By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nem on 07 July 2018
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
Nem said:

I honestly don't think theres anything anti-consumer about it.

Playstation consumers don't really gain anything from being connected to X1 and SW. It's the ones with the smaller online communities that benefit.

So, without having some sort of advantage for playstation users i don't see why it would even be pro-consumer for Sony to do it. Pro-consumer to rivals customers? Yeah, sure. But why should they care?

I honestly care more about the paywall as you say OP. I have a principle not to pay for online play that is free on PC. So, without the paywall i will actually try the F2P titles and maybe give them some money on PS. On Xbox i never did. Xbox isn't nor ever was more pro-consumer than Sony. We just need to think back about who started malpractices with DLC and season passes and how supportive Microsoft was of it. Also, they themselves created the online play pay wall and must we recall how it was in the unveil of the X1?

So, yeah, those are things that matter to me. Cross play doesn't.

"I honestly don't think theres anything anti-consumer about it."

>If the consumer is asking for it and it's not implemented, I consider it anti-consumer. It becomes a bigger deal when Sony's competitors are moving forward with crossplay. Even some third party devs are asking for it since it imposes less restrictions on those who play their game.

"Playstation consumers don't really gain anything from being connected to X1 and SW. It's the ones with the smaller online communities that benefit.

So, without having some sort of advantage for playstation users i don't see why it would even be pro-consumer for Sony to do it. Pro-consumer to rivals customers? Yeah, sure. But why should they care?"

>PS owners do stand to benefit: instead of only having 80 million other potential players to play with, they can have an additional 54 million potential players to play with via crossplay for a total of 134 million potential players.

"Xbox isn't nor ever was more pro-consumer than Sony."

>XBox didn't hijack anyone's Fortnite account last I checked.

"We just need to think back about who started malpractices with DLC and season passes and how supportive Microsoft was of it. Also, they themselves created the online play pay wall and must we recall how it was in the unveil of the X1?"

>I appreciate the history lesson but is this supposed to absolve Sony of any of their own current faulty policies?

I'm not asking for it. Some people are. Majority though? Nah.

Second point. Not true. There isn't a 1 to 1 representation in games. PS has a lot more exclusives and third parties than the other two. Some games would benefit slightly, but likely these are huge games to be multi-plat and you will never feel a difference when playing on the PS  because it's already highly populated. It would be a bigger advantage to the competition. One of the strong points of the playstation is that it's highly populated. This would erase that competitive advantage. It would be dumb to do that. Also, MS and nintendo aren't doing it for the consumers. They are doing it so Sony drops the competitive advantage.

Again, this is something that MS did in the past and would do again and much worse if they were in the lead now. Honestly, i'm thankful that this is the worst the market leader is willing to do. I cannot fathom the shit show we'd be in if Microsoft still was.