• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Synth

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,212
Honestly Minecraft is wholly off my radar... I have never owned it and not played a moment. I have nothing against it just never been a big Sim/Management/World building fan. Also style of the game doesn't interest me. (just a full disclosure)

And I'm not dismissing the twitter posts in the least but cmon they are more antagonizing then they are welcoming. Just saying if that's how I was being approached to agree to something that doesn't really benefit me I'd say "Sit on it"

Yes Sony should opt for it from a consumer standpoint, and there's tons of things that all platform owners do that really irks me... I have plenty of gripes with Sony be name changes, PS1 emulation, the way they handled the Vita, the ability to not communicate better with fans, terrible horrible customer support, and an inability to fund 1st party JRPGs for the last two console gens...

I just tend to comment from common sense and not what I'd like. There's a lot of things I'd like but I'm realistic and know what is and isn't really logical from a business standpoint...

The Twitter posts are antagonizing because Sony in this topic are the antagonist. They don't use aggressive language, just simply "we would want it to be crossplay". Without that, people would still be trying to claim MS was the holdout (which people were selectively doing for Fortnite right up to yesterday). Behind-the-scenes attempts at negotiation have clearly happened for a long time before it gets to the point of us being made aware. No different to Bethesda mods and EA Access. Epic didn't just get up on the TGA stage and rant about not being able to crossplay between consoles without actually attempting to make it happen privately first.

Your disinterest and/or ignorance of Minecraft and the situation surrounding its crossplay is squarely on you if you're going make claims that MS haven' or tried doing "legitimate business" with Sony. They publish the biggest game on the planet on their hardware and offered crossplay and feature parity with the latest version of the game. Sony disallowed it. "Oh, I don't really care for Minecraft" has no bearing on your previous statement of:

let's see MS try to do any kind of cross promotion or deal with Sony that just fair to both and then let's see if Sony is the same stick in the mud... then I'd fault them... then I'd scoff at for the players...

... this already happened, Sony was already the "stick in the mud" regardless, and you still hold the same position.
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
Cross-play is a thing Devs are interested in and gamers should be interested in too for their own benefit. Platform holders should allow it if a dev asks for it. We are not talking about cross-play for all games but we talk about games where mutual interest is expressed by Devs and gamers (and platform holders). To have that option benefits us, I don't understand that there is such a debate and all of the sudden some members of this forum became company representatives to defend one platform holder blocking it.
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,624
Canada
Because Nintendo and everyone else in the world knows that you dont buy a Nintendo Console to play cross platform games.
NES's are delivery systems for Nintendo software.
Playstations and Xboxs have less bankable 1st party games so they are more geared towards 3rd party support.

Soo Nintendo is ok with opening up the gates because basically the large selling point of Nintendo hardware is Nintendo Software.
Sony is not ok with opening up the gates because The popularity of the Console is because it is this generation's default Console. Your friends have one.. so it forces you to buy one if you want to play with friends. Cross Platform completely eliminates this need. And it would be impossible to stop the flood gates.. if you open up Xplay for one game.. it will have to be for all

Me personally.. I think this generation is done.. Sony has already won.. They should just open up the flood gates.. and they can force Xbox users to buy PSN+ if they want to get into the PSN network... or some other type of hurdle like that.
No single console is bought for 3rd-party games alone. If that were the case, they'd be considered wholly interchangeable.
Speaking of interchangeable, where does that leave the PC that Sony likes to play nice with in all of this? Are they not concerned about benefiting the PC market that relies ENTIRELY on 3rd-party games? Do these mythical PS4-owning friends not own PCs to play these games on? Statistics say they more than likely do. So if you want to play with friends, the obvious choice is to just buy it on PC since it has the largest cross-play user base, no?

This is the danger with that line of thinking, on top of the fact that a new generation is coming, with no guarantee of being the "default". What happens then? Does the next generation-winning console suddenly opt out of cross-play because it's no longer convenient for them? Does Sony opt in and make an admission that it doesn't command the market anymore, given everyone's statement that this was the motivation for opting out in the first place?

It's short-term thinking in the highest order.
 

Caliaztec

Member
Oct 27, 2017
854
Palm Desert,CA

Omg at least read the rest of the posts before snipping and blowing out a bad analogy that got read into...

See my post from earlier. If you can name a reason why Nintendo's hot-selling (read: on track to being #3 best-selling hardware ever) platform absolutely needed to do cross-play while Sony didn't, you might have something there. So you can't conveniently say "practical business sense" when another business that has equally less to gain went ahead and did it anyway. Until that's addressed, your point doesn't hold an ounce of fluid.

Damn totally had a decent post but fiddled fingers on phone...

Basically to summarize because I have to be up for work in 6 hours...

Switch is selling great but it's still following up from the mostly massive failure that is WiiU(Side note own every console ever, owned WiiU and Switch and own just about all major games for all platforms...) so Nintendo needs to build all the good will they can and let's be honest being the stick in the mud, and being stubborn with things has hurt them in the past more then any of the three IMO.

And while Switch is selling amazingly it still has years to go and much more work to do before it reaches or exceeds the PS4 but if Nintendo continues to make great games and good decisions it could happen agreeing and being open to crossplay helps that success completely.
 
Dec 4, 2017
11,481
Brazil
If this move would benefit Sony's bottom line, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The PS4 userbase is a valuable asset that Microsoft wants access to. They have everything to gain. The reverse simply isn't true.

It's simple business under the hood here, and acting like it's about bad guys, good guys, 'arrogance' and pro- / anti-consumerism is hilariously naive. If the tables were turned you'd be likely doing the same futile fist-waving at Microsoft here.

"Xbox Live delivers the best entertainment experience unmatched by anyone else, with 35 million actively engaged members. We have a high level of expectation for our game developers to ensure that all Live experiences remain top notch. Because we can't guarantee this level of quality, or control the player experience on other consoles or gaming networks, we currently do not open our network to games that allow this cross-over capability."

https://kotaku.com/5813740/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-360-but-you-wont
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,624
Canada
Omg at least read the rest of the posts before snipping and blowing out a bad analogy that got read into...



Damn totally had a decent post but fiddled fingers on phone...

Basically to summarize because I have to be up for work in 6 hours...

Switch is selling great but it's still following up from the mostly massive failure that is WiiU(Side note own every console ever, owned WiiU and Switch and own just about all major games for all platforms...) so Nintendo needs to build all the good will they can and let's be honest being the stick in the mud, and being stubborn with things has hurt them in the past more then any of the three IMO.

And while Switch is selling amazingly it still has years to go and much more work to do before it reaches or exceeds the PS4 but if Nintendo continues to make great games and good decisions it could happen agreeing and being open to crossplay helps that success completely.

So it's good PR for Nintendo and makes a difference, but Sony opting out and the bad PR it generates is insignificant and makes no difference on the whole, am I understanding you right? So why is PR points applicable in one instance but not the other?
 

methane47

Member
Oct 28, 2017
879
No single console is bought for 3rd-party games alone. If that were the case, they'd be considered wholly interchangeable.
Speaking of interchangeable, where does that leave the PC that Sony likes to play nice with in all of this? Are they not concerned about benefiting the PC market that relies ENTIRELY on 3rd-party games? Do these mythical PS4-owning friends not own PCs to play these games on? Statistics say they more than likely do. So if you want to play with friends, the obvious choice is to just buy it on PC since it has the largest cross-play user base, no?

This is the danger with that line of thinking, on top of the fact that a new generation is coming, with no guarantee of being the "default". What happens then? Does the next generation-winning console suddenly opt out of cross-play because it's no longer convenient for them? Does Sony opt in and make an admission that it doesn't command the market anymore, given everyone's statement that this was the motivation for opting out in the first place?

It's short-term thinking in the highest order.

Ummmmm
See Below.

"Xbox Live delivers the best entertainment experience unmatched by anyone else, with 35 million actively engaged members. We have a high level of expectation for our game developers to ensure that all Live experiences remain top notch. Because we can't guarantee this level of quality, or control the player experience on other consoles or gaming networks, we currently do not open our network to games that allow this cross-over capability."

https://kotaku.com/5813740/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-360-but-you-wont

Boom

Microsoft would flip flop on crossplay the MICROSECOND it would negatively affect their bottom line.
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,624
Canada
Ummmmm
See Below.



Boom

OK, and that proves Microsoft was against it in the last generation. It's not like Sony was jumping up and down to make it happen when MS said no. And none of the platform holders were on-board for it in that generation, as you may recall. Hell, a lot of games didn't even have cross-play to the PC versions in that generation. Your "gotcha" post isn't what you think it is.
 

Aokiji

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,265
Los Angeles
"Xbox Live delivers the best entertainment experience unmatched by anyone else, with 35 million actively engaged members. We have a high level of expectation for our game developers to ensure that all Live experiences remain top notch. Because we can't guarantee this level of quality, or control the player experience on other consoles or gaming networks, we currently do not open our network to games that allow this cross-over capability."

https://kotaku.com/5813740/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-360-but-you-wont
No no, angelic MS does what's best for gamers lol
 
Dec 4, 2017
11,481
Brazil
Ummmmm


Microsoft would flip flop on crossplay the MICROSECOND it would negatively affect their bottom line.
This shows how things can change 6 years, 8 months, 22 days later

OK, and that proves Microsoft was against it in the last generation. It's not like Sony was jumping up and down to make it happen when MS said no. And none of the platform holders were on-board for it in that generation, as you may recall. Hell, a lot of games didn't even have cross-play to the PC versions in that generation. Your "gotcha" post isn't what you think it is.

imagine if MS allowed the first game to have a crossplay ps3-xbox360, how many others would rise. And remember that ps2 had crossplay with pc long before.
 

Starlatine

533.489 paid youtubers cant be wrong
Member
Oct 28, 2017
30,421

Nanashrew

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,328

RedRum

Newbie Paper Plane Pilot
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,365
I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but in regards to that Kotaku quote people keep throwing around..

Can you, in the least, blame MS for not wanting CP at that time? A few months earlier, PSN cracked under one of the biggest fucking breaches concerning gaming at the time.
 
Dec 4, 2017
11,481
Brazil

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but in regards to that Kotaku quote people keep throwing around..

Can you, in the least, blame MS for not wanting CP at that time? A few months earlier, PSN cracked under one of the biggest fucking breaches concerning gaming at the time.


MS "killed" PC/Xbox cross-platform play

Because PC gamers were too good.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ms-killed-pc-xbox-cross-platform-play

In this case it would be very simple to make as a option, like Gears 4 today. I have even friends that were destroyed by pc gamers playing gears online.
The thing is, Psn or PC, when they had the biggest network, crossplay was a no-no.
 
Last edited:

Nanashrew

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,328
I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but in regards to that Kotaku quote people keep throwing around..

Can you, in the least, blame MS for not wanting CP at that time? A few months earlier, PSN cracked under one of the biggest fucking breaches concerning gaming at the time.
Yeah, I remember that. Had to change credit card information because of that huge breach and excessively long outage.

And for anyone that needs a refresher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_PlayStation_Network_outage

At the time of the outage, with a count of 77 million registered PlayStation Network accounts,[7] it was one of the largest data security breaches in history.[8][9] It surpassed the 2007 TJX hack which affected 45 million customers.[10] Government officials in various countries voiced concern over the theft and Sony's one-week delay before warning its users.
 

Arkaign

Member
Nov 25, 2017
1,991
See my post from earlier. If you can name a reason why Nintendo's hot-selling (read: on track to being #3 best-selling hardware ever) platform absolutely needed to do cross-play while Sony didn't, you might have something there. So you can't conveniently say "practical business sense" when another business that has equally less to gain went ahead and did it anyway. Until that's addressed, your point doesn't hold an ounce of fluid.

Nintendo isn't really all that much in competition with Sony or MS. Switch is in a realm mostly of its own, and can only benefit by having crossplay especially in these early couple of years where there are much fewer users than PS/XB. Crossplay gives their new owners more of a community in games that otherwise might not have all that many players.

This isn't to say that it would be nice if Sony was fully open on Xplay, but it's not really a big deal in the big picture, never has been. For every few thousand games, one or two will have some form of crossplay. That's not a coincidence, that's the whole desire for walled gardens, and for market leaders to protect their business interests.

I mean, paid online for console? The whole reason that exists isn't because they couldn't do it for free, it's because they can squeeze their customers for an extra 50-60 bucks a year and people just go along with it. Hell, we know one company that mandates that paywall even for free to play games.

They_dont_care_about_you_at_all

(They = all corporations). They care about themselves and their shareholders only, full stop, no exceptions.
 

headspawn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,619
Ummmmm
See Below.
Boom

Microsoft would flip flop on crossplay the MICROSECOND it would negatively affect their bottom line.

Boom? The context people keep ignoring is that this article was made and the quote from MS is coming right off the back of PSN getting hacked and being shutdown for an entire month and it otherwise being pretty terrible security-wise throughout the entire company before and after this.
 

RedRum

Newbie Paper Plane Pilot
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,365
MS "killed" PC/Xbox cross-platform play
Because PC gamers were too good.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ms-killed-pc-xbox-cross-platform-play

In this case it would be very simple to make as a option, like Gears 4 today. I have even friends that were destroyed by pc gamers playing gears online.
The thing is, Psn or PC, when they had the biggest network, crossplay was a no-no.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/203559/answered_did_microsoft_kill_cross_platform_play.html
 

Starlatine

533.489 paid youtubers cant be wrong
Member
Oct 28, 2017
30,421
Nintendo isn't really all that much in competition with Sony or MS

This argument keeps appearing and it never makes sense. Switch is a videogame console like the other videogame consoles and fight for the same market. They're not targeting the leftovers of X1/PS4 and their increased efforts in getting the same third party from them only reinforces that. The idea that nintendo is allowing crossplay because "they're not competing with the rest" is ludicrous. If anything they're accepting it exactly to compete even more.
 
Dec 4, 2017
11,481
Brazil
funny thing is all mentions of "angelic MS" comes from strawmens like yours, because i'm surely not seeing anyone else saying that here



don't be kray-kray its all a PR stunt still

*pulls FFXIV post from 2013 again*

Only know I understood the reference lol

"
https://kotaku.com/final-fantasy-xiv-isnt-coming-to-xbox-because-of-a-sil-723669207
Yoshida isn't okay with that.

"The policy has not changed on Microsoft's side," Yoshida told RPGSite. "The main reason from our side is that I don't want the community to be divided; to be split into two or more. For example, one player might be on the PC version, another might be on the PS4 version, and I'm playing the Xbox version - but we're not able to join the same game servers. That is just... I just don't like the idea. I disagree with it.

"To be frankly honest with you, there are now so many mobile devices, smart phones, everything — why would you ever just stick to one platform from the hardware aspect? Just — make it open to everyone? That's my opinion."

Boom. Funny enough, Square's last online game, Final Fantasy XI, was actually cross-console on PS2, PC, and 360. But for whatever reason they can't make it happen this time around. At least not yet."
 

IIFloodyII

Member
Oct 26, 2017
23,979
Also, I'd say PC is far more of a threat to PS competition wise, than Xbox is at this point. Sony don't care about sharing with that platform, they just don't want to play nice with Xbox for whatever reason.
 

Nanashrew

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,328
Honestly, if Nintendo wasn't seen as competition like PC supposedly is, there's a lack of Switch/PS4 cross-play too.
 

Arkaign

Member
Nov 25, 2017
1,991
This argument keeps appearing and it never makes sense. Switch is a videogame console like the other videogame consoles and fight for the same market. They're not targeting the leftovers of X1/PS4 and their increased efforts in getting the same third party from them only reinforces that. The idea that nintendo is allowing crossplay because "they're not competing with the rest" is ludicrous. If anything they're accepting it exactly to compete even more.

Don't shoot me, our very own Mat from NPD has said this repeatedly. Switch is a blue ocean product. XB/PS/PC owners buy switch, Nintendo fans buy switch, mobile only buyers buy switch, but switch hasn't affected sales of PSXB.

So if you want to say that, you're basically saying Mat from NPD is full of shit lol. He is in the best place to know. It's a very different kind of product, and yes of course their decision to allow crossplay is beneficial to them as a business decision, just as Sony refusing benefits them, just as MS charging Gold for FTP benefits them.
 

Starlatine

533.489 paid youtubers cant be wrong
Member
Oct 28, 2017
30,421
Don't shoot me, our very own Mat from NPD has said this repeatedly. Switch is a blue ocean product. XB/PS/PC owners buy switch, Nintendo fans buy switch, mobile only buyers buy switch, but switch hasn't affected sales of PSXB.

So if you want to say that, you're basically saying Mat from NPD is full of shit lol. He is in the best place to know. It's a very different kind of product, and yes of course their decision to allow crossplay is beneficial to them as a business decision, just as Sony refusing benefits them, just as MS charging Gold for FTP benefits them.

Oh, now that's interesting. I really want to see this quote of yours from Mat and the context behind it, because i know him as well and i doubt he would ever say the switch is fighting for leftovers and not making a dent on x1/ps4 sales at all
 

Arkaign

Member
Nov 25, 2017
1,991
Oh, now that's interesting. I really want to see this quote of yours from Mat and the context behind it, because i know him as well and i doubt he would ever say the switch is fighting for leftovers and not making a dent on x1/ps4 sales at all

Leftovers?? When did anyone say that? It's just a unique product line that serves a market previously untapped, and increases reach to families and Nintendo fans.

It's a brilliant thing, not a thing feeding on scraps. Hell just look at any port thread or announcement for switch multiplats, people in droves saying they will rebuy Skyrim, Doom, Rocket League, Dark Souls, etc, or double dip for a new release.

If you really want, all you have to do is look up the NPD threads over the past year, he's noted it specifically over and over :

All three have been selling exceptionally well, and Nintendo's success isn't denting PS4 or Xbox YOY to any calculable extent.

Edit : one example of Mat's quotes even made it to an article

https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/dami...r-xbox-one-as-both-are-still-at-record-sales/
 

RedStep

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
2,652
The point being missed by the people playing "Shareholder Meeting: The Thread" is that it's better for the games.

10 years from now if you want to fire up some Black Ops 3, it will be much better if a) it works on your new console and b) you can play with the full pool of people that also want to play a 10-year-old game at that time.

We've been spending a lot of time talking about preserving games here - being able to actually play multiplayer down the line (instead of sitting on "Looking for Match" for an hour) could be a huge boost to that.

It starts with the big popular games that don't really need it, but it will benefit all kinds of titles if we can get it off the ground.
 

GamerEra

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,096
Don't shoot me, our very own Mat from NPD has said this repeatedly. Switch is a blue ocean product. XB/PS/PC owners buy switch, Nintendo fans buy switch, mobile only buyers buy switch, but switch hasn't affected sales of PSXB.

So if you want to say that, you're basically saying Mat from NPD is full of shit lol. He is in the best place to know. It's a very different kind of product, and yes of course their decision to allow crossplay is beneficial to them as a business decision, just as Sony refusing benefits them, just as MS charging Gold for FTP benefits them.
The kind of games PS/XB gamers play just aren't on Switch. It's just not a replacement for a majority of these gamers. It never will be for many obvious reasons.

Nintendo is likely open to crossplay because they're coming from a position of weakness in the online department.
 

DrDeckard

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,109
UK
People are bringing up articles about the 360 from what? Almost ten years ago. Did satya Nadal run the company then? Did Phil Spencer run Xbox then?

People in here acting like a country changes presidents but will follow suit and change their policy to ones from ten years ago in the drop of a hat.

Just a hint times a changing and adapt or die. If microst chipped up this much about Cross play then turned coat they'd be finished.

The lengths people are going to try and defend this are insane. Like nothing can change from the past.
 

Starlatine

533.489 paid youtubers cant be wrong
Member
Oct 28, 2017
30,421
Leftovers?? When did anyone say that? It's just a unique product line that serves a market previously untapped, and increases reach to families and Nintendo fans.

It's a brilliant thing, not a thing feeding on scraps. Hell just look at any port thread or announcement for switch multiplats, people in droves saying they will rebuy Skyrim, Doom, Rocket League, Dark Souls, etc, or double dip for a new release.

If you really want, all you have to do is look up the NPD threads over the past year, he's noted it specifically over and over :

All three have been selling exceptionally well, and Nintendo's success isn't denting PS4 or Xbox YOY to any calculable extent.

Edit : one example of Mat's quotes even made it to an article

https://www.kitguru.net/gaming/dami...r-xbox-one-as-both-are-still-at-record-sales/

I still don't see how this disproves my point of switch still being part of the same market to xbox and playstation and how crossplay affects them the same way as it affects others, which you initially quoted? But i found the quote you were refering, though:

There is no "ripple effect" of Switch success. It's having no discernible impact at all on the sales curves of either PS4 or Xone. There is absolutely zero evidence in the data that the Switch is acting as a direct competitor to these other boxes.

Oh, and generations as they've been known in the past are a thing of the past.

Which is why i asked for context, and in the same page people were speculating how long would it take for switch to take over xbox place and stuff like that. Mat's point, unless i'm grossly misinterpreting it, was to reaffirm how well the three consoles are selling (as a result of the market being healthy enough to comport all three) and how this picture will not change in the next months. But the very fact that he still mentions the three consoles in each of his sentences and his follow up post of:

Eh, that's a very different question though, and one that was not asked.

I think the Switch will certainly reaffirm or suggest to the other mfgs that people want their content available to them whenever they may like to engage with it.

Seems to make clear its still competition for the same public with direct influence on the other products, as previously stated. Guess we'll agree to disagree on this one.

The kind of games PS/XB gamers play just aren't on Switch.

Which is exactly what they are trying (and in some ways succeeding) to change. Not the move of someone pulling out from competing with others, au contraire.
 

Jumpman64

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
550
Nothing to gain monetarily perhaps. Coexistence/harmony > money. Let's think bigger. Let's advance.


Lol why? They are a company that makes money, that is the sole purpose. The end game at Sony is to make a profit, same with Microsoft. Microsoft only is allowing it because they can only gain money off of it, not lose.

Does anyone remember that Microsoft Xbl games policy with xbox360?


I get what you are saying and it would be cool if they all played together, but it would be incredibly incredibly stupid for Sony to do it and risk their install base.

We won't have unity probably till one console manufacturer wins and then we have the other companies release software or software subscriptions like a video game Netflix on the one console
 

GamerEra

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,096
Which is exactly what they are trying (and in some ways succeeding) to change. Not the move of someone pulling out from competing with others, au contraire.
They're not though. The Switch 1st party is pretty typical Nintendo stuff. There's a third party port here and there but overall 3rd party support is still weak.
 

Arkaign

Member
Nov 25, 2017
1,991
I still don't see how this disproves my point of switch still being part of the same market to xbox and playstation and how crossplay affects them the same way as it affects others, which you initially quoted? But i found the quote you were refering, though:



Which is why i asked for context, and in the same page people were speculating how long would it take for switch to take over xbox place and stuff like that. Mat's point, unless i'm grossly misinterpreting it, was to reaffirm how well the three consoles are selling (as a result of the market being healthy enough to comport all three) and how this picture will not change in the next months. But the very fact that he still mentions the three consoles in each of his sentences and his follow up post of:



Seems to make clear its still competition for the same public with direct influence on the other products, as previously stated. Guess we'll agree to disagree on this one.



Which is exactly what they are trying (and in some ways succeeding) to change. Not the move of someone pulling out from competing with others, au contraire.

"There is absolutely zero evidence in the data that the Switch is acting as a direct competitor to these other boxes."

I mean, is that not perfectly clear? It's incredibly straightforward.
 

Starlatine

533.489 paid youtubers cant be wrong
Member
Oct 28, 2017
30,421
"There is absolutely zero evidence in the data that the Switch is acting as a direct competitor to these other boxes."

I mean, is that not perfectly clear? It's incredibly straightforward.

...read the rest of my post. Context matters. Go read the page where Mat said that.

There's a third party port here and there but overall 3rd party support is still weak.

Third party support is already stronger than previous nintendo consoles even with such a short life and perspective for the future is getting better. Support for the switch not only in ports but in technology to make such ports more feasible in the future is already a huge step ahead from the WiiU and it shows.

I can talk about sales here in Italy in the second biggest country brandshop ..the audience target that nintendo have is different from Sony/Ms one...and is clearly younger and parents drived..and if you add that the switch is more a handheld than a home console ...I can agree to a certain level that they are not competing this much

It's 2018, folks. Time to drop the "nintendo is for kids and parents buying for their kids". Nintendo themselves already published their findings and we had a thread about it
https://www.resetera.com/threads/nintendo-shares-gender-and-age-breakdown-of-us-switch-buyers.2852/

switchdemographicsqcue6.png


But i feel this isnt being related to the threads subject by a long mile now so lets take it somewhere else to avoid everyone being warned and stuff.
 
Last edited:
Nov 12, 2017
2,877
This argument keeps appearing and it never makes sense. Switch is a videogame console like the other videogame consoles and fight for the same market. They're not targeting the leftovers of X1/PS4 and their increased efforts in getting the same third party from them only reinforces that. The idea that nintendo is allowing crossplay because "they're not competing with the rest" is ludicrous. If anything they're accepting it exactly to compete even more.
I can talk about sales here in Italy in the second biggest country brandshop ..the target audience that nintendo have is different from Sony/Ms one...and is clearly younger and parents drived..and if you add that the switch is more a handheld than a home console ...I can agree to a certain level that they are not competing this much
 

CountAntonio

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,723
This thread is embarrassing. The facts are that RIGHT NOW Sony is the ONLY one against this. That's what this topic is about. Stop defending, stop deflecting, stop bringing up shit from nearly decade ago that has no more relevance and frankly stop embarrassing yourselves. Sony doesn't pay you and crossplatform is a great thing every GAMER should want. If it was Microsoft blocking it would be Microsoft getting shit for it especially on this forum where it get's shit for pretty much everything else.
 

Arkaign

Member
Nov 25, 2017
1,991
...read the rest of my post. Context matters. Go read the page where Mat said that.



Third party support is already stronger than previous nintendo consoles even with such a short life and perspective for the future is getting better. Support for the switch not only in ports but in technology to make such ports more feasible in the future is already a huge step ahead from the WiiU and it shows.

I did, there's zero evidence from Mat that he considers the switch a threat to the PSbox, or vice versa. They simply serve different markets, and it's part of Nintendo's brilliance in finding this untapped market in the first place.

You seem to be taking this as some slight against Nintendo or the switch, when in fact it's just the opposite. PS4 and XB are largely interchangeable devices. Set top boxes for mega multiplats, Blu-ray, home streaming, etc. Switch is vastly, and I mean VASTLY different. Yes, a handful of games are the same, but let's be honest, Mario, Zelda, Kart, Smash etc is never coming to PSbox, and Anthem, RDR, God of War, Forza etc are never hitting switch.

Some gamers will buy both, but next to nobody is buying one instead of the other, at least not long term, and absolutely not reflected in the raw, inarguable data, which Mat explained unbelievably clearly.

I think you hear "Nintendo isn't competing with PSbox" as also meaning "because it sucks or whatever" when in fact it's just an advantage. SonyMS can't hurt Switch, and vice versa. Some console warriors will claim so from both sides, but again, that isn't reflected in the reality of the sales. Sure one could point to X1 declining YOY, but it's been on a pretty stable if flat trajectory for longer than Switch has been even revealed.
 

Garrett 2U

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,511
It puzzles me as to why folks are posting articles, interviews, and anecdotes from 8+ years ago as some sort of gotchya or equivalence to this situation.
Acting as if the brand, leadership, and ecosystem of Xbox hasn't changed in almost a decade.

You'd imagine that after all the Xbox 180 jokes, the gaming community would agree that Xbox has changed a lot since Phil Spencer took charge.
 
Nov 12, 2017
2,877
Nothing man .we LL wait till next gen when(if) Sony falls behind in console sales and they too will change this policy ;) so just be patient.
To be honest I truly understand Sony I said it already and i repeat I don't think Ms is interested in Sony for Crossplay more than to use this as a PR ammo.
But some of you are right ..time pass and leadership and manager change and with it change also the way how a company work..think and behave
..with Nadella/Spencer is more than clear that they aren't looking or following anymore Sony and their business model.
This thread is particularly interesting because show out people and show how the benefit of a company become importants when this company produce your preferred piece of hardware or you are set in in their ecosystem. This thread and customer behaviour is interesting when they justify the company who is using their marketshare to keep the competitors down. Luckly in the console market all the competitors are healthy enough. But with Nintendo going all in on handhelds ...Ms merging their two platforms pc and console creating an exclusive integration of the two that can be done only by them and Sony following their standard console gen vision .....next years will be very very very interesting
 

Bitsmurch

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
325
User Warned: Drive-by, platform-wars rhetoric.
Why would the market leader invite the market bottom feeder to it's party?
 

Arthands

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
8,039
Its rather childish to bring up shits from many years ago to deflect what is happening here. Suppose Microsoft is against it, so what? They are pushing it now, its what matter and this means Microsoft is taking a step forward and should be praised.

And if Microsoft is doing it to sell consoles, so what again? This action also help push the industry forward and benefit all gamers and align with what gamers want, so there's nothing wrong with it.
 

Deleted member 9317

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
9,451
New York
The other topic about requiring XBL for F2P titles just made me rethink Microsoft's stance is pretending to be on an even play field and other folks stating how PS3 online was free so it didn't make sense for MS to allow Crossplay back in the old gen.

Maybe Microsoft needs to even the field and not aim to leech; make F2P games truly free to play, MS.
 

DongBeetle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,017
Imagine being so in love with a multimillion dollar company (who only seeks to profit from you and doesn't give a shit about you) that you would actively fight to make your gaming experience worse to protect the deep deep pockets of their highest executives. I guess I was 17 at one point too though.

Fucking disgusting. ALWAYS fight for better treatment for consumers!