By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Fortnite - warning DO NOT play on PS4, or you can't play on Switch (and quick start guide if you're sheltered like me, and didn't know about this game before)

Lauster on 19 June 2018
Mcube said:
pxrocks said:
In Previous generation PlayStation was begging for cross play with Xbox and Nintendo but this gen Xbox and Nintendo begging for cross play with PlayStation.its so funny but imo PlayStation doing the right thing here and they shouldn't feel pressure from some fanboys.playstation always supported cross play with PC but business wise not good to give your player base to your competition.just continue having cross play with PC,iOS,Android and everyone will be happy because 99% of players will be on that platform.

You don´t understand the real problem here. 

People make an account on their PC for Fortnite. All the items and skins they buy carry with their account. Meaning if you play on PC and you jump on XBOX you get to keep your stuff and from Xbox you can jump to the Switch and keep your stuff. Now if you log in once on your Playstation with your EPIC games account it leaves something on your account that wil block you from getting your progress on Switch and Xbox from now on. So now you´re locked on PS and PC. It´s the most disgusting thing they´ve done in a while and I dont understand how anyone can defend this. This isn´t ´pro business´ this is anti consumer. 

Except that if you first connect your account to your Xbox or your Switch you will not be able to connect with this account on your PS4.

If you blame to not be warned, blame EG, it's their page you see when you connect your account to a console network (but oddly they know how to warn when you want to disconnect your account).



Around the Network
Mcube on 19 June 2018
Lauster said:
Mcube said:

You don´t understand the real problem here. 

People make an account on their PC for Fortnite. All the items and skins they buy carry with their account. Meaning if you play on PC and you jump on XBOX you get to keep your stuff and from Xbox you can jump to the Switch and keep your stuff. Now if you log in once on your Playstation with your EPIC games account it leaves something on your account that wil block you from getting your progress on Switch and Xbox from now on. So now you´re locked on PS and PC. It´s the most disgusting thing they´ve done in a while and I dont understand how anyone can defend this. This isn´t ´pro business´ this is anti consumer. 

Except that if you first connect your account to your Xbox or your Switch you will not be able to connect with this account on your PS4.

If you blame to not be warned, blame EG, it's their page you see when you connect your account to a console network (but oddly they know how to warn when you want to disconnect your account).

You can from Xbox still connect to both Nintendo PC and mobile the fault is at sony´s there is no denying it. 



Lauster on 19 June 2018
Mcube said:
Lauster said:

Except that if you first connect your account to your Xbox or your Switch you will not be able to connect with this account on your PS4.

If you blame to not be warned, blame EG, it's their page you see when you connect your account to a console network (but oddly they know how to warn when you want to disconnect your account).

You can from Xbox still connect to both Nintendo PC and mobile the fault is at sony´s there is no denying it. 

Maybe I misinterpreted it, but I thought in the context of your previous text that actions were done one after other.

(1-Create your account on PC

2-Connect to your Xbox/Switch

3-Connect to your PS4

4-Can't reconnect to your Xbox/Switch because of your previous connection to PS4) 

That's why I made the precision in my first sentance. In this case, the step 3 is impossible.

 

You're confusing between Sony's position on the Crossplay (attackable in its posture, but maybe you do not know all the ins and outs behind this case, are you a little bit aware of the Microsoft Crossplay terms before you make your opinion?) and not to warn about the consequences of an account assignment for which only EG is responsible.



KLAMarine on 19 June 2018
EricHiggin said:
KLAMarine said:

The PS4 platform we have now but this is a superficial thought experiment and nothing more. The fact of the matter is the PS4 platform we've had and still have is increasingly anti-consumer and regularly associated with some negative maneuvers in the industry.

We don't have to arrange our purchasing agreements to such an extent. We can provide feedback in other ways. In this case, blast a company for when they start to shit on the consumer and have them suffer backlash to show them that their lead is not as concrete as they think. Don't let them think they can get away with abducting third-party accounts for example and Microsoft blasting them for this policy would do good.

At its core, this industry is a business and without a contract or written agreement, no one owes anyone anything.

Was it scummy for Microsoft to deny PUBG on PS4? Absolutely and it would be fair game to blast Microsoft for that maneuver. Just the same, it's completely fair game to blast Sony for hijacking people's EG accounts.

At the end of the day, what I want is for these companies to compete and blast one another and try their very best to one-up one another all the while benefiting the consumer instead of burning the consumer in the process.

I was just trying to point out that PS helped in the battle royale/PUBG scenario early on and didn't try to lock it down. If they had tried to lock it down it would be somewhat anti consumer, contract or not.

Otherwise I pretty much agree with everything you said. Unfortunately the way the system as it exists now is the best we've come up with so far. It's a lot better than most as well. Hopefully it can continue to progress in a civil manner for the good of everyone. Until then though, sometimes it's just going to suck, but that dip will always at some point be balanced out by a peak. Just gotta stay as positive as possible and not get dragged down in the negative times.

"I was just trying to point out that PS helped in the battle royale/PUBG scenario early on and didn't try to lock it down. If they had tried to lock it down it would be somewhat anti consumer, contract or not."

>That's nice and all but it's not much help for people whose EG account is under Sony's thumb.

"Otherwise I pretty much agree with everything you said. Unfortunately the way the system as it exists now is the best we've come up with so far. It's a lot better than most as well. Hopefully it can continue to progress in a civil manner for the good of everyone. Until then though, sometimes it's just going to suck, but that dip will always at some point be balanced out by a peak. Just gotta stay as positive as possible and not get dragged down in the negative times."

>I prefer to think the consumer is more able to affect change than to just shrug and act passively. These multi-billion-dollar conglomerates don't need to be handled with kid gloves. Sometimes, when they act with a heavy hand like Sony has here, they need to be treated just as firmly if not more.

twintail said:
All this talk about anti consumer this and pro consumer that just hides the fact that every decision these companies make are designed.to be pro company first and foremost.

>Of course it's all profit driven at the end of the day but some seek profit by looking after the customer, others by locking them down.



KLAMarine on 19 June 2018
twintail said:
Pyro as Bill said: 

What was Epic supposed to say? "Hey guys, it's possible that Fortnite might come to another console next year so don't play it on PS4 because Sony may or may not block your account/allow crossplay". Or should Sony have made it crystal clear that linking any crossplay game to PSN will lock you into their ecosystem?

Haha please. Epic developed the game. They ported it. It runs on their servers. They would know the account restriction policy being imposed. 

It's their customers. Like I said, they are as much at fault, not that they are solely so, and should have warned their constumers about their own game.

I'm not sure I'd lay as much blame on EG as this. Yes it's their game but it's not always their network through which accounts are created and linked to other networks. I downloaded Fortnite and created my EG account through my Switch. I imagine EG has limited control on what the customer gets to see during this process. I also expect that to use Microsoft's and Sony's respective networks, EG has to play by their rules...

Sony has been the one to push against cross-play, there currently exists no cross-play between PS4 and Switch/X1 (X1 and NSW are able to cross-play and play the same accounts fine from what I understand), and the one EG points the finger to when trying to play a PS4-linked EG account through the Switch is PS4. If there's one place where I would expect Sony to have less control over what the user can and cannot see during EG account creation and such, it would be non-Sony platforms. 

This is why I lean on Sony as being the most responsible for how things have turned out.



Around the Network
CrazyGamer2017 on 19 June 2018
Biggerboat1 said:

The game being on PS4 means far more to EG than it does to Sony, thus giving Sony more leverage to push the deal through on their terms.

You can say EG are complicit and should share some of the blame but nobody can expect them to sacrifice a huge revenue stream for a principal.

If you do want to apportion blame to both then it should be something like 99% Sony - 1% EG.

If EG were now to approach Sony & give them an ultimatum of including untethered accounts or lose Fortnite, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony told them where to stick it, just to show other developers/publishers that you don't fuck with Sony on their platform - will keep others from trying something similiar in the future.

And to your point about the situation being complex - it's not really.

Sony has weighed up the pro's (an attempt to reduce the number of players spending time & money on other consoles) and the cons (pissing of everyone who owns a PS4 & Switch, plus anyone who made the mistake of logging in to PSN without any intention of making the PS4 their preferred platform of choice) & decided that the former outweighed the latter. Simple.

And now they're reaping the criticism that they duly deserve.

Well if it is as you say then that would be very bad news for those pissed off by this controversy.

You and others are basically saying that Sony is not afraid of what could be the biggest backlash in gaming history by completely removing Fortnite from the Playstation if Epic Game decided to not play ball and agree to block Fortnite accounts on other systems. We are talking about telling some 30 million Playstation players (Probably more) of Fortnite that their favorite game is gone from their Playstation.

So if such a huge shit storm does not scare Sony then imagine how little they will care about the current fortnite account being blocked on Switch backlash. In other words don't bother appealing to Sony cause they won't care cause they're totally not afraid... Or at least that's what your theory entails.



EricHiggin on 19 June 2018
Mcube said:
KLAMarine said:

The PS4 platform we have now but this is a superficial thought experiment and nothing more. The fact of the matter is the PS4 platform we've had and still have is increasingly anti-consumer and regularly associated with some negative maneuvers in the industry.

We don't have to arrange our purchasing agreements to such an extent. We can provide feedback in other ways. In this case, blast a company for when they start to shit on the consumer and have them suffer backlash to show them that their lead is not as concrete as they think. Don't let them think they can get away with abducting third-party accounts for example and Microsoft blasting them for this policy would do good.

At its core, this industry is a business and without a contract or written agreement, no one owes anyone anything.

Was it scummy for Microsoft to deny PUBG on PS4? Absolutely and it would be fair game to blast Microsoft for that maneuver. Just the same, it's completely fair game to blast Sony for hijacking people's EG accounts.

At the end of the day, what I want is for these companies to compete and blast one another and try their very best to one-up one another all the while benefiting the consumer instead of burning the consumer in the process.

Microsoft paid for exclusivity for PUBG if Sony did that for Fornite fair play to them but they didn´t. This isnt even comparable to PUBG being exclusive to XBOX. 

XB used this thing called leverage, which comes in many forms, to make sure PS4 players can't play PUBG at all, and PS used leverage as well, to make sure they have exclusivity to Fortnite accounts on PS4, allowing everyone else to still play the free game. It's not the fault of PS that Epic either agreed to no warnings or not, locking accounts, just like how it's not the fault of XB that PUBG is exclusive to them, right? Epic and Bluehole both made choices, and now they are stuck where they are.

PS can easily allow this to blow over if they really want. Next time any new hot third party game comes out, PS can just make demands that are so anti consumer that no pub/dev, regardless of investors, will agree to them. Then when PS has 80+ million of their own customers losing their minds and creating a massive headache for whoever that pub/dev is because the game isn't coming to PS4, they will basically be forced to cave due to the mass negative social media activity towards them. Even if they tried to say, 'PS were big meanies and asked for too much', PS will just tweet small useless comments like everyone else does like, 'hey (insert dev/pub) wanna negotiate? #4theplayers'. Then a week later when PS stops being jerks on purpose, and locks up a more acceptable deal, they will come out smelling like the good guys even if that deal screws over XB and Nin again.

Who do you think the 80+ million PS4 owners are going to believe and side with? Two can play at this game if that's what XB and Nin want. I'd be careful if I were them.

KLAMarine said:
EricHiggin said:

I was just trying to point out that PS helped in the battle royale/PUBG scenario early on and didn't try to lock it down. If they had tried to lock it down it would be somewhat anti consumer, contract or not.

Otherwise I pretty much agree with everything you said. Unfortunately the way the system as it exists now is the best we've come up with so far. It's a lot better than most as well. Hopefully it can continue to progress in a civil manner for the good of everyone. Until then though, sometimes it's just going to suck, but that dip will always at some point be balanced out by a peak. Just gotta stay as positive as possible and not get dragged down in the negative times.

"I was just trying to point out that PS helped in the battle royale/PUBG scenario early on and didn't try to lock it down. If they had tried to lock it down it would be somewhat anti consumer, contract or not."

>That's nice and all but it's not much help for people whose EG account is under Sony's thumb.

"Otherwise I pretty much agree with everything you said. Unfortunately the way the system as it exists now is the best we've come up with so far. It's a lot better than most as well. Hopefully it can continue to progress in a civil manner for the good of everyone. Until then though, sometimes it's just going to suck, but that dip will always at some point be balanced out by a peak. Just gotta stay as positive as possible and not get dragged down in the negative times."

>I prefer to think the consumer is more able to affect change than to just shrug and act passively. These multi-billion-dollar conglomerates don't need to be handled with kid gloves. Sometimes, when they act with a heavy hand like Sony has here, they need to be treated just as firmly if not more.

Kid gloves? How is what PS is doing so horrible when you agreed what XB did with PUBG was "scummy", or in other words, just as bad if not worse? It's not like XB did this back during the 360 days, or even at the beginning of the gen, it was just last year, after Phil has been spewing his 'I hate exclusivity' BS for years now. Yet all you've heard at XB E3 for the last couple years is exclusive, exclusive, exclusive, and now all of the sudden since it's 2018, everything changes because XB and Nin say so?

It's funny how I don't recall seeing anyone mentioning/offering that XB should definitely agree to port PUBG to PS4 asap, along with PS unlocking the Fortnite accounts. That kind of thinking where XB can get away with what they did but PS can't, is having your cake and eating it too, and life doesn't work like that. Why XB and Nin poked fun at PS and didn't bother to follow that up with a tweet like, 'hey how about a trade, PUBG for unlocked Fortnite accounts?', boggles my mind. The XB PR win on that one would be so huge due to how truly pro consumer it would be, but hey, let's all just forget about that an pay attention to who the media's bad guy of the week is.

If your going to say PS needs to be dealt with appropriately, I'm on board, but only if your going at it from every angle, holding everyone guilty of this "crime" accountable. Every single day, everything and everyone are blamed for a past they may or may not have had anything to do with, so console gaming surely doesn't get a pass.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 19 June 2018

LudicrousSpeed on 19 June 2018

Are we really reaching so far to defend Sony here that we’re comparing the hijacking of accounts with a timed exclusive that couldn’t launch on PS4 in EA mode anyway? lol



KLAMarine on 20 June 2018
twintail said:
KLAMarine said:

>Of course it's all profit driven at the end of the day but some seek profit by looking after the customer, others by locking them down.

Its money first. If an action just happens to benefit the consumer too then of course that is great and high five all round. Sonys action does indeed suck. At the very least they should allow ppl who move from one platform to the PS4 and then back to their original platform to not be locked out of their content. I think that is a compromise they can indeed make even if they keep ps4 paid content tied to the PS4 account.

Not sure what you're proposing here. Not sure Sony would agree to it either.

twintail said:
KLAMarine said:

I'm not sure I'd lay as much blame on EG as this. Yes it's their game but it's not always their network through which accounts are created and linked to other networks. I downloaded Fortnite and created my EG account through my Switch. I imagine EG has limited control on what the customer gets to see during this process. I also expect that to use Microsoft's and Sony's respective networks, EG has to play by their rules...

Sony has been the one to push against cross-play, there currently exists no cross-play between PS4 and Switch/X1 (X1 and NSW are able to cross-play and play the same accounts fine from what I understand), and the one EG points the finger to when trying to play a PS4-linked EG account through the Switch is PS4. If there's one place where I would expect Sony to have less control over what the user can and cannot see during EG account creation and such, it would be non-Sony platforms. 

This is why I lean on Sony as being the most responsible for how things have turned out.

It is their game. They do indeed have to play by the rules set by each platform provider. But this means that they do indeed know how the account system will work between platforms. They arent being blind sighted by anyone. The weird stipulations for account transfer by Sony is something they would have known when bringing teh game to the PS4 in the first place.

So no, trying to shield EG from blame makes zero sense here. The reality is that they would have known and agreed (even begrudgingly) to how this all worked. After all we already known that cross-play can work and that while the decision comes from Sony the actual implementation comes from EG. So again... they know how this all works.

Its rubbish that Sony locks the content. Its just as rubbish that EG promotes the game, allows account transfer but conveniently dosnt mention any issues when connecting to the PS4 version. EG has allowed these restrictions to exist. 

"the actual implementation comes from EG."

It's not entirely EG's implementation if EG wants Fortnite available on PSN. Sony gets a say on how Fortnite will work on and with their network and it's Sony that stands to benefit from these restrictions, not EG.

EricHiggin said:

KLAMarine said:

"I was just trying to point out that PS helped in the battle royale/PUBG scenario early on and didn't try to lock it down. If they had tried to lock it down it would be somewhat anti consumer, contract or not."

>That's nice and all but it's not much help for people whose EG account is under Sony's thumb.

"Otherwise I pretty much agree with everything you said. Unfortunately the way the system as it exists now is the best we've come up with so far. It's a lot better than most as well. Hopefully it can continue to progress in a civil manner for the good of everyone. Until then though, sometimes it's just going to suck, but that dip will always at some point be balanced out by a peak. Just gotta stay as positive as possible and not get dragged down in the negative times."

>I prefer to think the consumer is more able to affect change than to just shrug and act passively. These multi-billion-dollar conglomerates don't need to be handled with kid gloves. Sometimes, when they act with a heavy hand like Sony has here, they need to be treated just as firmly if not more.

Kid gloves? How is what PS is doing so horrible when you agreed what XB did with PUBG was "scummy", or in other words, just as bad if not worse? It's not like XB did this back during the 360 days, or even at the beginning of the gen, it was just last year, after Phil has been spewing his 'I hate exclusivity' BS for years now. Yet all you've heard at XB E3 for the last couple years is exclusive, exclusive, exclusive, and now all of the sudden since it's 2018, everything changes because XB and Nin say so?

It's funny how I don't recall seeing anyone mentioning/offering that XB should definitely agree to port PUBG to PS4 asap, along with PS unlocking the Fortnite accounts. That kind of thinking where XB can get away with what they did but PS can't, is having your cake and eating it too, and life doesn't work like that. Why XB and Nin poked fun at PS and didn't bother to follow that up with a tweet like, 'hey how about a trade, PUBG for unlocked Fortnite accounts?', boggles my mind. The XB PR win on that one would be so huge due to how truly pro consumer it would be, but hey, let's all just forget about that an pay attention to who the media's bad guy of the week is.

If your going to say PS needs to be dealt with appropriately, I'm on board, but only if your going at it from every angle, holding everyone guilty of this "crime" accountable. Every single day, everything and everyone are blamed for a past they may or may not have had anything to do with, so console gaming surely doesn't get a pass.

Yes, I've said Microsoft's handling of PUBG is scummy and I stand by that statement but this thread isn't about PUBG, it's about Switch not being able to play an EG account hijacked by Sony. As far as I can recall, the Switch has never denied the release of a multi-plat game on PS4 and yet Sony has screwed over Switch owners.



Biggerboat1 on 20 June 2018
CrazyGamer2017 said:
Biggerboat1 said:

The game being on PS4 means far more to EG than it does to Sony, thus giving Sony more leverage to push the deal through on their terms.

You can say EG are complicit and should share some of the blame but nobody can expect them to sacrifice a huge revenue stream for a principal.

If you do want to apportion blame to both then it should be something like 99% Sony - 1% EG.

If EG were now to approach Sony & give them an ultimatum of including untethered accounts or lose Fortnite, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony told them where to stick it, just to show other developers/publishers that you don't fuck with Sony on their platform - will keep others from trying something similiar in the future.

And to your point about the situation being complex - it's not really.

Sony has weighed up the pro's (an attempt to reduce the number of players spending time & money on other consoles) and the cons (pissing of everyone who owns a PS4 & Switch, plus anyone who made the mistake of logging in to PSN without any intention of making the PS4 their preferred platform of choice) & decided that the former outweighed the latter. Simple.

And now they're reaping the criticism that they duly deserve.

Well if it is as you say then that would be very bad news for those pissed off by this controversy.

You and others are basically saying that Sony is not afraid of what could be the biggest backlash in gaming history by completely removing Fortnite from the Playstation if Epic Game decided to not play ball and agree to block Fortnite accounts on other systems. We are talking about telling some 30 million Playstation players (Probably more) of Fortnite that their favorite game is gone from their Playstation.

So if such a huge shit storm does not scare Sony then imagine how little they will care about the current fortnite account being blocked on Switch backlash. In other words don't bother appealing to Sony cause they won't care cause they're totally not afraid... Or at least that's what your theory entails.

I'm not saying that this could be the biggest backlash in gaming history because there is zero chance that either company will choose for the game to be pulled. There is way too much money being made.

So your conclusion that if Sony isn't scared of the backlash of the game being pulled then why would they be scared of the smaller backlash of untethering the EG account doesn't really hold true, because the first isn't realistically an option.

Companies do care about there brand but they also care about money and so they have to weigh up the implications of any action on both. In this instance Sony has concluded that the amount of extra money they will make is worth the tarnishing of there brand. Or at least they did when setting out their terms to Epic. Perhaps they didn't foresee the backlash being as big as it is, which may lead them to rethink their position, or not...