Support NeoGAF

[Three]

OK, then you answer it. What is the empirical evidence of the commercial value that can be attributed specifically to cross-play? Can you asnwer it? No you cannot because crossplay is a fan service much like BC and remote play. He knows this and wants to make it a point while not engaging in the topic because he never wants to put himself out there. A cowardly approach. It's much easier to not get involved, which is why Sony gets away with their stance on crossplay and blocking Fortnite accounts from being universal. Sony now thinks it is their property once it's connected to PSN while doing a shitty job explaining to their userbase why their position is the best option.

No offense but I'd rather not go round in circles.
I can't answer it because THERE IS NONE. What don't you get? People are asking YOU for the answer outside of 'that's nice of sony' or 'fan service'. Yet you keep deflecting with nonsense. You keep bringing up remote play but remoteplay made sense, it was in Sony's ecosystem, it boosted Vita sales by 68% it was used to try and boost Xperia sales.

Yet you can't come up with a single reason why they should do crossplay with consoles outside of 'fan service'. A service that benefits competition more than it does them. Companies don't do things because it's nice. You seem to understand that because you keep mentioning the reason MS didn't enter the VR market is because it isn't commercially viable. So why isn't that a service or feature some like to have, why don't they just do it to appease people? How's that for deflection?

People are asking you specifically what do Sony gain other than 'that's nice' and possibly losing sales? you don't have an answer for it, accept that and don't deflect.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

No offense but I'd rather not go round in circles.
I can't answer it because THERE IS NONE. What don't you get? People are asking YOU for the answer outside of 'that's nice of sony' or 'fan service'. Yet you keep deflecting with nonsense. You keep bringing up remote play but remoteplay made sense, it was in Sony's ecosystem, it boosted Vita sales by 68% it was used to try and boost Xperia sales.

Yet you can't come up with a single reason why they should do crossplay outside of 'fan service'. A service that benefits competition more than it does them. Companies don't do things because it's nice. You seem to understand that because you keep mentioning the reason MS didn't enter the VR market is because it isn't commercially viable. So why isn't that a service or feature some like to have, why don't they just do it to appease people? How's that for your dose of deflection?

People are asking you specifically what do Sony gain other than 'that's nice' and possibly losing sales? you don't have an answer for it, accept that and don't deflect.

Here's the only reason you need, the developers want to impose it. Can you not grasp that? Can you not comprehend Sony is being regressive all out of spite? Can you not fully endorse such a notion that all platforms having crossplay is better than the select few THEY think is best for you? No, instead you too want to be a coward and not get involed or poke the bear while towing the line. If that's the case then buh bye. I guess you have nothing to gain or nothing to lose, so why be involved here? You are too cowardly to not be involved in the broader sense, which is telling Sony they are being asshats. Instead we see others policing the forums questioning fellow gamers when it does not impact them. So it's a win win for Sony. Not only do they get away with bully tactics (holding third party accounts as hostage, not crossplay) they also have supporters who run around on the forums putting out the flames, all while telling everyone they don't care about it.

 

[Three]

Here's the only reason you need, the developers want to impose it. Can you not grasp that? Can you not comprehend Sony is being regressive all out of spite? Can you not fully endorse such a notion that all platforms having crossplay is better than the select few THEY think is best for you? No, instead you too want to be a coward and not get involed or poke the bear while towing the line. If that's the case then buh bye. I guess you have nothing to gain or nothing to lose, so why be involved here? You are too cowardly to not be involved in the broader sense, which is telling Sony they are being asshats. Instead we see others playing policing the forums questioning others when it does not impact them there either. So it's a win win for Sony. Not only do they get away with bully tactics (holding third party accounts as hostage, not crossplay) they also have supporters who run around on the forums putting out the flames, all while telling everyone they don't care about it.

I'm not being cowardly I'm just telling you that this is the reason. Also all that talk you gave about 'echochamber' then you say why am I here if I'm not supporting your cause? I'm here giving you realisitic input on the topic at hand. Not anymore though so as you put it 'buh bye'.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

I'm not being cowardly I'm just telling you that this is the reason. Also all that talk you gave about 'echochamber' then you say why am I here if I'm not supporting your cause? I'm here giving you realisitic input on the topic at hand. Not anymore though so as you put it 'buh bye'.

Put it this way, if you have no effort in change and think the situation now is fine by you then cool, that's your choice. But don't come after me for speaking my mind, you cannot have it both ways. Why tell me you don't care about crossplay then question my issues with Sony's position, because all that is doing is enabling their position.

 

[Clear]

Louis... you really need to be an adult about this. Sony considers the userbase size of their online service to be a one of its key selling points over its competitors. However CCP somewhat devalues that exclusivity, whilst simultaneously being distinctly beneficial to MS and Nintendo's offerings.

Sony aren't going to surrender what they see as a commercial advantage just because a relative minority moan about it on the internet! Especially when the only material reason for complaint is when they have bought into one of the competitor offerings, and as such shouldn't necessarily be considered a primary PSN user.

From their position there is no upside. Especially when it sets a precedent where third-parties publishers can consolidate their profits at the expense of the platform holder by making them serve content purchased from an external source ecosystem.

Its obvious why Sony have taken this approach, and frankly why you are wasting your time complaining about it.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

OK, then you answer it. What is the empirical evidence of the commercial value that can be attributed specifically to cross-play? Can you asnwer it? No you cannot because crossplay is a fan service much like BC and remote play. He knows this and wants to make it a point while not engaging in the topic because he never wants to put himself out there. A cowardly approach. It's much easier to not get involved, which is why Sony gets away with their stance on crossplay and blocking Fortnite accounts from being universal. Sony now thinks it is their property once it's connected to PSN while doing a shitty job explaining to their userbase why their position is the best option.

LC, as I have been saying and repeating over and over again if you want to convince me that crossplay has real value and is hurting Sony then some combination of the following needs to happen over the holiday:

1. Sony needs to get outsold by Xbox and/or Switch.
2. Fortnite numbers need to increase on other systems while they decrease (or remain stagnant) on Sony's system.
3. For shits and giggles we'll just say a major publisher boycotts the Sony platform in protest (For the record, this will never happen in case anyone is dumb believe it could)

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Thats the evidence I will need to see before I think Sony should reconsider their stance on crossplay.

In the mean time Sony should continue to remind everyone that they do not require a PS+ subscription to play Fortnite on their system.

Personal prediction: 1 could happen depending on BF prices and deals from Switch and/or Xbox. I don't believe for one second that 2 has any chance of happening. 3. No.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Sony aren't going to surrender what they see as a commercial advantage just because a relative minority moan about it on the internet! Especially when the only material reason for complaint is when they have bought into one of the competitor offerings, and as such shouldn't necessarily be considered a primary PSN user.

That's the argument they completely ignore. The people who are making this argument are not the people who have any interest in Sony's system.

And not to mention Sony has another advantage that should have ended this entire conversation ages ago: Fortnite is free on their system.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Louis... you really need to be an adult about this. Sony considers the userbase size of their online service to be a one of its key selling points over its competitors. However CCP somewhat devalues that exclusivity, whilst simultaneously being distinctly beneficial to MS and Nintendo's offerings.

Sony aren't going to surrender what they see as a commercial advantage just because a relative minority moan about it on the internet! Especially when the only material reason for complaint is when they have bought into one of the competitor offerings, and as such shouldn't necessarily be considered a primary PSN user.

From their position there is no upside. Especially when it sets a precedent where third-parties publishers can consolidate their profits at the expense of the platform holder by making them serve content purchased from an external source ecosystem.

Its obvious why Sony have taken this approach, and frankly why you are wasting your time complaining about it.

Being an adult would be looking beyond themselves and actually allowing developers to fulfiull their vsiosn. If anyone is acting like a child not wanting to share their toys it's them.

LC, as I have been saying and repeating over and over again if you want to convince me that crossplay has real value and is hurting Sony then some combination of the following needs to happen over the holiday:

1. Sony needs to get outsold by Xbox and/or Switch.
2. Fortnite numbers need to increase on other systems while they decrease (or remain stagnant) on Sony's system.
3. For shits and giggles we'll just say a major publisher boycotts the Sony platform in protest (For the record, this will never happen in case anyone is dumb believe it could)

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Thats the evidence I will need to see before I think Sony should reconsider their stance on crossplay.

In the mean time Sony should continue to remind everyone that they do not require a PS+ subscription to play Fortnite on their system.

Personal prediction: 1 could happen depending on BF prices and deals from Switch and/or Xbox. I don't believe for one second that 2 has any chance of happening. 3. No.

Why do you contineu to enable their p;ostion? You would be better off just ignoring it all, just like how they are.

That's the argument they completely ignore. The people who are making this argument are not the people who have any interest in Sony's system.

And not to mention Sony has another advantage that should have ended this entire conversation ages ago: Fortnite is free on their system.

I play on the PC, I already get crossplay, but again why are you enabling their position? You would be better off just ignoring crossplay discussions, as they are.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I play on the PC, I already get crossplay, but again why are you enabling their position? You would be better off just ignoring crossplay discussions, as they are.

You have every right to be against Sonys crossplay policy, but you also need to accept that others have disagreements with you. They can speak too.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

You have every right to be against Sonys crossplay policy, but you also need to accept that others have disagreements with you. They can speak too.

What exactly are you disagreeing with?

 

[Clear]

Being an adult would be looking beyond themselves and actually allowing developers to fulfiull their vsiosn. If anyone is acting like a child not wanting to share their toys it's them.

This is purely a business matter. There is no room for sentiment or personifying your commercial relationships, its just what's in black-and-white on the balance sheets and the projection graphs. Do you not understand the stakes being played for here? Its potentially millions of dollars in revenue both now and into the foreseeable future.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

This is purely a business matter. There is no room for sentiment or personifying your commercial relationships, its just what's in black-and-white on the balance sheets and the projection graphs. Do you not understand the stakes being played for here? Its potentially millions of dollars in revenue both now and into the foreseeable future.

And you care because...?

 

[LuvOfThaGame]

What exactly are you disagreeing with?

And you care because...?

That's the craziest part of these debates. As a consumer, what are they disagreeing with? More options? More open policies? Allowing developers to offer their customers these features? Unless they work for Sony, why would someone argue against crossplay and cross platform progression?

 

[intheinbetween]

I simply just don’t get it.

I fail to understand the reason Sony is being so stubborn on this matter. Kids, young people, middle aged people, most of us have friends with other platforms who love to play the same games, why is Sony blocking their customers to play with/against owners of other platforms, does Sony want to force these people to buy a brand new PS4 so they can play that multiplatform game with their friends when that would be the only reason for them to buy the system?

I’m sorry but I fail to understand the logic behind this, and I can only see Sony hurting their own customers rather than the owners of other platforms. Also, their hurting the developers since that would be an incentive to buy that game, but it seems they just don’t care.

 

[Clear]

And you care because...?

As I've said repeatedly, I'm ambivalent on the matter as a consumer, but at the same time I understand completely the business aspect and if I were in the Sony execs position I'd do pretty much exactly what they've done.

 

[Lort]

I simply just don’t get it.

I fail to understand the reason Sony is being so stubborn on this matter. Kids, young people, middle aged people, most of us have friends with other platforms who love to play the same games, why is Sony blocking their customers to play with/against owners of other platforms, does Sony want to force these people to buy a brand new PS4 so they can play that multiplatform game with their friends when that would be the only reason for them to buy the system?

I’m sorry but I fail to understand the logic behind this, and I can only see Sony hurting their own customers rather than the owners of other platforms. Also, their hurting the developers since that would be an incentive to buy that game, but it seems they just don’t care.

They are doing it because they fear the competition, and anything that may advantage them they need to do for fear of being outsold by xbox again.

Whats odd is they wouldnt loose that many sales and they might even gain some from kids who will now buy switch / xbox so they can play with all their friends.

Its a short signed business decision, that many here suggest is part of some master plan. In reality they will drop the stance in a year or two as more games as a service platforms come online.

Gamers want it, devs want it everyone else supports it except Sony ( and their negoaf legion).

 

[RScrewed]

As I've said repeatedly, I'm ambivalent on the matter as a consumer, but at the same time I understand completely the business aspect and if I were in the Sony execs position I'd do pretty much exactly what they've done.

You'd do what they'd do, sure, but would you also insult the intelligence of the gaming community by coming up with excuses or would you just come out and say "yeah...we don't wanna play nice cuz we don't see any money in it", instead of basically being the real life equivalent of Bentley in this gag:

Stay classy, Sony. Not sure how a company that is so is hell-bent on instilling divisiveness in the gaming ecosystem has such a fan following in this day and age of the renaissance of consumer focus; I guess people like rooting for their home team no matter what the circumstances. Tribal mentality ftw; Sony knows the landscape well.

 

[quickwhips]

That's the argument they completely ignore. The people who are making this argument are not the people who have any interest in Sony's system.

And not to mention Sony has another advantage that should have ended this entire conversation ages ago: Fortnite is free on their system.

To me that is like arguing its not free on cell phones because you have to pay for data plans. The game is free on all platforms.

 

[Clear]

They are doing it because they fear the competition, and anything that may advantage them they need to do for fear of being outsold by xbox again.

Put in the most pejorative and passive-aggressive manner possible, but fundamentally correct. That said every business keeps a close watch on their competition if they intend to stay in business,.

Whats odd is they wouldnt loose that many sales and they might even gain some from kids who will now buy switch / xbox so they can play with all their friends.

That's a stretch! And once again, why the hell would they want to encourage people to buy competing hardware and buy into their rival's ecosystems. Most of all, why would they want to lose *any* sales, particularly on F2P titles where their only direct revenue is via service purchases within their ecosystem?

Its a short signed business decision, that many here suggest is part of some master plan. In reality they will drop the stance in a year or two as more games as a service platforms come online.

Yay for service platforms. Fuck that noise, that's not a future I'd support anyway so frankly I couldn't give a toss.

Gamers want it, devs want it everyone else supports it except Sony ( and their negoaf legion).

Some gamers want it. Many more (like me) couldn't care less, and some will be actively against it because they are devoted to their platform of choice and wouldn't mind seeing the opposition go to the wall. The reality is businesses compete against one another, and regardless of any old bollocks about "competition being healthy" they publicly state, in their ideal world they'd be crushing all comers.

Some devs want it, no doubt, because centralizing sales is a good way to avoid the levies on the console platform holder's storefronts. More profits for them, but that's no more noble a strategem than that you are decrying Sony for employing.

It just suits you better, and just like them, all you really care about are your own interests.

 

[Three]

To me that is like arguing its not free on cell phones because you have to pay for data plans. The game is free on all platforms.

No that would be like google charging you to play online when you've already paid for your data plan. Let's not deliberately be obtuse. you pay for your internet separately.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I simply just don’t get it.

I fail to understand the reason Sony is being so stubborn on this matter. Kids, young people, middle aged people, most of us have friends with other platforms who love to play the same games, why is Sony blocking their customers to play with/against owners of other platforms, does Sony want to force these people to buy a brand new PS4 so they can play that multiplatform game with their friends when that would be the only reason for them to buy the system?

I’m sorry but I fail to understand the logic behind this, and I can only see Sony hurting their own customers rather than the owners of other platforms. Also, their hurting the developers since that would be an incentive to buy that game, but it seems they just don’t care.

You don’t get it because you have no understanding of how business and competition works.

Feel they are anti consumer all you want Sony is actually the best console to play on because it has far and away the largest user base AND AND just in case you missed it...does not require a subscription to PS Plus, something MS does not allow.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

I simply just don’t get it.

I fail to understand the reason Sony is being so stubborn on this matter. Kids, young people, middle aged people, most of us have friends with other platforms who love to play the same games, why is Sony blocking their customers to play with/against owners of other platforms, does Sony want to force these people to buy a brand new PS4 so they can play that multiplatform game with their friends when that would be the only reason for them to buy the system?

I’m sorry but I fail to understand the logic behind this, and I can only see Sony hurting their own customers rather than the owners of other platforms. Also, their hurting the developers since that would be an incentive to buy that game, but it seems they just don’t care.

My guess is Sony sees they have worked harder to gain more users and now they don't think it's main rivals should have access to those users even though they don't own the friggen game. To make matters worse is Sony feels the third party account is theirs to control, meaning you cannot use that Fortnte account on another platform even though Epic, the makers of the game, want you to. What's next, being like Nestle and charging the town for clean water because they bought up all the land?

As I've said repeatedly, I'm ambivalent on the matter as a consumer, but at the same time I understand completely the business aspect and if I were in the Sony execs position I'd do pretty much exactly what they've done.

I don't see how this helps Sony, all I see is them not wanting to get along and giving the middle finger to third party developers.

You don’t get it because you have no understanding of how business and competition works.

Feel they are anti consumer all you want Sony is actually the best console to play on because it has far and away the largest user base AND AND just in case you missed it...does not require a subscription to PS Plus, something MS does not allow.

It's also free on Switch (for now) but all you are doing is enabling Sony's position. Great job.

 

[prag16]

That's the craziest part of these debates. As a consumer, what are they disagreeing with? More options? More open policies? Allowing developers to offer their customers these features? Unless they work for Sony, why would someone argue against crossplay and cross platform progression?

It's embarrassing console wars bullshit when you come down to it.

Yeah Louis has been somewhat abrasive at times in the current pissing contest. But he's fundamentally right. What are the naysayers even 'disagreeing' with? Such a stance shouldn't even be possible except among Sony employees, really. That's the only way one could acknowledge that the policy is anticonsumer, yet still support it. (Especially the part where Sony holds users' Epic account hostage against their will; I don't play Fortnite really anymore, but 99% of what I did play was on PC, yet that one match I dropped into on my PS4 has apparently poisoned my account.)

When the Sony defense force says that only a small vocal minority cares about crossplay, that might be somewhat true. But what that leaves out is that the contingent that actively doesn't want crossplay is even tinier, and consists solely of blind irrational fanboys.

Even if this stance makes sense for Sony in the short term, it doesn't in the long term. It's only a matter of time before they cave, and the longer they hold out, the bigger dirt bags they will look like.

 

[Lort]

If so few people want it like some say, then they arent going to loose many sales are they? If Sony are so unbeatable why wouldnt they just do whats in the best interest of the devs and their own customers and enable it. Its true some people want it but its not that big of a deal so they are just loosing credability especially in light of their own tagline “for the players” which this as well as preventing EA Access is cleary completly contrary to.

Did i see someone say they want the “competition to go to the wall” i wont quote the person but what a rediculous statement. No Forza, No Mario, No Vive No Steam No Nintendo .. no ios or android .. what on earth kind of reactionary fan boy point of view is that?

My team / political party / corporation is so precious there shouldnt even be any opposition or even a game .. it should just be my team playing by themselves .. wtf

 

[Xerazal]

Whelp, hope sony enjoyed their gen of being on top. Because next gen, they won't be on top. You think they'd have learned from last gen to be more modest, but apparently not.

 

[Dlacy13g]

I understand the real reasons behind Sonys choices on crossplay on the business front. I don't buy into the excuses they have given (especially the previous "to protect the kids" nonsense). I almost feel they would be better of just being honest and saying "because we don't need or want to". That all said... I don't like their decision as a gamer. The days of walled off gardens are dying...Sony doing this will likely delay the progress of the inevitable for a bit but it will happen. Sony will either change their tune or fade significantly in the wake of the industry shifting in the coming years.

 

[Tarkus98]

Whelp, hope sony enjoyed their gen of being on top. Because next gen, they won't be on top. You think they'd have learned from last gen to be more modest, but apparently not.

So who do you think will top them next gen, Nintendo?
They may (Sony) eventually cave next gen and allow it in the broader sense.

 

[Zewp]

Stay classy, Sony. Not sure how a company that is so is hell-bent on instilling divisiveness in the gaming ecosystem has such a fan following in this day and age of the renaissance of consumer focus;

This right here sums up my view of the situation completely. Sony has proven themselves to be the least consumer-friendly console manufacturer this gen and yet, people are defending them for it at every turn. Whether Microsoft is doing it for their own benefit or not, they've realised that the console ecosystem is changing. The days of each console being a walled-off garden are coming to an end and for a very good reason. MS, for all the flak they get for not having good exclusives, has gone above and beyond in this gen to benefit gamers and roll out new, innovative features.

I game on Switch, PS4 and Xbox One, but I doubt I'll be getting a PS5 next gen because I am fundamentally opposed to Sony in this regard. Gamers are not benefited at all by Sony's insistence that their garden be walled off. Just like gamers were not benefited at all when PS+ prices were increased, because the service is just as patchy as before. Their exclusives are not that good that I can't live without them and I cannot imagine standing by a company's side when they consistently take a stance that brings me absolutely no benefit.

 

[Pallas]

This right here sums up my view of the situation completely. Sony has proven themselves to be the least consumer-friendly console manufacturer this gen and yet, people are defending them for it at every turn. Whether Microsoft is doing it for their own benefit or not, they've realised that the console ecosystem is changing. The days of each console being a walled-off garden are coming to an end and for a very good reason. MS, for all the flak they get for not having good exclusives, has gone above and beyond in this gen to benefit gamers and roll out new, innovative features.

I game on Switch, PS4 and Xbox One, but I doubt I'll be getting a PS5 next gen because I am fundamentally opposed to Sony in this regard. Gamers are not benefited at all by Sony's insistence that their garden be walled off. Just like gamers were not benefited at all when PS+ prices were increased, because the service is just as patchy as before. Their exclusives are not that good that I can't live without them and I cannot imagine standing by a company's side when they consistently take a stance that brings me absolutely no benefit.

I do agree with you, I believe this is bigger than Fortnite. If you look past brand loyalty and from a business perspective and see it from a gamers perspective(we are all gamers, right?) It just doesn’t settle well with me. CPP will be more prominent in the future, it’s already ahead in the mobile market(Apple, Google/Alphabet).

 

[phil_t98]

I honestly don't get why people are defending Sony here, yes its a business decision we all get that but people defending that decision is odd, would everybody be worse off if we had crossplay and even to add on to that backwards compatibility?

 

[Dragon_Rocks]

Everyone here who is asking that why people who do not care for crossplay are supporting Sony as it hurts consumers, have you ever thought about the following possibility:

* Sony decides to allow crossplay for all games with all consoles.
* Sony sees that MS is getting paid for live by its user who plays a f2p game like Fortnite, now enjoys Sony's userbase as well but Sony sees no money from this user.
* This user will now probably never consider buying a PS4 as well since he/she can still play with his/her PS4 friends with crossplay.
* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

 

[Toe-Knee]

Everyone here who is asking that why people who do not care for crossplay are supporting Sony as it hurts consumers, have you ever thought about the following possibility:

* Sony decides to allow crossplay for all games with all consoles.
* Sony sees that MS is getting paid for live by its user who plays a f2p game like Fortnite, now enjoys Sony's userbase as well but Sony sees no money from this user.
* This user will now probably never consider buying a PS4 as well since he/she can still play with his/her PS4 friends with crossplay.
* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

That's exactly what will happen.

It will also increase toxicity in game chat due to fanboys of either side being asses which will ruin things for everyone.

 

[phil_t98]

That's exactly what will happen.

It will also increase toxicity in game chat due to fanboys of either side being asses which will ruin things for everyone.

toxicity is already a thing, when I play on xbox x vs pc there is no fanboys slating either xbox or pc ever its always about the gamplay

 

[phil_t98]

Everyone here who is asking that why people who do not care for crossplay are supporting Sony as it hurts consumers, have you ever thought about the following possibility:

* Sony decides to allow crossplay for all games with all consoles.
* Sony sees that MS is getting paid for live by its user who plays a f2p game like Fortnite, now enjoys Sony's userbase as well but Sony sees no money from this user.
* This user will now probably never consider buying a PS4 as well since he/she can still play with his/her PS4 friends with crossplay.
* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

who says the player base on these games is bigger on one console than the other when online gaming, as people have shown there isn't the massive gulf in online players between games despite the massive sales lead Sony has. I think rocket league was a couple of thousand difference and battlefield was very close to

 

[Zewp]

Everyone here who is asking that why people who do not care for crossplay are supporting Sony as it hurts consumers, have you ever thought about the following possibility:

* Sony decides to allow crossplay for all games with all consoles.
* Sony sees that MS is getting paid for live by its user who plays a f2p game like Fortnite, now enjoys Sony's userbase as well but Sony sees no money from this user.
* This user will now probably never consider buying a PS4 as well since he/she can still play with his/her PS4 friends with crossplay.
* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

So we shouldn't be unhappy that Sony is screwing us over with crossplay, because they might then decide to screw us over in another way? How is Sony not the bad guy in both these situations. How about instead of defending it or rationalising it, we just put pressure on Sony to not be jerks instead?

Besides, are people really buying PS4s just so that they can play Fortnite with their friends who are also on PS4? I'm not saying it's impossible, but I find it highly unlikely that loads of people are going to buy devices for several hundred dollars just so that they can play a F2P game that is available on pretty much any device that can run games.

The excuses to not allow crossplay just seem incredibly weak and all seem to rely on "but it might lead to this extremely unlikely situation". It's not like PS4 is a stranger to crossplay. FF14 is one of the biggest MMOs on the market and probably the biggest MMO on PS4. You could very easily argue that Sony is losing console sales by allowing PC and PS4 to crossplay, because people who would otherwise have to buy a PS4 to play with their friends can just play it from their PCs.

Sony's excuse that their system is the best experience is entirely laughable too. PSN is notoriously unreliable and goes down pretty much any time something noteworthy is released. When the context of their excuse is Fortnite it's even more laughable, considering how badly their network tanked on the day Fortnite Season 5 released. Hell, they've been having issues again with PSN since Friday and are currently still reporting issues on their status page. Best experience my ass.

 

[Toe-Knee]

toxicity is already a thing, when I play on xbox x vs pc there is no fanboys slating either xbox or pc ever its always about the gamplay

Sure but right now most games don't have crossplay chat lobbies but if it becomes standard they will.

And the idiots will come out of the woodwork.

Of course this is already there but the fanatic plastic fans are kept separate. When those mix and there's chat it will probably get worse.

 

[Three]

* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

Who is going to lose in this situation?
Every single person who currently plays the game for free with thier friends on the PS4 without paying for PS+, which I can assure you outnumbers the people who are riled up about CCP and the xbox fans who had no intention of buying a PS4 anyway being riled up about this.

We may see it in the next gen where they begin to charge regardless much like MS but this gen they set a rule that a free to play game is free to play and they cannot change it now without pissing off thier own users to make Xbox and Switch users happy.

who says the player base on these games is bigger on one console than the other when online gaming, as people have shown there isn't the massive gulf in online players between games despite the massive sales lead Sony has. I think rocket league was a couple of thousand difference and battlefield was very close to

This link will show you two things, there are not 'millions of players' in these online games at any one time and that the difference in player count is more than 'a couple thousand' especially when you are talking about populations in the thousands anyway:

https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population

Spread these numbers across the globe. The chart is in fact based on time so that is actually a good way of seeing regional differences.

At times where Europe and other PS4 strong regions are awake you can see big population differences. Say yesterday (saturday morning) at 11 AM you have more than double the player population on the PS4. 18,000 on PS4 vs 7,000 on XBO and other times in regions where the install base split is less player counts are similar. Player population overall is much healthier on the PS4 though there is no denying that and this is a game that requires a subscription on both. Now imagine a split where one is free to play on PS4 and the other requires a sub on XBO which makes its install base about 50% less than the lower number it already is.

 

[phil_t98]

Who is going to lose in this situation?
Every single person who currently plays the game for free with thier friends on the PS4 without paying for PS+, which I can assure you outnumbers the people who are riled up about CCP and the xbox fans who had no intention of buying a PS4 anyway being riled up about this.

We may see it in the next gen where they begin to charge regardless much like MS but this gen they set a rule that a free to play game is free to play and they cannot change it now without pissing off thier own users to make Xbox and Switch users happy.


This link will show you two things, there are not 'millions of players' in these online games at any one time and that the difference in player count is more than 'a couple thousand' especially when you are talking about populations in the thousands anyway:

https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population

Spread these numbers across the globe. The chart is in fact based on time so that is actually a good way of seeing regional differences.

At times where Europe and other PS4 strong regions are awake you can see big population differences. Say yesterday (saturday morning) at 11 AM you have more than double the player population on the PS4. 18,000 on PS4 vs 7,000 on XBO and other times in regions where the install base split is less player counts are similar. Player population overall is much healthier on the PS4 though there is no denying that and this is a game that requires a subscription on both. Now imagine a split where one is free to play on PS4 and the other requires a sub on XBO which makes its install base about 50% less than the lower number it already is.

but it aint like people are saying on here that the player base of xbox is so small that Sony are killing it, yes Sony ahead but not by the numbers online people are thinking per game

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Everyone here who is asking that why people who do not care for crossplay are supporting Sony as it hurts consumers, have you ever thought about the following possibility:

* Sony decides to allow crossplay for all games with all consoles.
* Sony sees that MS is getting paid for live by its user who plays a f2p game like Fortnite, now enjoys Sony's userbase as well but Sony sees no money from this user.
* This user will now probably never consider buying a PS4 as well since he/she can still play with his/her PS4 friends with crossplay.
* Sony decides to make money elsewhere for this potential loss by making PS+ mandatory for all multiplayer games including f2p games just like MS does.

What if forcing crossplay on Sony leads to a scenario like this? Who is going to lose in this situation?

Sony is not doing anything as it is, Epic is the one who handles it and Fortnite is already on all platforms. But again all you guys see in your tunnel vision is MS, never talking about Nintendo, never talking about the PC and tablets and mobile where they already see no money. It's always this console war view of just Xbox versus Playstation and you guys need to just stop.

That's exactly what will happen.

It will also increase toxicity in game chat due to fanboys of either side being asses which will ruin things for everyone.

Bullshit. In fact it might actually deter it by building relations. You don't build relations by going out and telling the world we are better while we don't want to work with everyone, that's the messagiung Sony is sending and look now. Every Xbox topic is full of toxicity and every crossplay is about MS wanting it, hardly ever about the developer or Nintendo. This culture Sony keeps promoting is one of the issues. Is there or is there not an option to turn it off with PC players on Rocket League?

Who is going to lose in this situation?
Every single person who currently plays the game for free with thier friends on the PS4 without paying for PS+, which I can assure you outnumbers the people who are riled up about CCP and the xbox fans who had no intention of buying a PS4 anyway being riled up about this.

We may see it in the next gen where they begin to charge regardless much like MS but this gen they set a rule that a free to play game is free to play and they cannot change it now without pissing off thier own users to make Xbox and Switch users happy.


This link will show you two things, there are not 'millions of players' in these online games at any one time and that the difference in player count is more than 'a couple thousand' especially when you are talking about populations in the thousands anyway:

https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population

Spread these numbers across the globe. The chart is in fact based on time so that is actually a good way of seeing regional differences.

At times where Europe and other PS4 strong regions are awake you can see big population differences. Say yesterday (saturday morning) at 11 AM you have more than double the player population on the PS4. 18,000 on PS4 vs 7,000 on XBO and other times in regions where the install base split is less player counts are similar. Player population overall is much healthier on the PS4 though there is no denying that and this is a game that requires a subscription on both. Now imagine a split where one is free to play on PS4 and the other requires a sub on XBO which makes its install base about 50% less than the lower number it already is.

Then Microsoft will be pressured, not Sony. Microsoft will be pressured on answering why its not free to play. All you are doing is creating more whatisms without looking at the bigger picture. The reality going on now is this, developers want to utilize the feature. Your whatisms are already trumped by the fact the user now has to buy the game again or buy another system if they want to play with friends on another platform. It's Sony's job to promote its hardware and it's software, not by locking things down for third party developers. That's being regressive, not progressive.

 

[Zewp]

Sure but right now most games don't have crossplay chat lobbies but if it becomes standard they will.

And the idiots will come out of the woodwork.

Of course this is already there but the fanatic plastic fans are kept separate. When those mix and there's chat it will probably get worse.

Among all the excuses for not having crossplay, this is among the weirdest and just feels like reaching. People already talk shit in videogames. So we shouldn't have CCP because people are going to... talk shit about a different topic? If it's really that bad, mute people. Gaming on console is already such that chat channels (VoIP and text) are unbearable due to squeakers and shit-talkers. I have my chat muted most of the time and limit it party chat in games where that's possible.

I really don't see how this is an issue that is enough of a problem to justify not having CCP.

 

[Zewp]

which I can assure you outnumbers the people who are riled up about CCP and the xbox fans who had no intention of buying a PS4 anyway being riled up about this.

Any chance you can give us some data to back this claim up?

 

[The_Mike]

How can every thread about cross play be converted to “hur dur MS needs gold for f2p games”? We get it. It looks bad for Sony to be so arrogant, but no, instead of focusing on the problem let’s throw a distraction no one cares about - gold for f2p games. If you are so greedy then just buy a PS4, and hope your friends are not on Xbox One because then Sony wouldn’t give two shits about you being able to play with them.

#4ThePlayers.

 

[DeepEnigma]

How can every thread about cross play be converted to “hur dur MS needs gold for f2p games”? We get it. It looks bad for Sony to be so arrogant, but no, instead of focusing on the problem let’s throw a distraction no one cares about - gold for f2p games. If you are so greedy then just buy a PS4, and hope your friends are not on Xbox One because then Sony wouldn’t give two shits about you being able to play with them.

#4ThePlayers.

You are insufferable.

 

[The_Mike]

You are insufferable.

Try to point out where im wrong instead of just being insulting. Or is that too much to ask for?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Try to point out where im wrong instead of just being insulting. Or is that too much to ask for?

You are literally the shorthand version of thelastword.

Everything you say can be twisted the other direction too. "anti-consumer", "nobdy cares about being charge for Gold, but apparently you're a fanboy if nobody cares about cross-play", but Sony "greedy tho, but do not mention motives of the other" which is discourse, "leave MS alone", etc., etc..

"#4ThePlayers" is the derpiest dig of them all. Not anymore than "#PlayAnywhere" slogan either.

 

[The_Mike]

You are literally the shorthand version of thelastword.

Everything you say can be twisted the other direction too. "anti-consumer", "nobdy cares about being charge for Gold, but apparently you're a fanboy if nobody cares about cross-play", but Sony "greedy tho, but do not mention motives of the other" which is discourse, "leave MS alone", etc., etc..

Except from that guy I am fully aware and open minded about being biased towards Xbox One. After all, I am playing on an Xbox One and my Pc, even though I’m not that much of a “fanboy” (I don’t see myself that way), since I also own a PlayStation 4.

That doesn’t change the fact though that Sony always gets away by being anti consumer, and unlike thelastword I can easily back it up.

- no refund for digital pre orders.
- can’t change gamer tag.
- we want cross play, but fuck your friends if they are on Xbox One.
- coming with arrogant statements.

That’s what came from the top of my head. I know MS are shit heads as well, and would have been arrogant assholes just like Sony if they were number one. Thankfully for my experience, they aren’t. They pushed on BC titles and constant improve the platform.

 

[Clear]

That’s what came from the top of my head. I know MS are shit heads as well, and would have been arrogant assholes just like Sony if they were number one. Thankfully for my experience, they aren’t. They pushed on BC titles and constant improve the platform.

Well, after the Kinect era, the always-on debacle, the overpriced and underpowered original Xbone, they did have a lot of room for improvement! And honestly, as for arrogance noone on Sony's staff has ever oozed quite like Aaron Greenberg!

 

[Three]

but it aint like people are saying on here that the player base of xbox is so small that Sony are killing it, yes Sony ahead but not by the numbers online people are thinking per game

Because the advantages of larger player pools in games are not that obvious because devs take it into account. The issues that arise in low player pools depend on the game. On regional dedicated servers (especially older games) you are less likely to find actual games during matchmaking and just be stuck in the lobby. One example of that is the xbox one only game Halo MCC. The player count has dwindled and in Europe and other parts of the world where the install base is low a lot of people are complaining about not finding games after regional dedicated server locks to reduce latency:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/343-...ief-collection-at-last.1460818/post-253433360

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/...us/613e2425-19e5-40b8-a402-b4dee9f78376/posts

People are using VPNs to pretend they are in the US so they can find games. Ofcourse this means that they are severly disadvantaged because they have high latency ~200ms whereas local players have far less lag with around 50ms.
Players are not that latency sensitive most people just say 'what the hell I shot that guy first'. They would rather play than play with a bad experience so you rarely see this issue with low player pools. There have been no extensive studies of ping times at all and developers dont provide this info in lobbies anymore. Sony, MS, Nintendo and the publishers have this data though.

But based on player pools alone on dedicated server games PS4 players find matches quicker with a larger player pool they sell well and have a health player pool in all regions. People playing on PS4 on p2p games are more likely to have a lower latency (less lag) to the host player because there is a larger pool of players to choose from for matchmaking.

A game dies sooner with lower initial player counts. Low player counts usually mean devs make less game modes to make people part of one larger pool. Games are made around them. If there is a move to regional low latency dedicated servers which there is with all this talk of cloud consoles and streaming. If this happens Sony have a big advantage and MS and to a lesser extent Nintendo if they move into that space would need that global player pool.

 

[The_Mike]

Well, after the Kinect era, the always-on debacle, the overpriced and underpowered original Xbone, they did have a lot of room for improvement! And honestly, as for arrogance noone on Sony's staff has ever oozed quite like Aaron Greenberg!

So you don’t think saying “we don’t do CP cus we are the best” is arrogant? Just asking for pure curiosity.

 

[FranXico]

Well, after the Kinect era, the always-on debacle, the overpriced and underpowered original Xbone, they did have a lot of room for improvement! And honestly, as for arrogance noone on Sony's staff has ever oozed quite like Aaron Greenberg!

Jim Ryan (Sony) comes as a close second, if you ask me.