Ploid 3.0
Member
I wish, we will have new versions of old games forever. Though thankfully on PC the new versions of games are free upgrades sometimes (Skyrim SE if you had Skyrim + all of it's dlc).
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Tim Sweeney "All platforms should embrace cross-play; it benefits everyone"
- Thread starter ArtHands
- Start date
I wish, we will have new versions of old games forever. Though thankfully on PC the new versions of games are free upgrades sometimes (Skyrim SE if you had Skyrim + all of it's dlc).
Well that's sort of moot as in this case, the Minecraft update is free for all participants.
So much agree with Sweeny. I avoid serveral mp games a year because I main PC and my friend only play on PS4. if I could play with them I'd own Destiny, Fifa, BF, and several other games. I have one PC gamer friend and only spend MP in Overwatch basically due to lack of people to pay with. Plus I actually avoid games that I don't trust the userbase on PC like TF2. If I knew the console gamers were there I would have picked it up last Christmas.
WaterAstro
Member
Logically, it doesn't benefit Sony, who has the biggest playerbase, to help its competitor have a bigger pool of players to play with, especially with Minecraft where it is literally is supporting the Microsoft ecosystem.
For us, consumers, it's great.
For us, consumers, it's great.
Sad Affleck
Member
Some joke probably flew over my head but I don't get it. I'm being honest.
lmao, man that is so true. The more i see these threads and how the people respond in it, the less I care about this "movement". I said I supported crossplay, but didn't expect a business to help out it's biggest competitor. Got called an anti-consumer fanboy.
I like that the main thread about crossplay on this forum talks about how if you make memes and complain, you'll get cross save which isn't even on the table. Not even Microsoft or Nintendo are talking about doing crossave with their games. Read like one of those BS infomercials.
These guys care so about anti-consumer practices, but don't think it's anti-consumer that Microsoft is blocking features on the PS4 version of Minecraft while charging the same amount as other versions.
The same guy that wrote that main thread told me that kids should be happy that they're not getting these features and I should tell kids who want these features on PS4 (which don't require crossplay) about how cool crossplay is and tell the kids to go complain to Sony.
Seriously some weird ass shit.
Ploid 3.0
Member
But it isn't for Xbox 360, PS3, WiiU, Vita, and PS4. So upgrade is necessary. Also Final Fantasy XIV ditched new expansion support for PS3 recently, those players had to move to PS4 or PC if they want the latest expansion, normal.
Only one of those consoles is a current gen console though. But hey ho, it is what it is
The Jackdog
Member
couldnt i take that same argument and say, if i have a console and PC, and one console supports cross play and one doesnt with PC, but my friends are all on one and i want the best version, im getting the one with cross play?
perfectsil
Member
He's right, let's go
Yearsoflurking
Member
you're in all of these threads of course you care; rather that be defending anti consumer policies or being against them. you care.
It's probably related to people who feel his thoughts and fears on Windows and UWP are nonsense. For whatever reason, perhaps because Microsoft is one of the large console platform-holders, it's often referred to as a joke here. Of course, they'd be wrong.
As for cross-play, I agree. I don't think it's the strongest way to increase the lifespan of online games, that would be through allowing player-hosted servers and a server browser, but it's a significant benefit for a lot of online games.
it didn't mention any platform at all, it just mentioned crossplay and leaderboards. I've just checked their website and it doesn't specify anything but "crossplay and leaderboards", the platforms they list for the game are PS4, Xbox One, Steam, PlayStation VR, Vive and Oculus. They're all listed as crossplay but there's no mention as to what the means across the different platforms.
So true. If MS blocks it makes sense. IF sony blocks, anti consumer.
Also... anti consumer..... this is not anti consumer, at most is not pro consumer which is a different story. But hey, what do i know.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Only one of those consoles is a current gen console though. But hey ho, it is what it is
Yep, unless something changes PS4 is lumped in with the other platforms that don't get the new Minecraft. I doubt it's about old vs new gen. Phone/tablet version is updating.
Yes, you could, and you should. Don't settle for a version that's inferior if you can help it. That's why Digital Foundry, and such comparison/benchmarking content is so popular. I sure look for the best cost to performance ratio when I'm buying things, especially PC parts.
Mr Moose
Member
Only one of those consoles is a current gen console though. But hey ho, it is what it is
Poor Wii U, always gets left out.
I found it interesting that he said good for Nintendo but failed to mention MS, as if they are doing cross play with themselves
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
I know it's been explained to you multiple times why cross play is integral to the Better Together update. It's there to unify the player base with cross play, cross buy, parity updates, infinite worlds. The only thing where cross play isn't integral is with the graphics pack, but that's linked with the Bedrock engine, which is linked with cross play. Sony is blocking it, Microsoft is not going to make a special version of the engine just for Sony when many of the engine's features wouldn't even be working.
GuitarAtomik
Member
This is true. They'll look really hypocritical if it's not.
Lol. You must not have been on this board when people were talking about this stuff during the 360 days. This couldn't be further from the truth.
It is anti-consumer and who says it makes sense if MS blocks it?
Every company should support this, which is why it's a big deal when only one doesn't. We could have Tekken 7, Minecraft, and Rocket League supporting crossplay. That is awesome IMO.
Yes let's all be considerate to the billion dollar companies, that always goes well.
Yearsoflurking
Member
why should us as consumers care, it's on microsoft/sony to figure that out not us
If that were the case Sony wouldn't publish minecraft on PS at all.. 70% of those proceeds go to MS anyway and Minecrafts population is massive w/o Sony.
i was around here and never seen people as annoyed as now. Maybe i am wrong, but there were some simultaneous threads a few days ago.
Also not talking about MS in the past ( could you provide some links to some of the threads debating this in the past? btw) , but them deciding to lock ps4 from updates just because they decided that their unified server is the way to go.( btw they can do what they see fit if that makes sense for them, the same goes for sony though)
The Albatross
Member
There are no compelling arguments against it, only fanboyism.
GuitarAtomik
Member
They aren't deciding to lock the PS4 version from the updates, Sony is. The bedrock update is part of the better together update, which is what Sony is denying.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
Good thing the PS4 is still getting updates. It just won't have the Bedrock engine and features, graphics pack, and parity updates (updates that occur simultaneously on Bedrock engine platfoms).
Even taking this example at face value, it's a scenario that lets someone buy the platform they prefer, while still letting them connect to players they want to interact with online. They still want to buy and play the same game. You're advocating a situation where friends are being, effectively, forced to buy something they wouldn't otherwise, with the way you're phrasing it.
Cross-play makes online games more appealing to buy, regardless of platform. Every publisher wants that, and every player wants that. Platform-holders are still getting their cut of every piece of software sold. Rather than an ecosystem lock-in constricting buying habits, its easier for buyers to choose games and hardware based on underlying quality. That's a better buying environment, and will encourage better products in the long-run. This creates a stronger market, and is implicit in what Sweeney's saying.
The idea that Sony would want a situation where more people arbitrarily buy their platform doesn't matter. No one but Sony cares about that. Every platform holder would like people to only buy their product. Cross-play doesn't put any company at a disadvantage. It's a net-positive, all around. Part of the reason developers/publishers seem more outspoken this time around is that the technical and practical considerations are finally ironed out.
You keep saying this, don't realize none of these features REQUIRE crossplay.
Microsoft charging the same amount for the game, taking the same amount of profit from the game, but lowering the feature set is more "anti-consumer" than whatever Sony is doing. Atleast Sony didn't sell you on the PS4, promised it'll be kept up to date on features and then stopped updating it.
Crossplay isn't built into the graphics engine, it's not built into the new features. You can do a infinite worlds sever without crossplay and you have the new graphics without crossplay.
If you think Microsoft shouldn't pay for PS4 updates, then why do you think Sony should support their #1 competitor and do crossplay.
You're okay with one company screwing over the people who bought their product, but are calling the other one out for anti-consumer practices.
It's this hypocrisy that makes this movement not feel sincere.
Ploid 3.0
Member
There was a poster that mentioned their friends play on different platforms than PC. The poster would like to play games like Overwatch, Battlefield 1, and some other games with them with cross play. And for a lot of the games listed I was thinking, no. A fighting game, sure, a racing game ok, but shooters?
In the alternate reality with all games support crossplay, I wonder how the control options would balance out.
New Thread
"Which system is best for All Consoles Shooter IV? Swtich, Xbox, or PS4."
I would put my money on Switch with some gyro control fine aiming. It's amazing with steam controller, even PS4 controller can do it on Steam Controller API. More games should use it on console.
Edit: I currently play a lot of Paragon on PC. I know console players have a disadvantage when they play ranged characters. PC players can't see who's playing on console though, and even then PS4 players can hook up a mouse and keyboard so it's not easy to know if they are disadvantaged or not.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
So cross buy between platforms, parity updates that occur simultaneously between platforms linked with each other, infinite world servers to accommodate the cross play aren't working in tandem with each other? Why should Microsoft create a special version of the engine when the engine's purpose is unification and simplification? PS4 is still getting updates. It just won't be a Bedrock engine platform.
The only thing that's not required is the graphics pack. The only company screwing over customers is Sony.
Something making sense to a business, and something being anti-consumer are hardly conflicting concepts... MS using their market position in the 90s to fuck over pretty much any competing software made perfect sense if we were going to bat for them on an online forum about why "it makes sense for them to want to maintain their advantages", but I'd be surprised to hear any arguments for Internet Explorer 6 being beneficial to end-users. It made perfect sense why Sony and EA would want to charge $10 for an online pass, for anyone that bought a used game... or why they and Nintendo keep reselling you games you've already bought digitally on their other platforms... or why MS threw Netflix and the like behind an Xbox Live subscription... and so on. Yes, there are arguments for why it makes business sense (along with counter-arguments, which often lead to these decisions being reversed over time), but they're barely worth any consideration at all unless that company is paying you to defend their honor.
I don't even tend to have an issue with people holding an unpopular stance on a subject (I have many opinions that GAF finds indefensible), but you should at least be able to argue why you should care about a decision, rather than why it's best for the billion dollar company.
Oh, and MS took plenty of flak for not supporting crossplay previous, because much like PS4 Minecraft missing out on the new update features, the 360 lost out on Final Fantasy XIV in its entirety (despite the concept demo being demonstrated on MS' stage at E3). If there's more noise about the subject today, then it's likely because Sony were previously indicating that they would be fine with crossplay with Xbox. They held that position right up to the point where MS was all like "ok, fine, let's do it", before revealing that they were basically chatting shit. Now with Nintendo on -board also, universal crossplay feels closer than it ever has in the past, casting more of a light on the lone hold-out.
So you think Microsoft should pay to maintain PS4 only Minecraft servers instead of just making all Minecraft servers available to all platforms and keeping those who don't want in, off the BT update?
Keep dreaming.
*Slow Clap*
wasn't this explained to you ad nauseum in other threads? I don't feel as if you're posting in good faith considering that. no matter how many times the details are explained to you you keep trotting out the same nonsense
No, the PS4 version will still receive updates, just not updates enjoyed by the bedrock versions.
Also the infinite worlds servers are being run on MS' servers, so they will likely require a sign in still. If they were to go that far, they might as well allow crossplay as well.
You basically want MS to create an entirely different version specifically for the PS4 because Sony denies the bedrock version they were offered?
Also if Sony gets a special version you can bet Apple and Google ask for one. That kills a big driver to spend a ton of money to develop this update. This is 100% on Sony and you can bet they will get large backlash when the update comes.
One of the biggest gaming franchise in the world can't be bothered to pay for PS4 updates. They can't be bothered to make updates for their 3rd largest playerbase even though they still charge the same amount and profit off them.
In this same thread all of you want Sony to lose their playerbase advantage, lose the money they get from being the "place where your friends are". You want Sony to act against their own business and strengthen their competitors.
But you think it's crazy to expect features that all other versions of the game get when you paid the same amount.
No it wasn't and you can keep pretending it was, but that doesn't change anything. The argument always boils down to it's okay that Microsoft is removing features while the people saying it are too ignorant to see their own hypocrisy. Not arguing in good faith is getting all up in arms about anti-consumer practices and then going ahead and supporting it when someone else does it.
Bullshit. Microsoft is adding features here for the platforms that want their players to have a better experience. Nothing MS is doing with Minecraft is anti-consumer. Maybe anti-Sony-Stockholder.
Please tell me which advertised Minecraft PS4 features are missing from the game. What specifically did the Playstation store tell you would be in the game that isn't there? Nothing. You got what you paid for.
Your're not getting some free QoL updates because Sony didn't want you to have them.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
THEY ARE STILL GETTING UPDATES. The Bedrock update facilitates all platforms on MS hosted servers for cross buy DLC between platforms, cross play, updates between platforms that occur simultaneously, and infinite worlds hosted on MS servers (that you would log into XBL to access).
I don't know how you aren't getting this. Did you criticize Square Enix when they wouldn't bring FFXI over to Xbox because Microsoft didn't allow cross play then?
Yeah, tell the kid that buys Minecraft for the same price as everyone else that him not getting the features everyone else is, is good for them.
Yup you should be happy kid that you can't have the new graphics engine, unless you're a stock holder or an anti-consumer fanboy, suck it up.
Oh yeah, Sony totally denied the new graphics pack and servers. Pretty sure they only said no to crossplay.
If they brought it over, charged full price, then stopped adding features that were being added on the other platforms, fuck yeah I would complain. So would you.
Seems about right at this point.
Back on topic, has anyone heard anything about Fortnite in this regard? The proof of the pudding is in the crossplay.
Tell Sony to let them have the features. MS said they wanted PS4 players to have the updates. You just gotta be able to play on the same servers everyone else will be playing on. Sony doesn't want you playing on the same servers as everyone else = Sony doesn't want that feature parity for their players.
Sony is the only reason the PS4 kid isn't getting the features. Sony is now making kids sad. And you're proud of Sony for it. Shame