It works both ways my friend. MS are allowing the game to still be sold on PS4, Sony are the ones that are pushing the buttons. So if a future PS exclusive hits an Xbox console id expect you to say its okay, Xbox doesnt have to use PSN to play PS games. Either way i dont mine Minecraft being sold on PS consoles, i never did have an issue with it. My issue comes from Xbox wanting to merge there Minecraft community together and Sony are basically flipping them the bird. After all its MS's multi-billion dollar baby, i dont see the issue with what Xbox want from them, neither does Nintendo and anybody else for that matter.

Its also sad to see gamers sticking up for this practice. I never liked when MS blocked it last gen and i dont like it now that Sony are blocking it.

So your calling me out yet your the one agreeing with an anti consumer practice.

People always said Minecraft is not a killer app especially when it was announced for Xbox 360 and then end up selling 10 million before the retail version got released.  Minecraft is reaching(going to reach)  the top 10 most sold software sales on PS4/Xbox one and that even without the digital numbers..it even became the best selling Vita games and surely helped Vita sales.  I am fine that people don't like Minecraft but when a game is on his way to outsell games like Destiny on a single platform I find it strange people don't want to call it a killer app.

Such a great move by MS. They literally don't have to do anything now but say they would like crossplay with their biggest competitor with each and every MP game this gen to siphon brownie points away from said competitor. Dunno if that will ever translate into sales, but still a very good chess move.

I like crossplay because it means it's harder for a game to die online due to more users.

But I feel Sony don't want to do this because they want console gamers to have to get a PS4 to play online together and Microsoft don't care what you buy.

Lol sony scared?

Why would it be different? If somone wants to buy a PS4 or an XB1 and knowing that Minecraft is only available to the XB1 dont you see the appeal? Minecraft sells well on everything, and someone looking for a home console and wants minecraft than theres your killer app right there. 

All i am saying is it will deliever an edge to Xbox over PS4 if Minecraft isnt sold on PS4 anymore. Its not going to make the XB1 outsell the PS4 or even boost sales numbers though the roof however there is an audience out there for Minecraft. The game has an image and a reputation in the gaming world. It wont be a lost cause for MS if its not sold on PS4 as it will drive there other side up. I do say i think MS are waiting and milking the sales on the game as much as they can on PS4, probably just to help pay back that 3.5b they spent on it. However if its not selling on PS4 anymore than expect heavy marketing campaigns for the XB1 version. 

Indeed this still sounds very fishy

Ark's Jeremy Stieglitz - co-founder of developer Wildcard as well as lead designer, programmer and co-creative director of the game - wrote on Twitter: "For Ark, if the session host is running an Xbox One X, anyone connected to that host will not have tether regardless of clients' consoles :)."

MS wants crossplay, yet somehow they always want to remain in full control. XBox live sign in, or running on MS hardware.

As much as I can appreciate the appeal of crossgen for a number of indiviual games, the idea of crossplay as a standard meta-platform feature across all games is nothing more than a pipedream.

It will always be allowed or not, implemented or not on a game-by-game basis. Not just from the perspective of the platform holders but also the developers/publishers themselves. There's a significant engineering challenge required to implemenet and maintain meaningful cross-play in the way that many here on VGChartz dream it will be. And the actual benefits to respective games--and thus their creators--for all games that aren't MMOs are frankly not enough to justify the engineering manhours.

Sure for more service-based games it makes sense to try to unify the playerbases, but for three separate platforms with radically different network infrastructures, it's simply not worth it for the dev/pub to bear the cost of implementing and centrally managing social connectivity features that actually would make cross-play worthwhile.

So essentially, being limited to real barebones social connectivity between players on different platforms significantly limits the appeal of crossplay to essentially a novelty feature that probably sounds cool in theory but would likely be so clunky in practice that most players won't bother with it, and if that's how it eventuates, the publishers will be asking themselves is it really worth the developmemt effort.

Id would be a good way for sony to be stronger against the PC market
Id would keep online user bases larger for a longer time
Id would benefit gamers

Not doing it hurts their reputation look at the topics we are discussing on it. While doing it will make them seem very user friendly, who doesn't want that? I do!

CGI is absolutely correct here. Minecraft was already supported on most platforms before Microsoft bought Mojang. To retreat from that stance would earn them more enmity than it would be worth, and would probably also put a serious dent in Minecraft's own market value. People were leery when they made the purchase to begin with, and have been second-guessing a lot of the moves they've made since the purchase as being forced by Microsoft. There would be no trust whatsoever if Microsoft pulled support for a platform.

Also worth noting: Minecraft as an acquisition was not driven by the XBox Division. Mojang's purchase was almost entirely pushed by the Windows Division. The long term plan is for Minecraft to drive adoption of Windows and (pie in the sky) maybe even the Windows Store, not XBox.