Minecraft, Rocket League, Fortnite, etc CrossPlay on every Platform but Sony because...

[Deleted member 11852]

Come on BRiT, read the article. If you do you'll see the article title you quoted is clickbait and the Sony dude didn't say that. The actual quote from the Sony's CEO - which is in the article - because journalism is hard:

"On cross-platform, our way of thinking is always that PlayStation is the best place to play. Fortnite, I believe, partnered with PlayStation 4 is the best experience for users, that's our belief," he said, according to The Independent. <-- a place where journalists actually work!
​

But, you know, CNET. If you want to Sony to change, don't regurgitate clickbait because the issue then becomes associated with "fake news" and people switch off. or maybe, you work for Sony PR and this is your plan.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

"Fortnite, I believe, partnered with PlayStation 4 is the best experience for users, that's our belief."

I'd love to hear the rationale for that. In what way? And why does that negate the need for cross-play? Okay, Switch isn't the best place to play Fortnite, according to your beliefs (lugging a PS4 around to the hotel a better experience, obvs) - why would you exclude Switch players from playing with PS4 players? Pity? So they'll abandon their current console and buy a PS4 instead?

The excuse doesn't even fit the logic of the situation.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

The excuse doesn't even fit the logic of the situation

You don't really expect the CEO of Sony (not the head of PlayStation, mind) to be that intimately aware of issues like this do you? I'm surprised this dude even managed to recall a standard press line and throw it out given how little crap Sony are taking for this. Unsurprisingly Sony's CEO drops a pro-Sony line.

What really boggles my mind is that this seemed to surprise you. Press conferences aren't delivered under oath and PR is about marketing, spin and perception. It's not that different to politics, where the press are free to ask questions and the other person is free to give whatever answer they like. The only rules that dictate communications in publicly trade companies are those set by stock trading regulations. Remember when Phil Spencer failed to answer a bunch of straight questions asked by Eurogamer and you raged about that? Same thing. Corporate Executives are not required to answer questions that don't want too. Mark Zuckerberg testified in Congress and lied through his robot teeth.

Everybody knows this is about money and I can't believe the journalist anything other than canned PR answer.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I appreciate that they don't want to answer the question. What I can't fathom, same with politics, is how they go about that by talking absolutely nonsense as if it's a legitimate reason when that reason can't stand up to scrutiny. Don't answer the question, rather than trying to answer it in a clever/meaningful way that's isn't.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

What I can't fathom, same with politics, is how they go about that by talking absolutely nonsense as if it's a legitimate reason when that reason can't stand up to scrutiny.

Because they can get away with it.

Don't answer the question, rather than trying to answer it in a clever/meaningful way that's isn't.

Whenever you do any kind of media management training, the first thing that is drilled into you is if somebody raises somebody negative, leave journalists with something positive because what you say will be reported. In this case, PlayStation is the best place to play. He could added PlayStation has sold more consoles this generation, or the past four generations collectively.

But again, he's the CEO of Sony (not PlayStation) and he's likely got a hundred standard current PR lines for all aspects of Sony's businesses.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

We're going around in circles. Sony don't want to give away one of their greatest competitive advantages, least of all when one competitor's unofficial motto is "embrace, extend, extinguish.

Jerry: Why haven't you been over to John's with your new pet monkey?
Terry: Because he used to wander around, chanting "kill all monkeys."
Jerry: Pffft, come on Terry, that was like 5 years ago, he has a new haircut now.

I also think it's churlish to keep calling it anti-consumer. It's not anti-consumer to maintain competitiveness with a division of a multi - billion dollar software giant that has never been profitable and yet still shows no signs of relenting because it just gets to burn through daddy's billions on the off chance they start to understand entertainment after 20 years.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

We're going around in circles. Sony don't want to give away one of their greatest competitive advantages, least of all when one competitor's unofficial motto is "embrace, extend, extinguish.

I don't even think we're going around in circles. Sony don't want to give up money and people seem continually perplexed that this has not changed. Sony hasn't moved one iota on this. They are the market leader so do not require good will right now. Come the transition to the next generation, it may change if PS5 is not backwards compatible with PS4. If PS5 is backwards compatible, I doubt they'll change then either.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't even think we're going around in circles. Sony don't want to give up money and people seem continually perplexed that this has not changed.

They're not perplexed - they're pissed. We all understand why but that doesn't mean people should give up trying to change things. Everything shit in this world that's even been stopped existed because of reasons and stopped because people didn't give up trying to change it. If everyone sat back and said, "well, we don't like it but it';s understandable," we'd have workhouses and kids working factories and slavery and all sorts of biggotry and women having no rights and social elitism and food without any quality standards and no preservation of natural beauty in the wake of relentless industrial progress etc.

That's not to equate cross-platform gaming with any serious issues, but to identify the principle why people continue to complain, which perplexies you so - it is good and right to want things to be better and to keep harping on about it until they are!

 

[Deleted member 11852]

They're not perplexed - they're pissed.

People were pissed at the loss of access of digital items, and rightly so, but that was caused by Epic's console-account disassociation policy that was fixed almost three months ago. All that people are left with is not having something that they never had on a Sony console, and probably won't in the near future either.

Who is pissed? Where are these people? They're not posting here as all I'm seeing regular forum posters posting updates on infrequent coverage of an issue that otherwise seems to have faded. And that's why Sony won't change.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating Sony's position. I've said many times in this thread that I think it's bad for gamers but it feels like very few people are really pissed. Epic have fixed their policy, people should have access to their digital shit on other platforms, avoid PS4 for cross-console gaming. Simples.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating Sony's position. I've said many times in this thread that I think it's bad for gamers but it feels like very few people are really pissed. Epic have fixed their policy, people should have access to their digital shit on other platforms, avoid PS4 for cross-console gaming. Simples.

It's not simples. You have Fortnite on PS4. Your friend has it on XB and another on Switch. They get to play together and you don't. Simples is...buy them all PS4s? Or buy another console yourself?

There's no reason to segregate people as Sony are doing. Not even a good business one because it's not like people are going to buy PS4 just to play with other PS4 owners - choice of a console will come down to other factors. So people will choose their console based on exclusives, etc., and then see whether they are or are not allowed to played with other folk. There's bugger all reason to drop such disappointments on people and get in the way of friendships and social gaming.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's not simples. You have Fortnite on PS4. Your friend has it on XB and another on Switch. They get to play together and you don't. Simples is...buy them all PS4s? Or buy another console yourself?

Yeah, it's simple. Individuals may not like it, but that dosn't make the scenario any less simple. Simple =/= easy.

There's no reason to segregate people as Sony are doing.

It's about money.

There's bugger all reason to drop such disappointments on people and get in the way of friendships and social gaming.

Again, money. If you do not understand the purpose of companies pursuing profit then I don't know what to say to you. And Sony didn't "drop disappointments on people", there was never was cross-console gaming on PS4 and there continues to be no cross-console gaming on PS4. This is not like linux support on PS3 that was there, then it was gone. If people expected it, when Sony never promised it, that's unwarranted optimism.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's about money.

In what way is Sony preventing XB and Switch owners playing with PS4 owners good for their cash? Unless people are explicitly buying a PS4 in order to play with other PS4 gamers, it isn't.

And Sony didn't "drop disappointments on people".

To the average Joe who's not following this, who hears his friends enjoying Fortnite on their XBoxes and Switches, who wants to play with them but also play Spider Man and that robot dinosaur game, they have zero reason to think they'd be locked out. After all, the other consoles aren't. If Sony make someone have to choose between HZD or cross-play, they are imposing a degree of disappointment because said gamer will have to give up one or other, or spend more for two consoles and miss out on something else.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Not even a good business one because it's not like people are going to buy PS4 just to play with other PS4 owners

I doubt that very much: every conversation I've had with people over their choice of console, in the day and age of online gaming, has boiled down to "you go where your friends are." One was because his wife would only let him have the console with the dancing game that she never plays.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

To the average Joe who's not following this, who hears his friends enjoying Fortnite on their XBoxes and Switches, who wants to play with them but also play Spider Man and that robot dinosaur game, they have zero reason to think they'd be locked out. After all, the other consoles aren't.

Surely the average Joe who's not following this will just assume it's the walled garden way it's always been?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

In what way is Sony preventing XB and Switch owners playing with PS4 owners good for their cash? Unless people are explicitly buying a PS4 in order to play with other PS4 gamers, it isn't.

Or, as was stated on the record by ex-Sony executive John Smedley, it's entirely about having to buy content to be consumed on PS4 through PlayStation so Sony get their cut. As he says "dumb", but there you go.

There may well be an angle/belief that segregating PS4 players could result in increased PS4 sales. Nobody credible that batted that yet. You can be sure its about moey and not because Sony just like to eat shit in the press every couple of week.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Surely the average Joe who's not following this will just assume it's the walled garden way it's always been?

Not when people talk about gaming as they do now. There are tens of millions of Fortnite players playing across consoles and PC and mobile. Far, far more play Minecraft. Unless someone lives in Sonyland, there's good chance they'll know gamers who don't own Sony consoles but play the same games they do, and increasingly these people will be playing across platforms, except for Sony.

Back in the day, XB gamers played Halo and talked among themselves. PS owners played whatever and talked among themselves. There wasn't really a walled garden so much as little crossover. COD et al carried over that expectation - as long as had people to play with, you didn't think about the machine they were on. But now 90% of the market is playing together, sharing online with streaming and gaming vids, and the one that doesn't play nicely is the odd one out and that's no longer to be expected.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Or, as was stated on the record by ex-Sony executive John Smedley, it's entirely about having to buy content to be consumed on PS4 through PlayStation so Sony get their cut. As he says "dumb", but there you go.

I don't see the logic there. If someone only has one console, they'll buy on that console. They aren't going to swap their XB or Switch for a PS4 to be able to play Fortnite with PS4 owning friends, so Sony won't be any better off. If someone owns more than one console, they are more likely to buy the content on the platform they want to play on, and they may choose to play on the platform that is more inclusive.

I suppose if someone owns XB or Switch and wants to play a cross-platform game with the higher fidelity, they'll play that game on PS4 and buy stuff there. But then they'd do that anyway - they're not going to fire up the Xbox One, buy a Fortnite costume, then fire up the PS4 in order to play the game.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I don't see the logic there. If someone only has one console, they'll buy on that console.

And like a lot of online games, the lines between virtual and real currencies and how you can pay for items (or pay people to play for you) lacks barriers. Such as is the world of online games and modern equivalent of Chinese gold farmers.

If you don't believe an ex-Sony executive who was remarkably candid, I don't know to say to you.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How's about instead of being dismissive about how stupid/naive we all are, you actually explain that? I said I don't understand the logic. Explain it to me. Where's the money going/coming from?

 

[Silent_Buddha]

And like a lot of online games, the lines between virtual and real currencies and how you can pay for items (or pay people to play for you) lacks barriers. Such as is the world of online games and modern equivalent of Chinese gold farmers.

If you don't believe an ex-Sony executive who was remarkably candid, I don't know to say to you.

Sure, but again. If X device is the main gaming device of that person, then X device is where they will mainly play that game and where they will likely buy all of the content for said game.

The only way this makes sense as a money making move for Sony is if they are paranoid enough to think that someone who mainly games on PS4 and spends most of their time in Fortnite on PS4 would instead rather buy all of their content on a Switch or XBO.

Either that or they are trying to boost the revenue of Nintendo and XBO by forcing players that want to play with friends on those platforms to buy the content yet again on those platforms in order to play with those players. Or by forcing PS4 players that want to play Fortnite maybe 20% of the time on Switch to buy all of their stuff yet again on Switch in order to play it on the go.

So maybe this is all an elaborate plan by Sony to try to help Nintendo and Microsoft make money in a game which was designed from the grown up to be easily accessible on multiple devices with crossplay and carryover of purchased items.

I mean after all Sony have no problems with people using the stuff they bought on PS4 using that stuff on iOS, Android, and PC. I guess since those aren't rivals, they don't need to help Google and Apple make more money.

Regards,
SB