Support NeoGAF

[Carl]

Online local multiplayer. Pretty cool. Hope it works well.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

Sony are living in a future where we all have latency-free Internet.

Latency aside you can play with a friend using only one copy of the game (yours or his/her), would you rather if they don't have this feature?

 

[Fisty]

If you cant beat the hanging shootout in TLOUR, hand in your gaming card. Ive beat it twice while playing Grounded through remote play

 

[ultron87]

It is pretty weird that this is going to foist online multiplayer onto games like Towerfall and Sportsfriends where the developers specifically chose not to include it. I'm glad this means more people might try them, but I don't actually know if they'd be anywhere close to as fun with lag and no other people in the room. And it might just make them essentially unplayable.

 

[libregkd]

While not ideal, this means that Towerfall Ascension (And a bunch of other local multiplayer only games) now essentially have online play. This is gonna be great.

 

[BronsonLee]

With Far Cry 4 you need to d\l a chunk of the game; there's a 2-hour limit and the owner only has 10 keys to offer. It's basically an innovative demo solution Ubisoft came up with but for some reason only offering it on PS.

Huh! Weird. Thanks for clarifying!

But yeah guys, I would rather jump into lava than play Towerfall online, that sounds potentially rage-inducing

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Latency aside you can play with a friend using only one copy of the game (yours or his/her), would you rather if they don't have this feature?

I'm not sure that is happening though. Why would some of the big pubs agree to that? For games like Unity or Fry Cry you would be able to play through the entire game for free. There has to be a drawback. I'm not getting my hopes up.

 

[_Ryo_]

With Far Cry 4 you need to d\l a chunk of the game; there's a 2-hour limit and the owner only has 10 keys to offer. It's basically an innovative demo solution Ubisoft came up with but for some reason only offering it on PS.

Which is kind of my point. Why do that when you can do the entire co-op game with PSshare, without having to download anything and for an unlimited amount of times?

 

[LiquidMetal14]

This reminds me of that feature we have on PS3 where we can play PSP games online.

 

[lightzGamin]

FUCK you Sony add some real features instead of this shared garbage i want some fucking DLNA, more apps, and new UI that isnt shit.

 

[enzo_gt]

Sounds like an extension of a feature they announced with streaming. Super cool, but I got excited because I thought there would be a renewed focus on local MP games when this really has nothing to do with that

 

[TheOctodad]

FUCK you Sony add some real features instead of this shared garbage i want some fucking DLNA, more apps, and new UI that isnt shit.

 

[IAmRandom31]

Me and my friends will be passing the controller a ton during Bloodborne.

Just like the old days, you die, you pass the controller on.

 

[plainr_]

This is the highlight of the conference for me.

 

[libregkd]

I'm not sure that is happening though. Why would some of the big pubs agree to that? For games like Unity or Fry Cry you would be able to play the entire game for free. There has to be a drawback. I'm not getting my hopes up.

The draw back being, if you are allowing your friend to stream your game, you won't be able to use your PS4 for anything else. While someone else is streaming the game, it is still just your game running on your system where you can't do anything. As the blog put it, it's a "virtual couch" so just imagine that you have a friend over and they decide to play your games for awhile, when they do that you can't do anything else with your console.

 

[Lefein]

I have a feeling a lot of friends are going to want me to do the puzzle parts in their action games lol

 

[Saty]

You are "passing the controller" as Sony describes it, which probably means you aren't using your own saves, trophy data or anything when using SharePlay, plus your friend has to be online and let their PS4 stream while playing. That's how I think it works anyways.

Well, yes. That covers the part of why would a player buy games anymore. What i'm asking is what does the publisher gets to entice it to basically allow anyone who wants to play the game for free to do so. That's a giant tradeoff. And if Sony plans to do PS+ revenue share with the pubs, then how it's going to divided it between a range of games that are getting various amounts of usage of that feature?

 

[CREMSteve]

This is ridiculously awesome.

 

[perfectsil]

Diablo 3 is the perfect game for this feature, if it works well

 

[Steel]

This was the feature I was most hyped about buying a PS4 for. Glad it's coming this year.

 

[Dragon]

FUCK you Sony add some real features instead of this shared garbage i want some fucking DLNA, more apps, and new UI that isnt shit.

Please be sarcastic.

 

[PG2G]

I'm not sure that is happening though. Why would some of the big pubs agree to that? For games like Unity or Fry Cry you would be able to play through the entire game for free. There has to be a drawback. I'm not getting my hopes up.

The console is simply streaming the image/video to the other user and accepting input remotely instead of locally. The only difference between this and traditional local multiplayer is convenience.

You probably wont be playing many games all the way through with this because many games dont have local co-op, and if developers dont like this than even fewer will.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Sony are living in a future where we all have latency-free Internet.

I like that future.

 

[chubigans]

Well, yes. That covers the part of why would a player buy games anymore. What i'm asking is what does the publisher gets to entice it to basically allow anyone who wants to play the game for free to do so. That's a giant tradeoff. And if Sony plans to do PS+ revenue share with the pubs, then how it's going to divided it between a range of games that are getting various amounts of usage of that feature?

Eh, I'm sure they'll be able to opt out if they want.

 

[Dunkley]

I remember that from the initial hardware reveal, glad that feature is finally finding its' way to PS4. (Wish the WiiU had something similiar)

Next up, Suspend/Pause, please.

 

[SerTapTap]

Awesome shit. This solves my biggest problem with local co op...(almost) no one local. Love these PS4 features, this kinda stuff is what makes it my favorite console. Hope it's not a long wait, hopefully the lag won't be too bad.

Sony are living in a future where we all have latency-free Internet.

Latency does not instantly make this awful. Compare doing something with 100ms lag vs literally being unable to do it ever. I'll take the lag every time, thank you very much.

 

[DWinn7]

Me and my friends will be passing the controller a ton during Bloodborne.

Just like the old days, you die, you pass the controller on.

Nostalgia...pass the sticks! I beat Mario 64 with my sister. Then beat it again with a friend. Had no problem playing video games together back in the day.

 

[Saty]

Which is kind of my point. Why do that when you can do the entire co-op game with PSshare, without having to download anything and for an unlimited amount of times?

Well, because publishers will assuredly have the option to not allow SharePlay in their games. So in the case of Ubisoft, they probably won't allow in FC4.

Which goes back to my question, why would a publisher willingly give it's game for free for anyone that has a friend that owned it. The added exposure and marketing seems like a drop in a bucket for me in this case. Would they expect people to only play a bit and then go buy it because they can't stand the streaming nature of the feature etc. ? If Sony are planning to share PS+ revenue with pubs that allow the feature then it better be a heck of a sum to justify giving the game away like that, even in a streaming form.

Eh, I'm sure they'll be able to opt out if they want.

Obviously. The question is why would a publisher opt in in the first place and what can Sony offer that they would be willing to?

 

[dcelw540]

So wait will this be able to play muiltplayer games like battlefield together?

 

[ANDS]

The way it sounded to me is that there is still only one copy of the game being used. To me it sounds like the Remote Desktop feature on windows.

 

[majik13]

I wonder what the "devil is in the details" will be. Or have they confirmed no restrictions and avaliable for all games?

The way it sounded to me is that there is still only one copy of the game being used. To me it sounds like the Remote Desktop feature on windows.

I thought it was well understood that it is basically streaming, like OnLive and PSNow/Remote Play. So I guess basically like Remote Desktop. I thought that has always been how it has been billed since when the feature was discussed at the PS4 unveil at E3.

 

[chubigans]

Well, because publishers will assuredly have the option to not allow SharePlay in their games. So in the case of Ubisoft, they probably won't allow in FC4.

Which goes back to my question, why would a publisher willingly give it's game for free for anyone that has a friend that owned it. The added exposure and marketing seems like a drop in a bucket for me in this case. Would they expect people to only play a bit and then go buy it because they can't stand the streaming nature of the feature etc. ? If Sony are planning to share PS+ revenue with pubs that allow the feature then it better be a heck of a sum to justify giving the game away like that, even in a streaming form.


Obviously. The question is why would a publisher opt in in the first place and what can Sony offer that they would be willing to?

I think you're overthinking how easy it would actually be to play a game without purchasing it. Say I show my friend Infamous. Now he really gets into it and wants to play it all the time without buying it. That will depend on me turning on my PS4 when he wants to play, not being able to play or use my PS4 while he's playing, and having those trophies and save data appear on my account. If I'm not at home or want to play my PS4, he can't play the game.

 

[DirgeExtinction]

Dat power of the

Spoiler

PS

cloud.

 

[Saty]

Sure, if i dug the game i'll probably go and buy it to have the complete experience. But what about if im fine with getting my fix of 1-2 hour sessions when my owner friend is online. You could still play games like that and i don't see how's that going to sit well with pubs. Think about sport games where a lot of people only care about playing online with your friend. So one buys the game and now every friend of his can play against him.

I mean, if the big pubs are opting out of Steam Family Sharing, why would they opt in in SharePlay?

 

[acklame]

Sounds amazing.

 

[Moosichu]

This is basically remote play but between PS4s.

 

[Burning Justice]

Being able to play local multiplayer online sounds like an awesome idea... except I can't think of any games on PS4 that I'd want to play that don't already support online multiplayer. I guess not having to each have our own copy of the game is something...

Now, if this somehow applied to games from earlier PlayStation systems, then it'd be amazing.