OdinHades said: Nice guy Microsoft still doesn't allow Crossplay between Windows Store and Steam on games like Halo Wars 2. Just sayin'. |
That just changed now, though
OdinHades said: Nice guy Microsoft still doesn't allow Crossplay between Windows Store and Steam on games like Halo Wars 2. Just sayin'. |
That just changed now, though
I don't get this attitude in this thread to always mention the past and what MS did. Yes, MS did also a lot of shit, but when they got better in an area then they are better now, that's what counts.
This "MS didn't do it in the past and that's why Sony doesn't need to do it now" is such a weird statement.
It's like when a father tells his son "do something for school" and the son says "but you never did when you were a kid, that's why I won't do it now". Dude, your father learned from a mistake, don't act as if some mistake from the past gives you a logical argument in the present to do the same mistake.
Sony doing something against the players isn't ok just because MS did it as well. It still sucks.
aLkaLiNE said: Embrace, extend, extinguish. I wouldn't want anything to do with MS if I were Sony either.
to be clear, Sony does allow cross play. Everyone knows they allow cross play. It's particularily the Xbox brand that they don't want anything to do with. Look up the EEE strategy Microsoft employs for competitors. Embrace, extend, extinguish |
Those three words will likely keep Sony from wanting to make any compromise like this in the future. If Sony doesn't think they owe anything to consumers that won't buy their product, the least likely it is they'll act on it.
#4TheChildren
I can understand Sony if they don't want to allow it, Microsoft is indeed acting like Vultures and Hyenas. They're not on top, they want a share of the prize without putting much effort.
But this is giving Sony a bad rep anyway, because many players DO want crossplay.
CGI-Quality said:
It's different based on what I bolded. Gears and Halo were born on, and defined, Xbox. But it's pointless to even make the suggestion. Minecraft will continue to sell on as many platforms as it can. It remains a sound business move. |
Exactly. Always said since they bought minecraft (2 billion wow) that they'll keep it on all platforms but if they made a Minecraft 2 that would be exclusive.
There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'
RidingMower said: Because it's the ARK devs at fault here. They went the wrong direction in making multi-platform happen. I know of a game that allows multi-platform already. It's Trials Fusion, and it shares tracks between PC, Xbox, and PlayStation. They're workarounds in doing this. Hosting private servers is big must, so as to not log in on the competitions home turf while also not making strain on themselves with hosting on their own servers in doing this. Hiding who is playing on what systems, otherwise it is advertisement and neither Xbox or PlayStation do advertisements anywhere about the other console. They need to follow PlayStations rules to doing this first. They have the biggest player base with these consoles at play here. They really have nothing to loose right now by not allowing it. I wonder if this is ARK either not knowing any better, straight up lazy route making excuses, or being bitter and trying to cause conflict? |
Exactly.
It's also smoke and mirrors to make you not notice that the new $500 machine that was suppose to be the end all be all 4k machine can only play this game at 1080p60 or 1440p30. But cross play...that's the important issue, yeah. LOL.
noagenda said:
Exactly.
It's also smoke and mirrors to make you not notice that the new $500 machine that was suppose to be the end all be all 4k machine can only play this game at 1080p60 or 1440p30. But cross play...that's the important issue, yeah. LOL. |
seems like an alt account. just a way to make a dig on the one x. you know that it is up to the developer to pick the fps and rez. so, that has a lot to do with the topic. bu you have/are "noagenda".
It is near the end of the end....
Landguy said:
seems like an alt account. just a way to make a dig on the one x. you know that it is up to the developer to pick the fps and rez. so, that has a lot to do with the topic. bu you have/are "noagenda". |
Way to make assumption. Just because I don't post often doesn't mean it's an "alt account".
Regarding the point of the OP, The developer can't make a supposed powerful system run the game at 4k, so they are centering on cross-play to keep you distracted.
noagenda said:
Way to make assumption. Just because I don't post often doesn't mean it's an "alt account". Regarding the point of the OP, The developer can't make a supposed powerful system run the game at 4k, so they are centering on cross-play to keep you distracted. |
not to get too far off topic, but...
You seem to be confused, this is a game developer, not MS... So, "they" are not centering on that, MS just keep adding features. Sony is the ones saying no...
It is near the end of the end....
Be interesting to see Sony's response to EA, Activision and R* wanting cross platform play.
Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)
Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!