Quantcast
Why console crossplay will mean nothing in the long run

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why console crossplay will mean nothing in the long run

konkari said:

The potential market access has big implications, and I dont think crossplay will bring benefits to consumers, especially console gamers. The 3rd party companies will not put the same effort on games with smaller gamer base and this just leaves the consumers in unequal position.

I still remember the PS3 era when 3rd party games where very poorly implemented ports  for PS3 and the reason was simply the fact that 360 had more installed base due to earlier launch. 

Remmber PS4 and X1 early days, when MS implemented "same visual standard for X1 as PS4 demand"because they had less powerful console. Well market economics won and we see most 3rd parties comeout 900p for X1 and 1080p for PS4.

And then there is of course MS decision to make XBox exclusives available for PC and enabling crossplay between Xbox and PC. This has certainly benefitted PC gamers but the frankly I dont think it has helped the Xbox owners at all. I mean MS essentially went to less exclusives and focused to multiplayer genres. Why would anyone buy the console if you can play it on PC? Lets take an example, Destiny D1 was console exclusive and the gamers were very loyal and stuck withtjhe game to To make it great. And what did the developer do, made it available on PC and put so much resources on this development that the game itself was lousy. And by the this was the reason why D2 had to reboot, so everything that console players had invested had to be left behind. Anyway, all streamers went to PC, the game was superior in PC so face it console gamers, you lost.

Crossplay plays in the hands of 3rd party developers, not console gamers.

a

I rememberthe

hJways. What the hell goes on with the quoting system on this site? I'm on mobile and I can't type a coherent sentence.

h



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Around the Network

@konkari, I remember during the 360 days when Microsoft wouldn't allow late ports to their console. And (I think) Sony would only allow late ports if they had extra content.

This gen, the PS4 version of games were better than the Xbox One versions almost every time since day one. Every now and then, there was parity but it was almost always a no brainer which console would have the superior version of a multiplat. The game that made me buy a PS4 was Tomb Raider Definitive Edition and that game was definitely superior on PS4.

Microsoft has obviously relaxed their "late ports" philosophy, too. They're more than happy to get games like Nier Automata, Crash, and Hellblade a year later.



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

konkari said:

The potential market access has big implications, and I dont think crossplay will bring benefits to consumers, especially console gamers. The 3rd party companies will not put the same effort on games with smaller gamer base and this just leaves the consumers in unequal position.

I still remember the PS3 era when 3rd party games where very poorly implemented ports  for PS3 and the reason was simply the fact that 360 had more installed base due to earlier launch. 

Remmber PS4 and X1 early days, when MS implemented "same visual standard for X1 as PS4 demand"because they had less powerful console. Well market economics won and we see most 3rd parties comeout 900p for X1 and 1080p for PS4.

And then there is of course MS decision to make XBox exclusives available for PC and enabling crossplay between Xbox and PC. This has certainly benefitted PC gamers but the frankly I dont think it has helped the Xbox owners at all. I mean MS essentially went to less exclusives and focused to multiplayer genres. Why would anyone buy the console if you can play it on PC? Lets take an example, Destiny D1 was console exclusive and the gamers were very loyal and stuck withtjhe game to To make it great. And what did the developer do, made it available on PC and put so much resources on this development that the game itself was lousy. And by the this was the reason why D2 had to reboot, so everything that console players had invested had to be left behind. Anyway, all streamers went to PC, the game was superior in PC so face it console gamers, you lost.

Crossplay plays in the hands of 3rd party developers, not console gamers.

a

see

d21lewis said:
@konkari, I remember during the 360 days when Microsoft wouldn't allow late ports to their console. And (I think) Sony would only allow late ports if they had extra content.

This gen, the PS4 version of games were better than the Xbox One versions almost every time since day one. Every now and then, there was parity but it was almost always a no brainer which console would have the superior version of a multiplat. The game that made me buy a PS4 was Tomb Raider Definitive Edition and that game was definitely superior on PS4.

Microsoft has obviously relaxed their "late ports" philosophy, too. They're more than happy to get games like Nier Automata, Crash, and Hellblade a year later.


KLAMarine said:
EricHiggin said:

Nin stock is down 30% over the last couple of months and looks to continue that trend.

SNY stock is up 09% over the last couple of months and looks to be stabilizing.

MS stock is up 05% over the last couple of months and looks to be stabilizing.

While gaming has a greater influence for Nin's stock, the account and cross play debacle doesn't seem to be bothering the shareholders at SNY or MS.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Stock charts.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

JRPGfan said:

Lets assume like 5% of players would actually make use of cross play, on the PS4 side.
I really doubt the number is much higher than that.

Sure that ll be "millions" of players.
The same is true for F2P being locked behinde a paywall on the XB1 though.
Theres probably a good ~40% or so, out of those 39m Xbox Owners that dont have access to fortnite at all, because MS isnt allowing them it.

Why dont you hear epic bitch about MS being hurting their sales or MAU numbers by locking players out?
This crossplay thing is overblown.

 

"I find it funny how F2P being locked is somehow a bigger issue than millions of plaeyrs being able to play with one another."

You really dont think its a bigger deal? Its hurting all the xbox owners that bought a xbox, but cant afford to pay the subscription, but want to play Fortnite and such games.
Its also hurting the devs that make fornite, their market reach is smaller because of MS chooseing this.
That number is probably muuuuuuuuch bigger than the PS4 owners that wish they had crossplay with xb/switch.

I agree with this part. This is happening with XBOX from quite some time now.  F2P games is hiding under XBL. Imagine playing Fornite which is free on PS4 and PC and when you buy XBOX because it allows you to cross play then to find out you need Gold first. MS needs to fix this first before they start crying over cross play because I see Sony doing cross play under PS plus and worst F2P games will require PSPLUS so we can have Cross play yeah the horror of this one. People seems to forget the Sony is running a business and Cross play with their direct competitor will not give them any benefits at all. If they allow it and MS needs to XBL do you think Sony will not copy this shitty practice?

I would rather stick playing F2P for free instead of hiding under a payroll because of this Cross play Drama shit you guys are crying about.

My take on Cross play.

First of all. Business wise.
Sony doesn't benefit anything here. While both MS and Nintendo will benefit big time if Sony allows this.
Especially MS as I explain above Fornite is not free to play on XBOX.
MS also needs it because on how low their install base is but you have to remember last gen they block it because they will not gain nothing from it.
Online play from MS has a payroll and if they allow it they will get less because PS3 is their direct competitor. The same thing is happening now but people seem to forget that Sony allows cross play but not just with you know their direct competitor.

You can say  Sony is anti consumer but majority of people I see crying is from you know other side of the fence. Are those Sony's consumer or Nintendo/MS consumer? Can you tell it honestly they are being anti consumer?  Although I agree they are being a dick about it. More like Cock blocking but I understand why they are doing it.

For me personally I hate cross play. 
I don't want to play with PC gamers that will always have an advantage over me or my friends. I want to play with the same playing field so I would rather play with PS4 players.

Now with crossplay with  Mobile. Imagine a team based game and you have a team mate who plays on mobile. I played a lot of MOBA and imagine LOL or DOTA will have mobile counter parts and it's cross play with PC the horror of playing rank games solo/duo if crossplay becomes a norm. I mean having to solo/duo most of the time in MOBA is already hard and now you guys want cross play as a norm?
You guys don't see the negative impact of cross play because of your principles. On paper it looks good but if it start affecting your game play you will wish it didn't existed.

TLDR version: I would rather stick playing with PC gamers only and If I am playing with PS4 I would rather stick with PS4 gamers only.

Also, it is anti consumer right and people defending it are stupid? Sometimes you have to go outside of this console warring or your so called principles that just because some are not okay with it they are stupid. Some of you needs to stop being you know are representative. Don't try to represent us who disagree with it because I don't see any benefits from cross play aside from co-op based games and playing with friends who has an XBOX but I don't that's the thing.



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
KLAMarine said:

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Stock charts.

Which ones?



RaptorChrist 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.

They are all companies looking to make the most profit they possibly can. Any "pro-consumer" actions they take are still for their own long-term benefit, and they wouldn't be doing those things if they could get away with not doing them.

We all love videogames and maybe it's good to sometimes tuck that thought away and believe that these companies are catering to us as gamers, but let's not kid ourselves. If you have ever worked for a for-profit company before then it becomes abundantly clear that every single thing they do is for money. No exaggeration. Hard stop. Heck, many of the people working for these companies don't even play videogames. And just because Sony, as a company, makes a decision to do something, doesn't mean that every employee of said company agrees with it.

Sometimes it seems like people can spin any situation into a positive for themselves. If it were the other way around, Sony supporting crossplay and MS against it, I'd bet anything that your opinions would be different. Do you disagree?

My opinion would be exactly the same. As you say companies purpose is to make money. My purpose is as a customer to make the purchase decision that is most advantageous to me.

Playstation lines up with those objectives more presently. Xbox has been so in the past aswell and SEGA before that.

This is very pragmatic. As it stands, Sony has nothing to gain from allowing cross play, just like Microsoft back in the 360 era when they refused to do so.



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.



V-r0cK said:
Question for the cross players: Do you know if you're playing with someone that's on a different console?

I feel that cross play only affects 1% of gamers that has friends that own a different console and want to play together, but chances are, your friends have the same system as you and there's never a shortage of players online when you play. So why the big need of cross play? Just cause people are saying so?

I personally want Sony to jump on cross play, but only for the sake of getting the complainers to stop. Because the bottomline is that with or without cross play, it has never affected my gaming experience (and likely hasnt affected any of yours).

Most of the time friends have the same console... so that they can play together.  A Sony guy might have found himself buying an Xbox One purely to play Call of Duty with his friends.  The whole point of cross play is to eliminate that customer inconvenience.



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

microsoft and nintendo online games are dying fast so they need any online player to keep this game's alive

Last edited by Thisguywhokills - on 07 July 2018