Opinion: Why Sony Won't Support Cross-Console Play

I think the most egregious thing is that Sony got their early life momentum from saying we are "For the Players" and we aren't being restrictive like Microsoft is.

Only to now be restrictive because they are winning.

But here's the thing.

If your friend has an Xbox One and Minecraft and wants to play with you, but cant afford or justify a PS4, it benefits. And the same the other way.

Plus, Minecraft is NOT selling the PS4. Sony has nothing to lose, but Microsoft has been smart.

Sony made MS look bad by positioning themselves as for the consumer, and now while Sony touts that label, Microsoft throws the bone back.

Does anybody really care?

I personally don't want it but can see why some want it.

I think it bad for gaming in my opinion. Companies need your money to keep going after all and this would cut there income.

"For the players" was just a catchphrase then, right? It's not a deal breaker, but it does suck. Even Nintendo that's super restrictive is in.

Install base is a moot point because people will still buy the Platform they prefer and games like CoD will probably never be cross play because of marketing deals, different DLC drop dates etc.

User base has nothing to do with it either. Sony may well have the 'most' gamers out of the consoles but if you add the PC to Xbox -
inc 360 users (if there are any still) and Switch - especially Minecraft, that would probably beat 'Sony's' user base.

MS seem to be trying to unite the PC and Xbox users into one combined community. Whether you buy an Xbox or PC, you are joining the same community - especially with their games - making them have the biggest online user base...

No one has said that Sony have to do it with 'every' game but they could pick and choose on a 'per game' basis...

There's no justification for this. Minecraft isn't selling PS4s, and Sony is really only hurting its own players by segregating them from the wider Minecraft community.

Let's hope we don't keep seeing more ugly, arrogant decisions like this as time goes on.

@BLP_Software I mean, that was just a marketing slogan. None of these big corporations are your friends.

I'm very pro Sony, but I think it's the right thing to do for multiple reasons.

For the players - it helps because it unifies everyone

For themselves - Microsoft now owns mine craft, so it might help to play nice for now rather than have ps5 as the only console where you can't play mine craft.

My opinion Microsoft is just plays catch up with Sony and making Sony look like the bad guys for not allowing cross play. There stupid enough to allow people play there games on window pc without owning Xbox and now there are playing the role of cross play which is none sense. Once Sony allows it with mine craft then everyone will want it on othe games like gta, cod and many more games. Sony has more to loose that MS does

probably because they can smell an ulterior motive from microsoft..

anyway, i thought what was possible in minecraft depended on what platform it was on? you can build much much bigger stuff on PS4/XB1 than you can on PS3/X360, or on mobile edition. And on PC you can have way more options/flexibility with minecraft than on any of the other platforms.

Business-wise it doesn't make sense to do. Cross-platform play is something that only benefits the consoles with the smallest userbase. Plus, Windows is also part of Microsoft, so it only makes sense for them to do.

To me no support for cross-plat play is not that a big deal, the real issue is if PS4 doesn't get public server/realm support then very few will be wanting to play Minecraft on PS4.. I guess the size of Minecraft community on PC, Android, IOS, Xbox and Switch is a tad bigger than Sony

@leucocyte the new cross-platform play will be on the public server/realm and size of the world will be infinite because it's no longer limited by the size of a local save file

@AlejandroMora well from that vote percentage up there i would have to say yes

I can completely see where Sony is coming from, especially since they made overtures last gen and got turned back. Also, they do lose some control. As with the XB1X, what about framerate in FPS etc? Sony have a policy of a capped 30fps if the non pro version is running it.

However, from a consumer point of view, I think it should be offered. I have a couple of friends who (in their eyes) I betrayed when I went XB360 to PS4 that would love to play some co op on games with me.

ever thought it's a PSN issue and not that Sony doesn't want to do it, perhaps they actually can't yet

@FullbringIchigo so you're telling me that nintendo, who are consistently 5 years behind everyone else when it comes to online, can but not sony?

@manu0 i'm not telling anyone anything, i was just thinking that PSN is a closed system and it has some design flaws even Sony said so, hence why you can't change your PSN ID, so PERHAPS it's not "wont" but "can't"

besides Nintendo might be behind but that also means they are in a place to see what mess ups the others made and not make the same mistakes

It's funny watching people fawn over MS (the same MS that tried to kick off this gen with forced log- ins andother anti-consumer bs) like it's some pro-gamer company. If MS cared so much about unifying people why did it not even consider cross-platform play until now when its been getting stomped? Opening up this door does nothing for Sony and stands to really hurt over time.

Why would they? And, at the same time, who says they won't?

Best Sony remember that IF they choose to not go that route that they wont be the biggest fish in the sea forever. They have to guard against this arrogant stance that crops up now and then (and yip MS was indeed like that in 360 days and boy do we all know what happened then...).

There's no justifying this. By staying out of this they miss out on:
-Super Duper Graphics Pack
-dedicated servers
-Realms/infinite worlds
-cross-platform play
-DLC cross buy across all platforms.

Isolating your user base from everyone else is a poor, anti-consumer move. Terrible move by Sony.

@BLP_Software Agreed. If it's what the player wants, why not do it? I mean, we already have a couple of games where we can play with PC players.

@BAMozzy Exactly.

I don't see the issue with it for 3rd party games, like you said. People are going to play on the system they are familiar with and like. I'm sure both systems will have their own timed/exclusive DLC.

I think sony is okay with cross-play with pc but doesn't want to cross-play with xbox or win10 store, sure microsoft is nice now, but if xbox or win10 store become bigger than psn I'm sure as heck microsoft won't think twice about cutting ps4 from their network. In the end, sony doesn't care if ps4 users won't buy minecraft on their ecosystem.

Since I mostly play single player game and don't like minecraft, this is a non-issue for me

Rocket League just got announced for Switch with cross play with the Xbox One and Steam versions. No PS4.

So is Microsoft the one behind this too, or will the Sony fanboys admit Sony's at fault?

Plus Microsoft can easily throw Sony under the bus if something goes wrong and no body will argue.

Sony can just say this;

Sorry no Microsoft, your anti consumer windows licensing operation has us all a bit miffed. Getting into bed with the enemy doesn't work and we're not in the mood to be shafted.

Nintendo on the other phone line;

You hoo it's me a Mario, I believe your plumbing needs fixing x x x

Ok. so here is my thing. I avidly support cross-network play. Having those walls broken down eliminates that feeling in my gut every time someone wants to play a game with me and I have to ask them.. what console did you buy it for.

But I think we all need to look at what Cross-Network means.

1.) It will change, forever, what is important to the console brand. I think this actually works in Sony's favor, because rather than looking for multiplayer products that are "better" on PS4 - they will be looking into multiplayer products that are "only" on PS4.

2.) But because of the previous point - it will no doubt lead to either fewer 3rd party multiplayer titles as every company tries to produces MP on their console only... or we will transition to 1st party offering single player and 3rd party having the only means to offer MP. Again.. I'm not sure I like either of those options.

3.) It will change multiplayer forever. For developers and gamers. And it isn't all for the best. The size and scale will no doubt increase, and we can play anyone as long as they own the game... But we have double digit GB patches every month as it is. Can you imagine what the mess it would be when 3-4 different networks are piling in, together?

Cross Network sounds good on the surface, but ultimately I think Microsoft is pushing this as a red herring to make Sony look bad. If Sony calls their bluff... or keeps out - both don't go well for them.

@IceClimbers I woulnd't say 'Sony is a fault' - they will have their reason for not wanting to do it - there are quite a few good theories in this comment section.

Personally, I don't see it working on big games, only on indies. What if one platform allows mouse/keyboard or you have the xbox elite controller which clearly gives you an advantage online in FPS games - would that give a fair online experience to consoles that don't have this feature? Also, what if the games are a little different, like exclusive DLC content - the devs would have to make the same content for all platforms so that is can be seen in-game.

One of the big 'features' of online play is interacting with other players, talking, planning, abusing other players - if this shared online was there then all consoles would either need a unified party chat otherwise you will only be able to talk to people on your platform - same with matchmaking - if its auto then fair enough, it could mix and match, but I doubt you will be able to search for your friends name to add them to your group - multiple platforms = multiple instances of the same username.

The other big factor is servers. Minecraft is doing it as they are getting some unified servers and hosting everything there. This means any other game would also need unified servers as I can't see Sony being happy using Xbox servers and Xbox being happy using Sony's.

There will be a lot to this story that we will never know as its all speculation. We don't know who said no and why so you can't really put blame on either party. I feel Sony is looking out for the future and they want to ensure they don't share too much as what they have is why they are currently #1 in the world - MS just wants to get new users and they seem to be trying everything to make this possible.

One thing that may happen now - If you have a kid and all they play is minecraft or rocket league and nothing else (there are some of them out there). If your kid has an xbox at the moment, or if you are looking to get them a new console - surely you would pick the switch over the xbox now? Free online until next year, portable and home console + only $25 a year for online once it goes live, instead of the $60 and the higher price point of the Xbox. Surely that is going to affect sales of the xbox over Christmas?

Not Sony's concern, why should they bother to support their direct competitors in providing a giant pool of players and creating a more stable online experience. It's not a charity.

@IceClimbers Dude you cant say stuff like that on here it will get you a ban, just a warning from someone that truly knows.
I game on most devices and have friends across all, it would be great if we could all just "PLAY" together

There are over 30 million XBoxes sold now, so I guess that there are enough players for multiplatforms games allready on that console. I don't think that's the reason for MS, they don't need the gamers that much.
Maybe we will someday hear the truth, same as Sony keeps EA Acces away from the console.

what i find ironic is all the people moaning about Sony not doing cross platform for Minecraft when MS DID THE EXACT SAME THING for FFXI on the 360 and it's the same reason why the XB1 didn't get FFXIV

they can't do it to others then complain about them doing it back

but here is the big question: IF the situation was reversed and the XB1 had ACTUALLY sold well, would MS have even bothered making Minecraft cross play with other systems?

I don't see why this is a story now, just because Sony are saying "no".

No-one really cared for all the PS3/360 years, when it was Microsoft who wouldn't allow it. Even until recently with the XBO, they wouldn't even allow cross-play with PC for games like War Thunder.

But now they've changed their attitude because they've - for want of a better phrase - had their ass handed to them this generation, and suddenly everyone makes Sony out to be the bad guys.

As someone who doesn't play much online anyway, I don't care one way or the other. But let's keep some perspective.

@get2sammyb i don't know if you have seen this but apparently to use the cross-platform play on Nintendo Switch you need to log into an XBOX Live account. perhaps this is why Sony said no

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/nintendo-e3-2017-minecraft-on-switch-requires-an-x/1100-6450965/

EDIT: the main question though is "Do you also have to pay for XBL Gold in order to play it on another system?", i can see people being a bit peeved if you do