may be the case that there's a lot of unpicking previous agreements from 3rd parties and licensing of tech that runs Live/PSN.
Kudos to Microsoft for getting their act together about this quickly, but it really wouldn't shock me if there's something in TOS of Live that the Sony lawyers are just not going to accept without it being adjusted (or vice-versa, but right now it looks like Sony is the blocker here).
If crossplay is achieved via
Player on Live -> 3rd party (ie Epic) <- Player on PSN
Then the issue is that the 3rd party has to manage the connections from both which I think would be more palatable for Sony than direct Live <-> PSN connections.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the technology is certainly capable and obviously ready for this, so based on what we know for sure it's either:
* Prior legal stuff that needs to be untangled/negotiated
* Sony being dicks
Now it may be the case that there's a lot of unpicking previous agreements from 3rd parties and licensing of tech that runs Live/PSN.
Kudos to Microsoft for getting their act together about this quickly, but it really wouldn't shock me if there's something in TOS of Live that the Sony lawyers are just not going to accept without it being adjusted (or vice-versa, but right now it looks like Sony is the blocker here).
If crossplay is achieved via
Player on Live -> 3rd party (ie Epic) <- Player on PSN
Then the issue is that the 3rd party has to manage the connections from both which I think would be more palatable for Sony than direct Live <-> PSN connections.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the technology is certainly capable and obviously ready for this, so based on what we know for sure it's either:
* Prior legal stuff that needs to be untangled/negotiated
* Sony being dicks
I think a lot of people are missing a crucial detail here. First of all, the fact Sony crossplays with PC is a moot point - it's not direct competition, and everyone does it. The Dreamcast did it. The PS2 did it. Xbox 360 did it. It's not new or particularly commendable when everyone is doing it. Second of all, they pushed cross-play last-gen for the whopping number of one game, which didn't appear because of a policy, not because of a specific choice or wrongdoing towards Sony.
Fast-forward to 2018. Microsoft pushed cross-play for real. Not one game, but potentially any game where the devs are okay with this. Nintendo jumped on board. There are currently 6 games with actual cross-play between Xbox and Switch. Fortnite, when coming to Switch (seems to be a given), it'll almost certainly cross-play with Xbox. There's other indies probably going for it, too, and I'm sure a lot of AAA-devs are definitely potentially on-board with this. Hell, Epic was until Sony cockblocked it.
For the first time ever, cross-play is being pushed with serious efforts and with actual results. There are actual games that cross-play between Nintendo and Microsoft consoles, even with mobiles. This was an unthinkable reality a mere year ago. Now it is happening more and more often because Microsoft and surprisingly Nintendo embraced the future. Sony is doing a great disservice to the player by deying this, but players don't care: they're engaged in their system, they have their games over there and their progress in GAAS titles. They won't sacrifice that, and Sony knows it: Xbox One X is currently the best place to play multiplats which is what most people play, and if Sony gives up even as little as cross-progression, no doubt a lot of people will bail.
What Sony is doing is understandable, but it is very much against the players' interests. I'd love a future where no matter what version of a game you buy (PS, Xbox, Nintendo, Android, iOS, PC, W10, Mac, whatever) you get to play with the same people, with your save carrying over. Give us opt-in/opt-out, sure, if you're on a touch screen I understand if you don't want to compete with controllers or mouses, but give me the option to do so if I want to. Give me the option to play, say, FIFA at home as I advance in the championship, then get on the bus and continue on the Switch, then when I have a 30 minutes break at work time to pull out the mobile and play a match there. This is the future I want.
Thing is, we can complain all we want. Make 100 more threads about it, which I am perfectly fine with actually, else I wouldn't be here commenting. But do you really want a change? Make an actual effort, like those corny copypastas with the "Disney supports gambling" texts about Battlefront 2. Vote with your wallet and buy the games on the consoles that support this future-proof mode, don't reward Sony for closing you off. For one, if you buy Minecraft on Android, iOS, Xbox One, Switch, W10 or Mac, you can play together. If you buy it on PS4, none of that is available to you along with other features missing. You are literally buying a crippled version if you choose PS4, so vote with your wallet if you want to make a change. People rightfully did so when X1 announced an unpopular set of features, when Battlefront 2 went overboard with lootboxes or when companies like EA were pushing shit like online passes. People's fights changed these scenarios. Want cross-play on PS4? Make sure you force them to budge. It's the only way.
Fast-forward to 2018. Microsoft pushed cross-play for real. Not one game, but potentially any game where the devs are okay with this. Nintendo jumped on board. There are currently 6 games with actual cross-play between Xbox and Switch. Fortnite, when coming to Switch (seems to be a given), it'll almost certainly cross-play with Xbox. There's other indies probably going for it, too, and I'm sure a lot of AAA-devs are definitely potentially on-board with this. Hell, Epic was until Sony cockblocked it.
For the first time ever, cross-play is being pushed with serious efforts and with actual results. There are actual games that cross-play between Nintendo and Microsoft consoles, even with mobiles. This was an unthinkable reality a mere year ago. Now it is happening more and more often because Microsoft and surprisingly Nintendo embraced the future. Sony is doing a great disservice to the player by deying this, but players don't care: they're engaged in their system, they have their games over there and their progress in GAAS titles. They won't sacrifice that, and Sony knows it: Xbox One X is currently the best place to play multiplats which is what most people play, and if Sony gives up even as little as cross-progression, no doubt a lot of people will bail.
What Sony is doing is understandable, but it is very much against the players' interests. I'd love a future where no matter what version of a game you buy (PS, Xbox, Nintendo, Android, iOS, PC, W10, Mac, whatever) you get to play with the same people, with your save carrying over. Give us opt-in/opt-out, sure, if you're on a touch screen I understand if you don't want to compete with controllers or mouses, but give me the option to do so if I want to. Give me the option to play, say, FIFA at home as I advance in the championship, then get on the bus and continue on the Switch, then when I have a 30 minutes break at work time to pull out the mobile and play a match there. This is the future I want.
Thing is, we can complain all we want. Make 100 more threads about it, which I am perfectly fine with actually, else I wouldn't be here commenting. But do you really want a change? Make an actual effort, like those corny copypastas with the "Disney supports gambling" texts about Battlefront 2. Vote with your wallet and buy the games on the consoles that support this future-proof mode, don't reward Sony for closing you off. For one, if you buy Minecraft on Android, iOS, Xbox One, Switch, W10 or Mac, you can play together. If you buy it on PS4, none of that is available to you along with other features missing. You are literally buying a crippled version if you choose PS4, so vote with your wallet if you want to make a change. People rightfully did so when X1 announced an unpopular set of features, when Battlefront 2 went overboard with lootboxes or when companies like EA were pushing shit like online passes. People's fights changed these scenarios. Want cross-play on PS4? Make sure you force them to budge. It's the only way.
OR now that crossplatform gaming is becoming a bigger issue people are rightfully going at the one company that is currently blocking it. It's probably just that simple.
Perfect example, yet people still don't get it, and say we're defending our fav company. At the end of the day whether your against it, don't care or care that doesn't matter what matters to Sony is what you posted above. So yeah people that care ,sorry cause your out of luck, ain't going to happen but you can keep tweeting and asking if that gives you hope.
And they are still this gen.....the part that is changing is that at xbox instead they opened the doors to all the others they have now crossplay with ninty and pc's and they invited Sony to do the same.....sony refused...theres nothing comparable with last gen
I'd say no chance. Microsoft is a service lead company these days, XBL is a constant and very publicly successful revenue stream. Maybe add value to it but not remove it for sure.
Yeah Microsoft never will change their used game policy either.
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see them either roll Gold into Game Pass or make it so if you buy Game Pass you don't need Xbox Live Gold. Doubt they will get rid of Xbox Live Gold completely.
Haven't you seen the news prior to this thread? Fornite is coming to mobile, and I'm pretty positive that Switch can hold at least a decent candle to what runs mobile platforms.
You're being obtuse. Going by your logic then simply having a walled garden system, which Switch, PS4 and Xbox One all are, is anti-consumer. It doesn't benefit anyone but the platform holder as it keeps players locked within their eco system, as do exclusive games. Are they also anti-consumer?
Is Microsoft being anti consumer for not releasing games on Steam? Is Sony anti consumer for making you pay for PS Plus? Is Nintendo anti consumer because their solution for in-game voice chat is awful? Because none of those benefit consumers either, just like Sony's reluctance to allow cross play between PS4 and their direct competitors platform.
The quality of discussion in these topics is awful. "I don't like X thing so it's anti consumer, and if you say otherwise you're a corporate shill" is effectively what it always boils down to.
I can't reiterate enough how I don't support what Sony is doing here. What bothers me is that the word anti-consumer is thrown around way too much by emotionally charged era members and detracts from nuanced discussion. Wasting my time anyway. I'm out.
If Amazon offers free shipping and Walmart charges $20 per package, how is the latter not anti consumer?
I would say a lot has changed since then, and Yoshida says similar things about the Switch and cross-play though we know Nintendo is for cross-play between consoles.
What's this supposed to mean? Xbox would have been DOA if it didn't change it, ps4 going strong and can't see Sony fucking up ps4 so bad this gen that they can't recover, they already selling atleast 80 million total by the end of the year, not having cross play isn't going to stop them, if anything I see it boosting their sales, if a group of 5 friends all have ps4 except of 1 I'm pretty sure that 1 would want to get one so he won't be left out online.
Last edited:
I am just curious would the same people who are so enthusiastically pushing for crossplay from Sony do the same if the roles were reversed.
Like ask yourself and be honest, if the Xbox One was market leader and Sony were being outsold 2:1 and begging for cross play because they need access to a larger player base and stop people from jumping onto the Xbox ecosystem, would you still be so supportive of the initiative or would you likely not care and move on?
Like ask yourself and be honest, if the Xbox One was market leader and Sony were being outsold 2:1 and begging for cross play because they need access to a larger player base and stop people from jumping onto the Xbox ecosystem, would you still be so supportive of the initiative or would you likely not care and move on?
So why come into these threads? Like why do any of you? It's always the same line "it's not a smart business decision" Yeah we know that and we know why none of this is an epiphany. People want this, devs want this so we make it known. What exactly is your purpose in these threads?
Yes? Why do people think this is all Sony haters. I think Sony has done so much more right this gen than Microsoft but this is not one of those times. I don't even own either console and as a PC player get to play with both but I'd love to see this artificial barrier gone as would many others on all sides.
Yeah that's when "Last-Gen" was a thing ... read the context of my quote.
I dislike how the word is thrown around too. We can thank YouTubers for this and their serious lack of understanding of what anti-consumer is, and that real anti-consumer practices break laws like anti-trust laws and anti-competition laws.
I'm explaining why it won't happen that's why I came in here just like people coming in here explaining why it should happen. I didn't say stop begging for it to not happen, so what's your problem?
So now we're saying companies that charge for shipping are anti consumer? Because I know many that ship for free, many that don't.
Yeah, I'm out of here for real. Christ on a fucking bike.
It's a product of this outrage culture that GAF so joyfully loved to indulge in, and Era seemingly following suit in. Do I want cross play and think Sony should stop being stubborn? Fuck yeah. Is it anti-consumer? No, not really.
Keep pushing for it, we should be. But going down the "it's anti consumer route" isnti going to get us anywhere, because it isn't.
Discussing the subject with more depth and nuance than knee jerk outrage isn't necessarily a bad thing, because there's obviously more to this topic than Sony simply hating consumers and/or Microsoft loving them or whatever.
Regarding what's best for us as customers, there's a lot of things that you could apply your logic to, eg paid online play, monthly subscriptions, microtransactions, games not being less than $60, exclusive games, exclusive marketing, exclusive DLC, digital first party exclusives not being cheaper, consoles no longer being sold at a loss at launch, physical toys tied to DLC, overpriced hardware and peripherals and so on and so on. Alas reality doesn't work like that does it? We don't always exactly get what's best for consumers, and there are generally business reasons for these things. This is no different, and stating the realities of these things makes someone no more anti-consumer than someone in another thread about these other things, stating why microtransactions, online subscriptions etc exist.
Last edited:
the "They're only interested in cross-play because they're not on top" is a deflection and misses the point. Once we can get cross-play between all the consoles then that genie can't be put back in the bottle no matter who 'wins' the next generation.
.
.
Yes. If the roles were reverse nothing would change. The market around us is full of multiplayer games and GaaS models where playing with lots of people is important. Battle royale games, this up and coming genre will thrive on it.
We know. We have always known. You almost sound as if you are gloating which makes me think why? Why don't you want this as well?
" So yeah people that care ,sorry cause your out of luck, ain't going to happen but you can keep tweeting and asking if that gives you hope."
Exactly. Nobody would want to walk back on such a monumental feature. Software sales would increase across the board, more subscriptions would be purchased to play the games, and timed DLC would probably be forced away as well. There's no negatives here.
Well my fault if you read my post and took it as hostile, I said what I said didn't mean to offend anyone we're all here to discuss the topic and I did, didn't mean it to be hostile since u took it that way.
Last edited:
Competition is the backbone of a free market. Microsoft know this, that's why they're constantly battling the EU in anti-competitive legal trials.
You can ask Sony to do this but it goes against everything that businesses believe make the current free market great. Competition is supposed to be best for the consumer too.
You can ask Sony to do this but it goes against everything that businesses believe make the current free market great. Competition is supposed to be best for the consumer too.
Same. Didn't mean to come off hostile either and it was more of a general statement than directly towards you.
MS is what
This is a fucking terrible post mate. Dont post anymore
This is a fucking terrible post mate. Dont post anymore
This whole situation reminds of the outrage that the ID@Xbox parity clause caused on message boards and social media when it would rear it's head when a particular game wouldn't come to the Xbox platform because of it.
Both anti consumer, both derided by developers and both would ultimately improve said gamers platforms and gaming time if they just went away.
To see people justify and defend Sony over this whilst trying to diminish and dismiss the counter argument is as sad as it is predictable.
Brand loyalty is a hell of a drug.
Both anti consumer, both derided by developers and both would ultimately improve said gamers platforms and gaming time if they just went away.
To see people justify and defend Sony over this whilst trying to diminish and dismiss the counter argument is as sad as it is predictable.
Brand loyalty is a hell of a drug.
Lol. To be honest I'm not sure what the people who keep calling others Sony apologists/defenders/whatever want from these threads. Do they actually want to discuss cross play or do they just want a thread to bitch about Sony policies?
You want to play fortnite with your PS4 friends? Buy a PS4! We won't give you the choice to buy a MS console instead.
That's what Sony thinks probably. But in that case they should change their "for the players" slogan...
MS is doing a good job in this part to appear like the good guy. But in the position of sony (actual leader console market) probably would act the same.
That's what Sony thinks probably. But in that case they should change their "for the players" slogan...
MS is doing a good job in this part to appear like the good guy. But in the position of sony (actual leader console market) probably would act the same.
Is it really that hard to understand that companies sometimes make decisions that they don't immediately and directly benefit from monetarily, simply to generate goodwill? Or that sufficient consumer outrage is sometimes capable of tipping the scales for companies to make those decisions rather than deal with the bad publicity?
I find it hilarious how corporate apologists in this thread don't even understand the basics of corporate decision making, and seem to believe the best decision for any corporation is always the one that benefits them economically in the short term. If it was that easy Ben Kuchera would be a hugely successful CEO.
And before that strawman is constructed, I'm not saying Sony would actually benefit more from allowing cross play (unlike many people in this thread, I don't claim to know what's best for Sony's interests in such a complex matter); I'm saying it's not nearly a clear cut, black and white situation, and having a discussion about it is absolutely legitimate.
Except this doesn't work because you don't need a PS4 to play the game with PS4 owners.
Also who even gives a shit about the optics.
Which is why people should stand up and vote with their wallets. Lootboxes like Battlefront 2 is what every company would love to implement with no backlash. EA went too far, they lost billions of dollars because of that move. And yet, nobody could argue that if it pushed through, it would have been insanely profitable and "great" for them. But it was shit for the players, so players fought back and won. Not sure we're suddenly so preoccupied with Sony's finances when discussing crossplay. Is the decision to block it hurting paying customers? Yes, very much so. In the case of Minecraft the entire game is crippled because of this. That is the only thing people should give a shit about: what's best for them. If everyone acted in the interest of businesses, we'd still have online passes, insanely OP lootbox systems, not to mention we'd never use sites like Amazon because they kill the mom and dad shops. But here we are.
Fine. Sony is Evil.
Don't play any Sony titles and sell your playstation4.
I just want to play God of Wars and Detroit ASAP. I don't care about why Microsoft focus on this every months. Maybe it's just because Microsoft has nothing to announce of its exclusives so that it has to put rubbish on Sony again to make its topic on the first page of this forum.
lol.
User was warned for thread whining.
I don't understand why we have another thread on this. Will we get why games are not cross play with every online game that has cross PS4-PC and Xbox-PC. Can I also vote for monthly why do we pay for online thread and I hate lootbox thread even if they are cosmetics.
I suggest we should have a OT
Why Sony doesnt do cross online OT
Lootbox are bad OT
Why are we still paying for online OT
I suggest we should have a OT
Why Sony doesnt do cross online OT
Lootbox are bad OT
Why are we still paying for online OT
?
It was a reply by Microsoft on twitter. They didn't push it to the face of any news outlets. If you don't care, why do you post in this thread?
And with this, you've invalidated any arguments you were making. This isn't a thread on exclusives, but on crossplay.
We had dozens of lootbox threads as well which greatly contributed to the lootbox outrage that almost killed Battlefront 2, that's making legal changes to prevent or regulate such standards in games, and that's pushing other developers to abandon their lootbox plans or to rework them in a much more consumer-friendly way. So they could make 10 threads a day and I'd support it if the endgame was Sony being forced into conceding cross-play, thank you very much. And yeah, feel free to fight for no online fees as well: I'm sure most of us would be fine without having to pay for it. No need to ask for permission to battle for something that is objectively better for consumers.