Quadraphonic
Member
All of them. Every mobile device. Every PC device. Everything. Except Sony consoles. But Minecraft isn't on Steam.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony refused cross platform play in Minecraft
- Thread starter EvB
- Start date
All of them. Every mobile device. Every PC device. Everything. Except Sony consoles. But Minecraft isn't on Steam.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Here's what I believe.
Sony tried pushing this last gen and Microsoft refused, not giving Sony the upper hand since their online service was free, and MS' wasn't, and since MS was leading the sales and didn't want to lose sales if "folks can play with their Xbox friends without owning Xbox".
Now that the tables have turned, Sony doesn't want to give anyone else the upper hand. I think it is arrogance indeed, but moreso it goes back to the initial rejection that they're bitter about, bringing reasons like XBL not working well with PSN or some shit like that.
But most of all, it's gaming politics. It's all about not giving the other advantage, even if it's a small one. Companies pay millions to have timed exclusive games, or full exclusive games, and have their logo show up before trailer, or try their best not to mention their competition's name in the same vain as their own counterpart. This is sadly the side effect of console war.
Turbo Killer
Member
Ok, I agree. I just hate that people still use the "arrogant Sony" BS without knowing all the facts.
I mean even MS is not saying why they refused.
Again don't get me wrong, I'd want this feature (and I've wanted it in the past)
Rocket League, COD/Battlefield, and others would be sick if you could have Xbox vs PlayStation matches...or mixed matches.
Maybe someone can ask Phil Spencer why they wouldn't do it in the past?
Or maybe there is an old article touching on this point.
If Phil or another Xbox Exec gave a similar response to Shu... then maybe it really does have to do with those things.
So even though Rocket League devs can flip a switch and it would be ready to go....other aspects that they wouldn't have to deal with or answer to might be an issue.
Rocket League, COD/Battlefield, and others would be sick if you could have Xbox vs PlayStation matches...or mixed matches.
Maybe someone can ask Phil Spencer why they wouldn't do it in the past?
Or maybe there is an old article touching on this point.
If Phil or another Xbox Exec gave a similar response to Shu... then maybe it really does have to do with those things.
So even though Rocket League devs can flip a switch and it would be ready to go....other aspects that they wouldn't have to deal with or answer to might be an issue.
protomouse
Member
Because they ARE invested - emotionally/psychologically. We all know humans need to feel validated and have a sense of belonging. For some, a $400 plastic box and some nostalgia is enough commitment. Fanboyism is tribalism for the 21st century.
People can't be asking for this in mass because it's not something they've known and experienced, apart from a very tiny selection of games here and there over the past years.
Allowing more and more games to be cross platform might lead to this feature being standard someday, and that's an objectively good feature for the consumers. A Sony player would be able to play with his friends who are solely Nintendo/Microsoft/PC gamers for example.
We keep hearing more and more about CP between consoles, whereas it was almost solely limited to console-PC before. Why not encourage the push toward it rather than making excuses for whichever company we prefer ?
Huge Succeeded
Banned
Yeah, I feel you. Several of the back-and-forths I've had in this thread stemmed from disagreements with people who ultimately took issue with the allegations of 'arrogance', and yeah, that explaination lacks nuance.
This thread is a room of people throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks because we have no official explanation for this decision from Sony.
The Artisan
Member
to be fair, there's so many people posting sarcastic comments combined with people actually defending this shit, that it's kinda hard to distinguish between the two
bro, this is indefensible.
edit: if you are talkin about ea access then again: long story short, sony should have let their consumers decide that for themselves
None of the reasoning people are giving holds up to even a slight amount of further thought. If this were a legitimate issue, it would prevent crossplay of any form occurring. What are Sony going to do if you want to report a troublesome player on SFV playing via Steam? Exactly the same as they would in this case.
There's really no reason why anyone should be defending Sony on this. Setting arbitrary fences, on a game like Minecraft of all things, to keep your playerbase gated from everyone else's-- when btw everyone else has decided to embrace cross-play? It's not a good look. The keyboard + mouse vs controller argument doesn't hold any weight here. So, it just boggles my mind how anyone can defend this and choose to stand by a decision that doesn't benefit you, as a consumer, in any way.
It's not Destiny, or Overwatch, or Battlefront etc. it's Minecraft. I thought they'd, at the very least, allow crossplay for a game like Minecraft.
It's not Destiny, or Overwatch, or Battlefront etc. it's Minecraft. I thought they'd, at the very least, allow crossplay for a game like Minecraft.
Sony is literally giving every other platform the upper hand by not partaking in this
along with taking some unneeded blows from a PR standpoint
This is incorrect. WiiU (Console Edition) and Minecraft: Java Editon (the original game than is maintained to this day and majority of the PC market) are not interoperable with this initiative
Minecraft: Console edition (minus WiiU and Sony) and Minecraft: Pocket Edition (which Minecraft: Windows 10 is a fork of) will be interoperable.
Anyways, no real excuse for Sony considering they spent this entire generation marketing their products as "4 the gamers"/
Nintendo and Microsoft made such a thing happened despite of all the technical / legal "issues", so it's clearly feasible.
Not to bash on Sony and praise Microsoft or Nintendo, but we should push all 3 companies to make it happen more and more often.
N30RYU
Gold Member
The problem here is that Minecraft and Mojang are owned by Microsoft. And any move to make minecraft cross-play would lead to MS having access to the PSN accounds info and data is gold nowadays.
If sony refused is 'cause there's more to lose than to gain from their point of view. Otherwise would have agreed.
With all the shady indi policies something must be going on that we don't really know to say if sony is arrogant or just wanna play safe.
If sony refused is 'cause there's more to lose than to gain from their point of view. Otherwise would have agreed.
With all the shady indi policies something must be going on that we don't really know to say if sony is arrogant or just wanna play safe.
Turbo Killer
Member
None of the other games are owned by MS, maybe there is something there.
This may be the third most cringy post I've ever seen on NeoGAF.
I have this game already on several systems, with the best performing machines being my PS4 Pro and PC. With this new cross-play multiplayer, I will finally be able to play Minecraft via Xbox One X and PC. Currently, I can only play my wife via multiplayer on our Vitas (poor performance) or splitscreen on PS4 Pro (not a big fan of the lower screen real-estate on splitscreen). Those who think this was only a pure good decision for Sony; it wasn't. Had they offered cross-support, for this game, I would have one less valid reason to buy an Xbox One X.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Ehh, it was pretty fucking atrocious, but I can't fault the guy for trying to be funny, even if he failed miserably.
ebullientprism
Member
If that was what it was about, they wouldnt allow EA games period.
I'm not talking about Sonys relationship with EA. I'm talking about the general core audience sentiment concerning EA which helps to spur the mindset of not giving a fuck about EA Access.
Nah. This doesn't stop Sony from Doing crossplay with other networks.
hikarutilmitt
Member
Frankly, forced obsolescence, by design, would be anti-consumer. It also happens all the time because it's part of almost every industry. But it really, really sucks.
This just limits a segment. It's not anti-consumer because it's doing nothing against the consumer. They are still free to buy it and it works, it's missing the cross-platform section for multiplayer in some way.
And that's not anti-consumer. By this argument, Xbox Live (and now, PS+) are anti-consumer because you can't play multiplayer on current systems without them. We all sighed, and some raged, when Sony announced PS+ was required for online multiplayer with the PS4, something Xbox Live had been doing since 2002 that only a few people hated.
Again, I feel like the term aniti-consumer gets thrown around very casually on the internet, particularly here on GAF, because gamers seem entitled to everything in the world. We don't even know what actually led to Sony not allowing crossplay, as I found the word "refused" to be not carefully chosen for facts, but very carefully chosen to draw a particular reaction. This thread is incredibly evident of that.
Let's all jump to conclusions.
If there is any communication, then the game must be responsible, that is how Rocket League does it.
Cross Play games need to run on dedicated servers, so the host can block users from accessing online.
No doubt. This will have a negligible effect on Sony. But it will have an effect on Sony customers who like minecraft.
It's the same scenario with EA Access. The only people who lose out are Sony customers.
I'm not sure why being a market leader makes it cool to limit your customers in this manner.
You appear to be misinformed.
Check this thread for a full breakdown of what PS4 owners will now be missing.
This is a full fledged relaunch of Minecraft and only one console won't be getting the new version.
Thats not any of this works, at all.
PSN & XBL wouldn't even directly communicate. The game server is essentially a bridge between the two.
There's no security concerns or no privacy concerns.
There is no valid excuse for Sony to disallow this.
Even if it did, cross-play just makes the player pool bigger, not allows platform comms or matchmaking for example.I wish Overwatch had console cross play. My friends are divided everywhere.
Poor implementation, but anything else would be a huge engineering effort and that's when companies would have to work together quite extensively.
It also seems like it means the PS4 version won't get all the updates, or won't get them as fast since it will still have an older version. If that's right, Sony isn't just declining crossplatform play, they are turning down getting on board with the future of this franchise. Who knows what direction the franchise can take from here now that they have all versions unified and easily updatable. Maybe features are rolled out with crossplatform play in mind, like special events, and PS4 players just won't be able to participate.
This is embarrassing for you.
I stand by my original belief in that Sonys probable main concern outside of holding onto an advantage is with network security. They have already had a major breach in the past and I doubt they want to face the potential ramifications of another. As much as I like Sonys games we have plenty of evidence that suggests PSN is held together by thread, they can't even allow people to change their PSN IDs.
I'd be curious to see what someone with a solid background in IT thinks on how this could or could not open potential security loopholes for hackers.
If Nintendo or MS were hacked because of this I think the goodwill of the gesture would be drowned out by angry consumers calling their IT departments incompetent or lazy.
I'd be curious to see what someone with a solid background in IT thinks on how this could or could not open potential security loopholes for hackers.
If Nintendo or MS were hacked because of this I think the goodwill of the gesture would be drowned out by angry consumers calling their IT departments incompetent or lazy.
TimeEffect
Member
At this point, if these were the causes, sony would say something. It feels as if they are avoiding the bad press because they just dont want it.
MS is really smart to turn this into a PR thing, because they are looking like the bastions of cross play, and getting Nintendo in on it, while Sony just sits outside with its arms folded.
The Nintendo get is what really seals it IMO
The Albatross
Member
Trust me when I say I understand the implementation and how it's most likely done.
There's no engineering effort even needed by Sony. This is just them saying "OK" and the devs doing it for them.
Google, Apple and Nintendo all agreed so it's hard to imagine what could've been so disagreeable for Sony alone. This just looks really bad on them.
Starchasing
Member
PSN is just superior to other networks. They have more strict requisites so users are safer from atacks. Apple, google and nintendo dont have such good online infrastructures.
Again, this line of thought doesn't hold up to even basic scrutiny.
MS can already see who's playing Minecraft on PS4, simply by the existence of Minecraft on PS4. You think if you have a support query regarding Minecraft today, and give them your PSN ID, they wouldn't already have your PSN data to look up?
I really hope this is sarcasm. Like really 😂
Bitch Pudding
Member
It's a clear anti-consumer / pro-business decision of the market leader who has no intention to give its subs a single reason to switch ecosystems.
Beer Monkey
Member
It's not just Minecraft. Titanfall 2 runs in Azure among other cloud services (though they definitely have to authenticate through PSN before connecting further).
Beer Monkey
Member
Dupe post.
PanicFreak
Member
Microsoft already has access to PSN user data through Minecraft.
I'm 95% sure they don't. They may gather metrics on usage linked to PSN ID's, but not the actual accounts themselves.
SlipperyFishes
Banned
It hasn't happened for PC games cross connected to PS4 so the only other reason it could be is "they don't trust Xbox Live"
Which is bullshit.
Where was an argument about them not trusting MS' security made?
Sony trusts Sony's security and QA/QC, no one else. That's probably a pretty unfounded belief, but most companies view the world that way. I personally think Blizzard is far more capable of QA/QC on Overwatch patches than Sony, yet Sony still makes them jump through the same hoops to patch the game.
More like just not interested in another witch hunt based on nothing but conjecture and social media astroturfing.
There is no need to speculate that Sony was offered different terms when Sony does not opperate under the same conditions as the other platform providers. The agreement likely simply didn't meet with Sony's specifications for network control.
This is far from a certainty, not how many companies do business, and again, is basically applying guilty until proven innocent logic to the scenario.
What's next? Throw Jim Ryan in a pond and if he floats he's a witch?
Well Sony can't, from a business relations standpoint, come out and say "EA Access is EA's attempt to circumvent us in the customer relationship, after EA clearly aligned their future plans with MS' DRM scheme for the Xbox One prior to this generation. We're stomping MS into the fucking ground worldwide and even beating them in the U.S. so EA's not going anywhere, but we'll be damned if we give them a back door to try and fuck us some more".
Not their fault you can't read between the lines.
And you either A. bought it without any promise of crossplay or B. will buy it without any promise of crossplay.
Sony isn't taking anything away, failing to deliver on something they promised, or misrepresenting what you're getting. They're willing to lose sales to customers who value crossplay over playing on PS4 in exchange for not complying with whatever partnership terms MS presented. That's entirely their prerogative and no one has actually lost anything as a result.
What digital content is being exchanged in those other examples? Compatible player v. player netcode is one thing, actual content that then resides and runs on the local system is something else entirely.
And again, the entire 'Better Together' feature set explicitly calls out digital content purchasable cross-platform, i.e. outside of Sony's marketplace. Sony doesn't let Blizzard sell Overwatch boxes for PS4 outside of PSN. They don't let EA sell Ultimate Team packs outside PSN. They don't let any of their longstanding 3rd party partners sell content without paying the Sony tax. Yet they should just let MS run a service through their platform that explicitly allows just that?
This of course assumes that Sony doesn't have any "most favored nation" clauses with 3rd party publishers stating their online royalty rates would be equal or lower than any other partners, which they probably do with at least someone. At that point agreeing to this would basically cue up every 3rd party with such a deal wanting either to run their own storefront or have the PSN storefront royalties removed.
But hey, Sony just being dicks 'cause MS right? Arrogant Sony. Etc..
It's not just crossplay though. It's a relaunch of Minecraft and all versions with the exception of PS4 are now the PC version. The PS4 version is going to be missing a ton of features.
As someone with a solid background in IT, during gameplay in cross-play, there is no communication between any of the different providers networks.
You matchmake into a server, then once in that server, all you do is receive & send traffic between the server. The server won't care if its an Xbox, PlayStation or Switch what is sending that traffic as they'll work with the same netcode and not use any specific platform API's. Any platform API interaction will be the console to XBL for example, rather than the console to the server then to XBL.
If anything, developers have more of an engineering effort to block cross-play as they'll have to create virtual pools so to speak. Its not like they're developed differently.
Sony are literally taking a whole fucking update away and screwing over their own customers.
You don't need a IT background to know the "security loophole" excuse is completely bogus and makes no sense whatsoever.
Yep. The Rocket League devs already said so. They have everything they need in place for XBL-PSN crossplay, they literally just have to have Sony permission and then they can simply flip a switch to enable it.