I don't play multiplayers game on console, so i don't care much, but maybe on big hit game this could be cool.

Can't reiterate this enough.

Additionally, P2P hosting has given me less problems in online games than dedicated servers which are far more prone to being overloaded.  

Oh, and dedicated servers come to an end for all multiplayer games.  P2P? Not so much.  If it were your way, you wouldn't be able to still find a match on the original 360 for Gears of War. Some food for thought

More food for thought, a bad route to the host of a round via P2P ruins one match till you join someone else, a bad route to a dedicated server ruins EVERY match until you're shunted to a different one.

Yeah! LOLOLOLOL Why don't they use dedicated servers to provide a better online experience, you know, like Driveclub, or MCC...

just because there is not dedicated server doesn't mean there's no network infrastructure supporting it.
I'm used to play with dedicated servers but BF4 and others with that model just makes one wonder if in the age of optical fibre and more than 100mbps connections, a (some times bad and old) server running several instances of the game server program is better than consoles doing p2p...

I had some pretty big issues when I had 3 megabit internet and when I had 6 megabit internet. (3 was pretty much unplayable, but EVERY other game worked fine)

Better MP connections? How? And for who? We are all limited by our individual internet speed, and If you have slow internet, no server is going to magically make your connection better.  If you have fast internet, chances are much higher that you're host and I don't see how anyone would complain about that.  Server farms could also be based in one specific state which would mean users on the other side of the country are more inclined to higher ping.  Modern day P2P matchmaking groups you with users that are from your state, or those that are nearby.  In a free market, P2P makes more sense and is far more cost effective, requiring less maintnence and giving multiplayer portions of games a longer potential for life.

So OP, what about Sonys lack of enforcing dedicated servers on certain games? I'd almost say it mutually benefits everyone.

Also a little factoid here, dedicated servers (yes, even for games) initially came about because it of often too heavy a burden on older systems to run the server/client networking code as well as the game software, so the dedicated server would run ONLY the server software and connecting clients needed only run client side software, alleviating the resource requirements.

In this day and age, the resources saved not running server-end code locally are next to nothing.

in modern day networking for consoles, you have as follows:

Dedicated:
Client > route via ISP to game service > Game service route to dedicated server > In/out transmitted to connected clients via each client ISP > Client
Intermittent checks from clients to dedicated server, intermittent checks from dedicated server to game service.

P2P:
Client > route via ISP to game service > Game service connects client to other clients (Client-connect handoff), best detected speed of client set as host, all other players connect directly.
Intermittent verification checks for clients to game service.

What's the end difference?, ultimately, the difference is just that the host is the dedicated server by default, in theory this means "always has good connection", in practice this means "always has good connection, if your ISP's route to it is good, and if the server is even up"
For P2P, the person with the best connection is host, and connecting clients bypass the additional route from game service to dedicated server, it has it's drawbacks of course, you will occasionally get low speed players joining your game and having bad lag, but this happens on dedicated servers anyway.

The only worthwhile use of dedicated servers is when the game needs persistent storage of user-interactable content, content that needs to be identical for all connecting clients.

p.s. when dedicated servers get turned off, you're fucked, p2p based networked games last until people stop playing completely, go fire up quake 1 on PC, and even now, to this day, you will find people running P2P multiplayer servers.

Yeah and all games should be 1080p and 60 fps for me to enjoy it. /sarcasm

Both are non issues when it comes to enjoyment.

Yes. Back when I owned a PS4 and PS Plus (got it at launch) I was shocked at just how slow and unreliable their service was. I use to own a PS3 and 360, and always preferred XBL but when I heard Sony was upping their services, I decided to go PS4 first this generation. Man, what a mistake it was for me. I don't know about everyone else, but the service was horrible. Between the mandatory maintenance downtimes, capped download speeds(I pay or 60 down, and the PS4 capped it at 24), hacker attacks which, for some reason, Sony can't fix for days and days and just general shoddiness, I just couldn't take it and sold the thing.

Now, I have a Wii-U and an Xbox One. Xbox Live has pretty much been the opposite of PSN for me. No mandatory down times, no speed cap at all, totally dependable etc. I'm still going to get a PS4, maybe this holiday, but when I do, it's going to be an offline console where I own it strictly for first party exclusives. Anything like FPS etc. that depend on a great internet connection is going to be on the bone.

I hope Sony can catch up though because the PS4 is a great system. It deserves a great online service to go with it.