Support NeoGAF

[rakkadakka]

Lmfao holy shit

I wonder when Sony was suggesting this last gen if the MS fanboys were the same.

It's bad for MS so they shouldn't do it.

It's good for gamers period so every company should do it when possible.

 

[Head.spawn]

PS4 players paid for the game they are playing. They are still getting updates. The Bedrock engine is a free update that Sony chose not to receive. And I wouldn't complain about SE, I would complain to Microsoft. Because Microsoft's policies prevented it. Just like Sony's are now.

Has MS actually flatly stated that they aren't releasing the Bedrock update on PS4?

They could simply release a neutered version that:

1) Has no log-in...
2) Has no crossplatform play with GearVR, Android, Xbox One, Switch, iPhone, iPad, Windows 10 etc etc (this would require crossplay)
3) Has no common crossbuy account system (this would require a log-in)
4) Has no access to Realms servers (this would require a log-in and crossplay)
5) It would likely not receive updates at the same time as the base Bedrock versions, since it would be it's own specific codebase.

That last point of maintaining another codebase makes it sound like more of a hassle than anything, considering 4J is working on the standard version exclusively and Mojang is working on Bedrock (that emcompasses every other modern version). "Maybe" they could (possibly because I don't know), release a Bedrock version with 4k/HDR Pro update and release the Super Duper upgrade as a free DLC. That's a possibilty (unless I missed something). This theoretical version doesn't sound like a version to be excited for if you're a big Minecraft fan.

Either way, it looks absolutely bonkers to blame MS for this, Realms has required Xbox Live log-in for account purposes before it was ever even announced for consoles and before it even included Xbox One in on this.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I wasn't a fan of playing paragon with console players. They had to be carried. Maybe others had a different perception, but no way in heavier aim shooter games.

Certain other games would be tolerable.

 

[Liliana Eileen]

Good. The more noise made, the better.

 

[Jeff Freecss]

I wasn't a fan of playing paragon with console players. They had to be carried. Maybe others had a different perception, but no way in heavier aim shooter games.

Certain other games would be tolerable.

It will be interesting to see Soul like games with crossplay. That will even the odds.

 

[Head.spawn]

I wasn't a fan of playing paragon with console players. They had to be carried. Maybe others had a different perception, but no way in heavier aim shooter games.

Certain other games would be tolerable.

Paragon has mouse/keyboard support on PS4.

Even with a controller it plays fine... it's not like it's a twitch shooter or something, so control method is out the window. So maybe it's just that more experienced Paragon players meeting up with new players that made you feel that way.

 

[CookTrain]

It will be interesting to see Soul like games with crossplay. That will even the odds.

Invasions as far as the eye can see... all day... every... single... day...

 

[Shrennin]

Has MS actually flatly stated that they aren't releasing the Bedrock update on PS4?

As far as I know, they have not stated that definitely. However, I doubt Mojang will work on it. 4J may update the PS4 version with a lesser version of Bedrock eventually. Regardless, you're right, it's not Microsoft's fault that the PS4 is missing out.

 

[Decado]

As a PC gamer I'd like to have more crossplay fighters. None of the ones I'm interested in have this and thus I can't bring myself to devote time to these types of games.

 

[CookTrain]

As a PC gamer I'd like to have more crossplay fighters. None of the ones I'm interested in have this and thus I can't bring myself to devote time to these types of games.

With it coming to Steam, hopefully Killer Instinct is the starting pistol to more fighters spreading the love.

But as yet, we don't even know if that version will have cross play, which is frustrating.

 

[DataGhost]

Invasions as far as the eye can see... all day... every... single... day...

Turn off the online till you're super buffed and then invade others all day every day

 

[CookTrain]

Turn off the online till you're super buffed and then invade others all day every day

Didn't say it was a bad thing To me, my Blue Sentinels!

 

[Marty Chinn]

Saying "Ok, go for it" isn't bending over backwards.

This assumes that Sony has nothing to lose or risk by simply saying "Ok, go for it" which isn't the case. If they're going to lose projected sales over this without any gain, that's them bending over backwards to appease the consumer.

So you're saying Sony would allow Minecraft PS4 players to log into XBL to access its servers, where the update is required to access things like infinite worlds?

This is literally not Microsoft's fault that Sony won't accept a free update that includes consumer friendly features like CROSS BUY DLC that requires multiple systems to talk with each other.

I don't know if they would or wouldn't. It hasn't been tested to my knowledge. What has been tested and seems to be the result is Sony does not want cross play with Xbox One. That's the only thing that's clear at this time.

Nowhere did I suggest it's Microsoft's fault, nor should they have to bend over backwards and maintain a parallel version. Microsoft has every right to push back on this. However, some people here are yelling out that they only care as a consumer and couldn't give two shits about Sony's bottom line nor what the business implications are. By that same stance, one shouldn't care what it would take for Microsoft to update the PS4 version? Microsoft has the resources, Minecraft is a huge game, and there's no technical reason why it can't be done. It just doesn't make sense to devote the money and resources to do it.

The truth is, there would be no need for any special version if MS remained an outside party and let Mojang make the game server agnostic. Those conversations at the beginning of development must have been interesting.

As others have said, that wouldn't solve the cross play problem because the problem seems to come down to not wanting to play against Xbox One players. That's the barrier that needs to be overcome and no amount of planning or strategy would get around that.

What this really comes down to is just that. Sony does not want cross play with Xbox One and the primary reason is most likely due to financial and business reasons. It's not about whether you disagree with Sony or you think it's good for everyone else. Those things really aren't in dispute for the most part. The point that needs to be addressed is what needs to be done to convince those financial and business interests do not outweigh the financial hit they feel they would currently get by supporting it. They need incentive to change their mind and without that incentive, they're going to stay put.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Why isn't paragon on xbox then if he believes this?

I don't know why, but maybe because it's still in beta, and sony are allowing them to update the game whenever they need to (currently weekly patches, + maybe some surprise hotfixes). It seems like Epic doesn't need to run things through certification, or they have a direct line somehow to get their weekly patches through super fast. Adding Xbox would slow that way down if they couldn't get the same treatment.

 

[Shrennin]

I don't know if they would or wouldn't. It hasn't been tested to my knowledge. What has been tested and seems to be the result is Sony does not want cross play with Xbox One. That's the only thing that's clear at this time.

Nowhere did I suggest it's Microsoft's fault, nor should they have to bend over backwards and maintain a parallel version. Microsoft has every right to push back on this. However, some people here are yelling out that they only care as a consumer and couldn't give two shits about Sony's bottom line nor what the business implications are. By that same stance, one shouldn't care what it would take for Microsoft to update the PS4 version? Microsoft has the resources, Minecraft is a huge game, and there's no technical reason why it can't be done. It just doesn't make sense to devote the money and resources to do it.

That's the thing, Microsoft could eventually develop what they can for PS4. People should be caring that Sony is screwing over its customers who bought Minecraft. As Sony rejected the Bedrock update, which is what Mojang is dedicated to, the Minecraft version for PS4 is now continuing to be overseen by 4J who could eventually update the PS4 version to what they are able.

Microsoft may eventually contribute the resources to get the PS4 version to what they can without cross play (and its associated features/benefits) but the reason PS4 players won't get it in the foreseeable future is because of Sony.

The reason Microsoft isn't held to this the same way as Sony is simply due to the fact that Sony rejected it and Microsoft is still pushing for the update. It's not like Microsoft can instantly create a lesser version of its Bedrock engine for only PS4 players. They may have 4J eventually do that, but it'll take time.

Lastly, you shouldn't be arguing for Sony or trying to understand why Sony does this or that. You are a consumer. The only way Sony will change is if they see that consumers are willing to stand against them and then it becomes in Sony's best interest to comply. Otherwise, they won't.

 

[Lulubop]

yes

 

[Trup1aya]

I'm not thinking of the game itself. I'm thinking of the Xbox Live login.

Seeing the words "Xbox Live" on a PlayStation is damaging for the PSN brand.
It's why there are strict guidelines for game submissions that specifically say that you can't have hardware competitors branding anywhere in a PlayStation game.

I'm surprised that Nintendo would allow, though they might backpedal when it goes into Nintendo QA. Perhaps Nintendo are desperate to recover from the Wii U.

How does it damage the brand?

How does a consumer start to think negatively of "PlayStation" simply because one of the games they play uses Xbox live servers.

I think most customers would just be happy to know that they can play with their friends who are on Xbox, and think more highly of Sony for allowing it to happen. Customers who don't feel positively about it probably don't care at all.

Those who are such warriors that they'd view this as damaging to the brand probably don't play minecraft because they don't want to support an MS franchise.

 

[PSqueak]

"Sony is only losing by allowing crossplay. Instead of buying a PS4 to play with your friends, you can buy an Xbox and Sony loses a sale. Good on Sony for sticking to their consumer base."

People who say this also ignore the counterpart to this, for example:

If i want a PS4, but all my friends are on the Xbone, then im more likely to buy an Xbone so i can play with my friends.

If the PS4 allows cross platform, then i can afford to get a PS4 and still play with my friends.

 

[Shrennin]

People who say this also ignore the counterpart to this, for example:

If i want a PS4, but all my friends are on the Xbone, then im more likely to buy an Xbone so i can play with my friends.

If the PS4 allows cross platform, then i can afford to get a PS4 and still play with my friends.

And considering Sony's first party is much more diverse than Microsoft's, Sony has a competitive advantage there. I would actually think Microsoft would be against cross play more than Sony would have been.

 

[Lifeline]

What a weird stance for a gamer to take.

Yeah, I'm not a #TrueGamer for expecting my game to be kept up to date. Sorry for expecting too much from the poor indie devs Mojang and Microsoft and their small game called Minecraft.

Maybe I'll just go make some crossplay memes so I can call myself a gamer again.

 

[tzare]

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.

but Sony is not giving you less features than promised. Games on ps4 still play online, and some still have crossplay with pc.

As i said in another thread, this needs to be addressed as a whole by the industry and reach agreements everyone feels comfortable with, not like now in a case by case basis scenario.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

Yeah, I'm not a #TrueGamer for expecting my game to be kept up to date. Sorry for expecting too much from the poor indie devs Mojang and Microsoft and their small game called Minecraft.

Maybe I'll just go make some crossplay memes so I can call myself a gamer again.

Umm, you missed the first part of my post?

lol, you really are going all in on this one aren't you, even when it is being pointed out that your logic is flawed and incorrect.

But reading through this thread you seem to have a selective reading problem, in that you skim past all the parts where people show your logic is flawed and just ignore them to trot out the same incorrect viewpoint. Carry on though, this is quite amusing to see how its going to unfold next

 

[Shrennin]

Yeah, I'm not a #TrueGamer for expecting my game to be kept up to date. Sorry for expecting too much from the poor indie devs Mojang and Microsoft and their small game called Minecraft.

You have literally ignored every single explanation and argument proving why Microsoft is not at fault. I guess the fact that there is a studio dedicated to the PS4 version flew right by your head? I guess you expect Microsoft to instantly be able to develop a version specifically for PS4 that doesn't even have that many benefits without the platforms linking out of thin air because Sony was stubborn and said no as opposed to Nintendo, Google, and Apple?

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

*Snip*

In case you missed it on the other page...

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.

Don't worry dude. Your constant participation in these threads makes it Krystal clear how much you don't care.

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.

I gave the Wikipedia definition of crossplay as a general term specifically so that people wouldn't get hung up on just Minecraft and Rocket League. I wanted people to understand what crossplay becoming more of a standard could mean for everyone. The point was to encourage people to look ahead. As a community worker in my city I know how hard it is for a LOT of people to do that.

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.

This has already been explained to you so many times I don't want to waste my time doing it again.

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.

You where putting words in my mouth then and you are still doing it now. Let me show you and everyone else what actually happened...

I've made it pretty clear here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=241022859&postcount=701



You're right it's not anti-consumer at all to hold off features on a version of the game where your 3rd largest playerbase is, while charging the same amount.

Next year when CoD:WW2 holds off features on the Xbox One, it won't be anti-consumer either right?



I don't know why you are so obsessed about the features I'm interested in. Am i only person playing Minecraft on PS4? I've already told you multiple times, I don't care about Minecraft at all.

Just because I don't personally care about the game, doesn't mean that it's okay too hold off features for the millions of people that paid full price for it on the PS4. That's as anti-consumer as it gets. If this was any other company in any other situation, everyone would be calling it anti-consumer.



Right because holding off Minecraft features for the third largest playerbase of Minecraft benefits the consumers.

It absolutely does benefit more people if it pushes Sony to enable crossplay. EVERYONE but Sony, a corporation, would win in that scenario.

But I actually don't think it would even be that bad for them like I said earlier,

Even if it bites them later. It's up to consumers to make things like this as standard as possible if we like it even when it might not be the most beneficial thing for whatever company isn't on top.

Thing is, Sony might not be on top forever, so eventually this may benefit them just as much as it would MS, Nintendo etc now and vice versa.

When looked at this way, this is actually a good thing for the industry as a whole.

Genius argument. Let me just go tell all the kids that bought Minecraft that even though they're stuck with a inferior version they paid the same amount as everyone else, they should be happy. This is good for them.

They should be grateful that Microsoft isn't updating their games with these new features in the off chance that Sony changes their mind and the few people that wanted cross play get it.

Wow, what a pro-consumer move.

That's not at all what I said but ok.

What you could do though since you seem so keen to help is tell the kids about this cool pro consumer thing called crossplay that enables gamers from outside of the island to be able to play with them too. To complain to Sony so that crossplay can benefit them and EVERYONE else as well. This only makes life easier for everyone. Devs included.

Also, MS isn't the only one who wants crossplay for goodness sakes.

You'll notice that not once did I say that kids should be happy that they are not getting the features.

This seems to me to be a case of confirmation bias.

Seriously some weird ass shit.

You got that right.

 

[pureplayin2]

I don't feel it is Sony's responsibility to increase/inflate MS' player base for multiplayer games. If they want Sony to join in, MS should be paying Sony a fee for their subsidy to Xbox's player base. IF Xbox gamers can't find mp matches then they know what to do- go get the console that has the player base, it really is that simple. But overall I do agree and in favor of cross-play and that FOR CERTAIN games cross-play is needed and a must.

 

[CookTrain]

I don't feel it is Sony's responsibility to increase/inflate MS' player base for multiplayer games. If they want Sony to join in, MS should be paying Sony a fee for their subsidy to Xbox's player base. IF Xbox gamers can't find mp matches then they know what to do- go get the console that has the player base, it really is that simple. But overall I do agree and in favor of cross-play and that FOR CERTAIN games cross-play is needed and a must.

Are you suggesting Minecraft needs a player count bump? Or Rocket League? Clearly that's not the motivation for these titles. That's our own speculation about the benefits for other titles.

 

[Gestault]

I don't feel it is Sony's responsibility to increase/inflate MS' player base for multiplayer games. If they want Sony to join in, MS should be paying Sony a fee for their subsidy to Xbox's player base. IF Xbox gamers can't find mp matches then they know what to do- go get the console that has the player base, it really is that simple. But overall I do agree and in favor of cross-play and that FOR CERTAIN games cross-play is needed and a must.

This is such a strange formulation for looking at the situation that I don't even know how to put together a response. Developers and publishers are requesting the ability to implement a feature they want, which benefits them and those playing their games.

 

[Lifeline]

You have literally ignored every single explanation and argument proving why Microsoft is not at fault. I guess the fact that there is a studio dedicated to the PS4 version flew right by your head? I guess you expect Microsoft to instantly be able to develop a version specifically for PS4 that doesn't even have that many benefits without the platforms linking out of thin air because Sony was stubborn and said no as opposed to Nintendo, Google, and Apple?

How does any of that go against what I said? There being another studio working on updates doesn't change the fact PS4 isn't getting these features. Mojang isn't some small indie studio that can't afford to keep the PS4 up to date.

These excuses you are coming with are on par with Sony's "for the kids" excuse.

Keep pretending that I'm ignoring explanations and that you've successfully proved that this is not an anti-consumer move. In reality you have not.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I agree, not doing so is an anti consumer move.

But does Sony care about that above keeping their online ecosystem advantage?

It'll be interesting to see what eventually happens if anything

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Yeah, I'm not a #TrueGamer for expecting my game to be kept up to date. Sorry for expecting too much from the poor indie devs Mojang and Microsoft and their small game called Minecraft.

All I'm going to say is it's odd that this is your ultimate take away from this whole situation.

 

[Shrennin]

How does any of that go against what I said? There being another studio working on updates doesn't change the fact PS4 isn't getting these features. Mojang isn't some small indie studio that can't afford to keep the PS4 up to date.

These excuses you are coming with are on par with Sony's "for the kids" excuse.

Keep pretending that I'm ignoring explanations and that you've successfully proved that this is not an anti-consumer move. In reality you have not.

So Sony shares no responsibility for this, in your mind?

And again, you ignored the fact that Mojang is developing a singular version. Microsoft could bring the PS4 as up to par as they can with 4J. Mojang can't just instantly develop a version for Sony right away as soon as they refused.

In reality, Microsoft's Bedrock version is essentially a new version of Minecraft that Microsoft is giving to platforms for free. The PS4 version won't change and it has always been overseen by 4J. As a previous poster basically stated, Sony opted out of Minecraft 2, essentially. Sony is the one being anti-consumer. Not Microsoft in this instance.

 

[btrboyev]

Cross play is awesome, but the only drawback is not being able to communicate.

If MS and Nintendo made party chat available accords platforms, that would be a game changer.

 

[FX-GMC]

How does any of that go against what I said? There being another studio working on updates doesn't change the fact PS4 isn't getting these features. Mojang isn't some small indie studio that can't afford to keep the PS4 up to date.

These excuses you are coming with are on par with Sony's "for the kids" excuse.

Keep pretending that I'm ignoring explanations and that you've successfully proved that this is not an anti-consumer move. In reality you have not.

Pro-consumer: Everyone who owns X game can play together

Anti-Consumer: If you own X game on our platform you can't play with people on other platforms that also own this game while they can all play together.


This really isn't that hard. You just have to look at it from the perspective of a consumer instead of a stooge.

 

[NeonBlack]

"Sony is only losing by allowing crossplay. Instead of buying a PS4 to play with your friends, you can buy an Xbox and Sony loses a sale. Good on Sony for sticking to their consumer base."

Actually the argument used was that Sony would have to put more effort into testing online an less effort into making games.

What sense does that make? Hell if I know.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

It will be interesting to see Soul like games with crossplay. That will even the odds.

I think most people play souls games with controller though, even on PC.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Doesn't look like he's calling out Sony here ¯_(&#12484_/¯

Because he's secretly hoping Microsoft is the problem.

Hoping he's not holding his breath.

I don't feel it is Sony's responsibility to increase/inflate MS' player base for multiplayer games. If they want Sony to join in, MS should be paying Sony a fee for their subsidy to Xbox's player base. IF Xbox gamers can't find mp matches then they know what to do- go get the console that has the player base, it really is that simple. But overall I do agree and in favor of cross-play and that FOR CERTAIN games cross-play is needed and a must.

Your post would almost look credible if the 2 games that are the face of cross weren't the 2 games with 2 of the biggest player bases in the world on console.

 

[Inuhanyou]

He hates MS so I am not surprised he thinks MS is the reason there is no crossplay.

From the perspective of a PC oriented game dev, i would hate MS too if they were largely responsible for Windows segmentation of the market and XBL on PC for years. I mean it doesn't make them any less guilty of all their previous anti consumer moves all over their company just because their game division supports crossplay between consoles now

Its the same kind of thing that happens when Sony comes out with a new product, will they drop it like a hot potato if it doesn't get a certain amount of success? That's because they have a habit of doing that in the past

 

[Lifeline]

So Sony shares no responsibility for this, in your mind?

And again, you ignored the fact that Mojang is developing a singular version. Microsoft could bring the PS4 as up to par as they can with 4J. Mojang can't just instantly develop a version for Sony right away as soon as they refused.

Never said that either. I've said from the beginning I want them to do crossplay.

That doesn't mean i'm okay with getting a gimped version of Minecraft that i've paid the same amount as everyone else. If only crossplay was missing, sure I would just be against just Sony. But there's features unrelated to crossplay that are being held off too.

We've known about Sony's position on crossplay for a while. I think the most successful game in recent history could afford to release an update for the PS4 too. If they have intentions to bring all of these features to PS4 eventually, they could always just announce it.

Pro-consumer: Everyone who owns X game can play together

Anti-Consumer: If you own X game on our platform you can't play with people on other platforms that also own this game while they can all play together.


This really isn't that hard. You just have to look at it from the perspective of a consumer instead of a stooge.

Anti-consumer: Charging the same amount as other versions of the game while delivering less features after you've already bought the game.

Ya know, This really isn't that hard. You just have to look at it from the perspective of a consumer instead of a stooge.

And before you say it, no these features were not blocked by Sony. Because not all of these features require Crossplay, which was blocked by Sony.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

From the perspective of a PC oriented game dev, i would hate MS too if they were largely responsible for Windows segmentation of the market and XBL on PC for years. I mean it doesn't make them any less guilty of all their previous anti consumer moves all over their company just because their game division supports crossplay between consoles now

Well I guess it's good to see people still wary of Sony over root kits and $599 right?

 

[Shrennin]

Never said that either. I've said from the beginning I want them to do crossplay.

That doesn't mean i'm okay with getting a gimped version of Minecraft that i've paid the same amount as everyone else. If only crossplay was missing, sure I would just be against just Sony. But there's features unrelated to crossplay that are being held off too.

We've known about Sony's position on crossplay for a while. I think the most successful game in recent history could afford to release an update for the PS4 too. If they have intentions to bring all of these features of PS4 eventually, they could always just announce it.

Microsoft is probably focusing on the Better Together update and plans to update 4J's version with things like the graphics pack are probably not determined yet. The entire engine is built into this singular vision. It's not a simple process to remake it just for PS4 when every other Microsoft competitor found that the way Microsoft is handling this is perfectly fine. The issue you have should rest solely on Sony. We never knew definitively what Sony's stance on cross play was aside from that they would have to think about it when Psyonix tried to get it for PS4. Now it's known that Sony is a definitive "no" and others including Nintendo are fine with it.

Microsoft, contrary to what you believe, doesn't give its gaming division unlimited resources. They do have a budget.

It's still clear that you either don't get or refuse to accept that the engine is built in with cross play. There is no separate version right now that Mojang can just get ready. Sony refused the update. Period.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Well I guess it's good to see people still wary of Sony over root kits and $599 right?

I mean, those things are not really the same thing considering the crossplay situation right now is in line with other online control measures MS have introduced in the past like DRM, like segmenting their online market place from other PC markets, and windows ect.

Can we really consider Sony making an expensive game machine and getting rid of Linux the same thing?

People are rightly wary of Sony's online infrastructure now because of their history of hacks(from anything to individual customers accounts being hacked, to the huge hack years ago), i think that's more in line of what your saying. I also think people are rightly wary about Sony's support for non mainline console machines due to vita, vita TV, PSPGO, PSX, and other similar failures they have had that they have pulled without warning.

 

[FX-GMC]

Anti-consumer: Charging the same amount as other versions of the game while delivering less features after you've already bought the game.

Ya know, This really isn't that hard. You just have to look at it from the perspective of a consumer instead of a stooge.

And before you say it, no these features were not blocked by Sony. Because not all of these features require Crossplay, which was blocked by Sony.

They all require the Bedrock Engine which was tooled for cross-play. No cross-play, no bedrock update. See when Sony said they didn't want to be part of the update they chose that they would be on the 4J version of the game. Sony could have allowed their users to get the Bedrock version but since that version is made to work with all cross-play platforms going forward, non-cross-play versions get left behind.

Do you see where this was Sony's decision and they made the wrong one for the consumer?

I call that anti-consumer.


MS: "Hey Sony, we're cooking up a cool update to Minecraft. Here's what we want to do. Cross-Platform play, DLC, infinite worlds, graphics pack. Want in?

Sony: "No."

It was Sony's choice.

 

[TaterTots]

I have yet to see one logical reason from anti cross play posters as to why it should not be implemented. However, I do see a lot of, "this only benefits MS" posts, which says it all. Believe it or not, you are not at war with the other consumers who purchased another video game system. We could all play together and have fun.

 

[BetterCallSauls]

Since I can't create my own topic; What do you guys think will be hurdles with potential cross play?

Would only hosted games be able to utilize cross play? Having peer to peer might be an issue with two different versions of the game.

How would voice chat work? Both systems that have readily available chat(PS4/XB1) use their own proprietary network for in game chat. From a tech perspective how would they solve that issue?

 

[Dineren]

The idea that Sony multiplayer games would receive no benefit is crazy. I've had to solo old content in Destiny on the PS4 because there weren't people available playing that particular strike and that is one of the most popular games on the platform.

There are plenty of games with large populations that have unpopular modes that would benefit as well as games that didn't attract a large population in the first place. There is no downside as a consumer.

Since I can't create my own topic; What do you guys think will be hurdles with potential cross play?

Would only hosted games be able to utilize cross play? Having peer to peer might be an issue with two different versions of the game.

How would voice chat work? Both systems that have readily available chat(PS4/XB1) use their own proprietary network for in game chat. From a tech perspective how would they solve that issue?

Connections between different versions of the game won't be a problem since the developer can check that themselves (and presumably they would push updates at the same time if they broke compatibility). Voice chat and parties are currently a non-issue since as far as I know it isn't being implemented in current crossplay games. I believe text chat is available though. Currently the only purpose of crossplay is to increase the matchmaking pool.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

I have yet to see one logical reason from anti cross play posters as to why it should not be implemented. However, I do see a lot of, "this only benefits MS" posts, which says it all. Believe it or not, you are not at war with the other consumers who purchased another video game system. We could all play together and have fun.

I mentioned my guess above somewhere, and many people brought up communication between cross play players. Some games also don't allow you to disable cross play so don't expect them all to enable it.

My post http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=241434666&postcount=237

Controller advantage is a big one. Switch for a FPS could edge out Xbox with the gyro aim controls (if it's anywhere near as good as steam gyro though no track pad). I used that on PC with Steam Controller and PS4 Gyro (which PS4 games don't seem to have as an option especially for fine aiming) and it's really good.

 

[CookTrain]

Since I can't create my own topic; What do you guys think will be hurdles with potential cross play?

Would only hosted games be able to utilize cross play? Having peer to peer might be an issue with two different versions of the game.

How would voice chat work? Both systems that have readily available chat(PS4/XB1) use their own proprietary network for in game chat. From a tech perspective how would they solve that issue?

In the near term, I'd think the best option for cross platform chat would be rolling out Discord to everything, but obviously that's just a near term thing. Once the first moves start being made, more robust systems can be put in place in time.

The biggest hurdle will always be adoption by developers. A lot will see it as preferential to divvy up their user base for balance reasons, for business reasons, for pretty much the same reasons as Sony. Hopefully it becomes enough of an expectation in time that that diminishes though.

 

[Marty Chinn]

That's the thing, Microsoft could eventually develop what they can for PS4. People should be caring that Sony is screwing over its customers who bought Minecraft. As Sony rejected the Bedrock update, which is what Mojang is dedicated to, the Minecraft version for PS4 is now continuing to be overseen by 4J who could eventually update the PS4 version to what they are able.

Microsoft may eventually contribute the resources to get the PS4 version to what they can without cross play (and its associated features/benefits) but the reason PS4 players won't get it in the foreseeable future is because of Sony.

No disagreement here at all.

The reason Microsoft isn't held to this the same way as Sony is simply due to the fact that Sony rejected it and Microsoft is still pushing for the update. It's not like Microsoft can instantly create a lesser version of its Bedrock engine for only PS4 players. They may have 4J eventually do that, but it'll take time.

No disagreement here either.

Lastly, you shouldn't be arguing for Sony

Don't disagree here as well.

or trying to understand why Sony does this or that. You are a consumer. The only way Sony will change is if they see that consumers are willing to stand against them and then it becomes in Sony's best interest to comply. Otherwise, they won't.

This is where I disagree. I think we all should try to understand how things work rather than turn a blind eye to that. So many discussions happen simply because people don't take the time to understand or aren't willing to understand why things work. Ignorance is never good IMO, and it weakens the discourse on the subject. It's also contradictory to not want to understand why things are done, when you elaborated above why it's not so easy for Microsoft to simply offer a PS4 version with the update. By the same token, I should throw out and not consider all the things you said above, which I agree with, as to why it's not so easy for MS to put out an updated version.

Understanding why something happens doesn't mean that a person agrees or supports the action. The only way Sony will change is if there is a benefit to them to change course from their current action. I completely agree that if people want this, they need to stand up, make their voices heard, but there also needs to be action that follows up with that. Simply saying you want something isn't good enough unless it has some sort of effect that is going to make things worse for Sony. The best way to give them a reason to change course, in my opinion, is to start with understanding what is holding them to that stance and then to focus on action where they'll feel it. I already feel like the outrage has died down a lot since last week and Sony is just going to ride the storm.

 

[AmFreak]

Well I guess it's good to see people still wary of Sony over root kits and $599 right?

Yeah selling a >$800 device for $500-600 for sure is on the same level as shipping a rootkit on a Music-CD or Microsoft's huge and endless history of bullshit.

 

[jonscrambler]

That doesn't mean i'm okay with getting a gimped version of Minecraft that i've paid the same amount as everyone else..

I don't understand this concern. PS4 Minecraft (and other console/mobile branches) are already gimped versions, they are missing features/mods that's on PC and behind in versions and various limitations (no servers/smaller world), been that way since the game launched and have been since.