Don't Expect a Quick Reply from Sony on PS4 and Xbox One's Cross-Network Gameplay

A few days ago, Microsoft opened to the possibility of cross-network gameplay between Xbox Live and other consoles and PC networks, extending an open invitation to other manufacturers to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, this immediately prompted many to expect a quick response from Sony Computer Entertainment on that possibility.

That's most probably not going to happen.

[johndoe11211]

"Because PC is an open platform it’s much more straightforward. Connecting two different closed networks is much more complicated so we have to work with developers and publishers to understand what it is they are trying to accomplish.

We also have to look at the technical aspect – and the technical aspect could be the easiest. We also have to look at policy issues and business issues as well."

Abriael, please explain to me what is vague about that answer? Every single thing he stated is factually correct. That is the BEST possible response that anyone can give at this time. I'm sorry if he's not a phil spencer that would just blurt out anything that comes to his head in order to gain points with the public. That answer is as straight forward and precise as you can get. The man even said they will work with developers to understand what they would like to do. That statement clearly states their intentions while showing that it's not something that will happen soon due to the technical and legal implications. What more do people want?

[Abriael]

Correct and Precise are two very different things.

In no place the article mentions that what Yoshida-san said is incorrect. As a matter of fact, he said all he could given the circumstances.

It's vague because it does not effectively provide a yes or no response, which he couldn't, and that's exactly the point. We won't get a yes or no response any time soon.

"Every single thing he stated is factually correct. That is the BEST possible response that anyone can give at this time."

If you read the article carefully, you'll notice that it says exactly the same thing.

[johndoe11211]

My point is that this answer is not "vague" or "iffy" as you stated in your article or "evasive" as a certain known diehard microsoft supporter stated in this comment section. "vague" and "iffy" are terms used by gaming writers that are trying to draw views to their site with clickbait articles to cast doubt on sony's response. He said they will need to talk to developers to see how it can be done and he stated the obstacles they would need to overcome. how in the name of all that is holy is that response vague?

If you want a vague response let me show you what he could have said that can be described as vague:

"We understand the interest by gamers for this feature and we commend microsft for their openness to the idea. At this time it would be difficult to say how or if this can be done and right now sony is dedicated to giving their customers the best gaming experience possible. It is definitely something we may consider in the future".

THAT, my friend, is vague, iffy and evasive.

[Abriael]

The answer is vague. It doesn't include a yes or no. That's the definition of vague. "vague" isn't necessarily positive or negative in this context. It just is.

The article states that the answers were "saw by some" as iffy. Not that they are iffy. The article actually criticizes those who interpreted the answer as iffy.

As for evasive. It's not mentioned even once.

[johndoe11211]

"or "evasive" as a certain known diehard microsoft supporter stated in this comment section", at no point did i say evasive was mentioned in your article.

vague
[veyg]

adjective, vaguer, vaguest.
1.
not clearly or explicitly stated or expressed:
vague promises.
2.
indefinite or indistinct in nature or character, as ideas or feelings:
a vague premonition of disaster.
3.
not clear or distinct to the sight or any other sense; perceptible or recognizable only in an indefinite way:
vague shapes in the dark; vague murmurs behind a door.
4.
not definitely established, determined, confirmed, or known; uncertain:
a vague rumor; The date of his birth is vague.
5.
(of persons) not clear or definite in thought, understanding, or expression:
vague about his motives; a vague person.
6.
(of the eyes, expression, etc.) showing lack of clear perception or understanding:

The man clearly stated they would work with developers on it and that they would have to look at the technical and business implications. There is nothing vague about that statement. What you wanted for him to say in order for you to be happy with the answer was "yes, we are gonna do it and it will be ready on the 17 of November 2017". His response shows that they are open to the idea and that they will have to work with developers to accommodate it. what exactly is vague about that other than the fact he didn't say yes and gave a date? you don't have to say yes or no in order to be clear. If you ask me to lend you $100 dollars and I say "i'm gonna have to go to the bank and see if my account has money in it" my answer wasn't vague, it was bloody clear as day. I didn't say yes or no but what i said implied that once certain conditions were met I would lend you the hundred. If you go through life expecting every answer to be yes or no in order for you to move forward then you are in for a lot of frustration.

[Abriael]

Vague = not clear.

A clear answer to a question that is answered with yes or no, is "yes" or "no."

Yoshida-san did not say "if certain conditions are met, we'll do it." he said "if certain conditions are met, we'll see."

It's funny that you're in full defense mode in an article that doesn't require any defense, because there's no attack.

[johndoe11211]

This has nothing to do with defense mode. Your article headline, like most gaming websites headlines these days, is clickbait nonsense that is calling a statement vague that was simply meant to show the steps and obstacles that would need to be considered when doing cross platform. We both know that by saying his statement was vague you will stimulate more discussion and debate and draw more clicks to your site. Here's a headline that would have been 100% more accurate to what he said: "Yoshida talks possibility and hurdles of cross platform play". But hey, that's no way near clickbaity enough right?

[freshslicepizza]

@Abriael
"Vague = not clear.

A clear answer to a question that is answered with yes or no, is "yes" or "no."

Yoshida-san did not say "if certain conditions are met, we'll do it." he said "if certain conditions are met, we'll see."

perfectly said. vague does mean not clear. sony's answers were not clear and still left loopholes in place.

Sonty's response,
"We also have to look at the technical aspect – and the technical aspect could be the easiest. We also have to look at policy issues and business issues as well."

that sounds like a loophole and this is why the answer is vague. they should have been more pumped about the idea. after all they went on stage at e3 to announce their deal with valve. why not say 'hey if we can make it work we will, we are after all here for the customers'.

@johndoe11211
"If you ask me to lend you $100 dollars and I say "i'm gonna have to go to the bank and see if my account has money in it" my answer wasn't vague, it was bloody clear as day. I didn't say yes or no but what i said implied that once certain conditions were met I would lend you the hundred. If you go through life expecting every answer to be yes or no in order for you to move forward then you are in for a lot of frustration."

going to the bank first is a reasonable response. it is logical and easy to know where you are coming from. you either have the money or you don't. sony to respind with from a business point and policy issue is not in the same category. sorry to burst your bubble.

why is this brought up when microsoft already opened up the DIRECT invitation? if anything the burden should be on microsoft to deliver on their word and sony should have put all the emphasis back onto them. they didn't. instead they said they already support cross-play with the pc. that does not answer the xbox one possibility. they should have said they would love to do it if it's possible. that's it. no political vagueness about policies and business.

[DragonKnight]

""vague" and "iffy" are terms used by gaming writers that are trying to draw views to their site with clickbait articles to cast doubt on sony's response."

DING DING DING!!! You hit the nail on the head.

Yoshida did not provide a vague response.

Question: Will Sony allow cross network gameplay.

Answer: We'll need to work with the devs on that one.

That's a direct answer. The only thing vague about that answer is that it is essentially a "yes, when we can get it to work" answer. But it's pretty direct for a PR response.

Abriael is just inventing and inviting controversy. Placing the ball in Sony's court to give a definitive answer when NO COMPANY EVER would ever outright make such a committed response to any question. A "yes" or a "no" in the business world can easily be turned into a lawsuit.

[freshslicepizza]

it is quite vague because not once did they even hint at the possibility of working with microsoft's xbox one. instead they alluded to the pc and left it up to the publisher to decide. which is fair enough until you get to the last part,

"We also have to look at policy issues and business issues as well."

that to me sounds like a backdoor, a way to get out of it of they choose to do so.

this needs to happen one way or another. gamers would live it mostly because of the rivalry but more importantly to keep the numbers up to sustain the community for longer. we all know online games live or die based on the community. having nintendo, microsoft, sony and the pc all working together should be possible in such a global connection we posses.

isn't there a game that will work with nintendo and sony? what sony needs to do is highlight why it will take longer to answer with microsoft than it did with steam and nintendo. we all know the main rivalries out there is playstation and xbox fans. so wouldn't it make the most sense to collaborate to get those two parties to play online?

micrsooft purposely worded their new direction moving forward, they named other consoles, they names other online services. sony on the other hand will not directly name other direct competitors, only the pc which micrsooft has already made games cross play with before as well.

[jb227]

"that to me sounds like a backdoor, a way to get out of it of they choose to do so"

Considering the news came out of the clear blue sky for Yoshida, is it smart for him to commit to something that he has no real details on? If he came right out & said "absolutely we are in", only to read MS' fine print & realize that their offer may make for an poorer experience for Sony gamers, Yoshida would have to go back on his word in order to do the right thing for his fans, which would be a bad situation & one that would be pointless to put yourself in w/ a kneejerk reaction.

"micrsooft purposely worded their new direction moving forward, they named other consoles, they names other online services."

Did you read the statement? The only platform they mentioned by name was PC, then the vague idea of "other networks"...they never once mentioned Sony directly by name.

Sounds to me like this was a situation where MS decided to finally start allowing cross plat play for Xbox & PC as that makes sense for their new focus moving forward, and they used the opportunity to put Sony in a tricky spot by basically calling them out w/o actually calling them out. Without seeing where it leads or what the details behind it are, you can't say right now that it could only lead to great things.

End of the day it makes obvious business sense for MS to do this, not out of sheer good will, but as a way to keep consumers from picking the PS4 over the XBO because all of their friends are on the former. It's not some white knight move to unite platforms, it is just a way to gain more market share, pure & simple.

[freshslicepizza]

a direct question was asked phil spencer

https://twitter.com/xboxp3/...

Josh Luck ‏@JoshLuck1995 Mar 14
@XboxP3 do you seriously see there being MP between @PlayStation and @Xbox ? I would love to see it but just can't see it happening?

Phil SpencerVerified account
‏@XboxP3
@JoshLuck1995 @PlayStation @Xbox For developers, more MP players means opportunity for games to stay relevant longer, good for all.

do you not think this is a good move, yes or no?

[BEASELY]

You two should examine this argument from an exterior perspective and realize just how petty it is. You're getting down to granial levels of technicality over nothing. Just relax.

[freshslicepizza]

we will relax once it becomes a reality.

[ApocalypseShadow]

What's hilarious moldy is that you took what Microsoft said as direct when that's not what they said. They said " we are open to other networks."This is Charla:

*Cross-Network Play
First, in addition to natively supporting cross-platform play between Xbox One and Windows 10 games that use Xbox Live, we’re enabling developers to support cross-network play as well. This means players on Xbox One and Windows 10 using Xbox Live will be able to play with players on different online multiplayer networks – including other console and PC networks.

Of course, it’s up to game developers to support this feature, and Xbox Live players will always have the option of choosing to play only with other Xbox Live players. We’re thrilled to confirm that Psyonix’s Rocket League will be one of the first games to take advantage of this new capability by enabling cross-network play between Xbox One and PC players, with an open invitation for other networks to participate as well.*

Did he have to directly say "we are open to PlayStation and the PSN network for crossplay of games? No he didn't. You used your brain to come to the conclusion that he spoke about Steam, Nintendo and Sony being included in what he's saying.

So why does Sony have to directly state " YES, we are working with Microsoft to make this happen?" They stated the same thing Microsoft said. It's up to third parties but there are legal and technical issues to get past. And being that Sony has already done cross play way more than Microsoft, I doubt they are not willing to try. It was Microsoft time and time again saying no to developers to not include cross play with Sony.

Johndoe has been destroying you guys with reason and logic. And he right about Abriel and the click bait title.

[freshslicepizza]

they said other online networks and other console. why would they directly name the ps4 when it means any console? they don't even know the actual name of nintendo's new system, nx is just a placeholder and sony will make a ps5. this is why it isn't specific to just saying ps4 or wii u.

that to me is a lot more clear than some vague response that sony gave and they never said we will have to look at our business model and policy issues first. for far too long microsoft has been sectioning itself off in their own walled garden, that has changed now. so there should be nothing to prevent xbox, playastion and nintendo fans from playing together. and we should not allow some vague response of policy issues and business plans to keep it from happening. if it doesn't happen then the media should be all over sony or microsoft for making it difficult moving forward.

and let's not ignore another elephant in the room, ea access. if sony can just mandate without even giving ps4 the option what does that tell you?

[ApocalypseShadow]

EA access has nothing to do with the topic. And two, it's just EA's way of undercutting used games and wanting to make a profit on old games. That's why they supported Microsoft on DRM, always online check ins and lack of game ownership. You should be aware by now of EA's tactics. No one has to tell you.

*On topic*

Sony has never had anything against it as most of the games like FF, rocket league, street fighter, DC online,etc are cross play. Microsoft denied it every time. Being open about it doesn't change the fact Sony was already fine with it. This is not on Sony. It's on Microsoft and their controlling behavior they always had. Sony doesn't need to be direct because through ACTION, we already know their answer.

I don't know how they or john can be any clearer to you guys.

[GamingIVfun]

People forget that it is not completely up to Sony or Microsoft, it's up to the developers and publishers ultimately, Sony can offer to allow it it but unless the developer/publishers want to do it, it doesn't matter. First party exclusives can't have cross platform play with other consoles.

Sony mentioned being open to cross platform console play a couple of years ago. Nothing was ever said or done to support it. I think the same thing will happen since Microsoft has said they are open to it.

[stuna1]

Truthfully I think this is Microsoft trying to push Azure Cloud servers. It just seems premeditated! Sony has always been pretty open to cross platform play, it has always been Microsoft against it. Now all of a sudden their for it!? Why? Because with their Azure Cloud service they stand to benefit greatly as well dictate the rules.

This is possibly one of many reasons Sony hasn't given a definite answer, because it'll cost them as well as put them at a disadvantage.

[DragonbornZ]

That's possible, but the first game they proposed uses Psyonix's servers right?

[stuna1]

Yes, but I think that will change as time goes on and it becomes more accepted.

[DragonbornZ]

@stuna1
Maybe. I feel like it's something they'd push for at the start with the first game, establishing a basis for the future.
It could be as you say, as what you said does make sense tho.
I guess we'll see.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

Great comment @stuna. I think what you say is on point with their sudden cross platform play change

[Aenea]

See my post below, has nothing to do with Azure servers...

[DashArrivals]

Sony have other fish to fry at the moment. There is no rush on this, but I still believe it will happen eventually. It doesn't really bother me though because everyone I know plays on PS4. But I do realise the great potential of this move.

[Free_Fro]

They're being evasive. .

at least the option is there...

-
^_^

[johndoe11211]

There is absolutely nothing evasive about his answer but i really didn't expect you to say anything different.

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

Oh please!

[bleedsoe9mm]

it was an answer designed to sound like its for the players without being committal with doing anything that is actually for the player

[vanity29]

At least they made a statement. MS turned down Cross play on ffxiv but the ones who brought it to light were square enix. MS said nothing about how they turned it down.

[-Foxtrot]

I don't get why people think Microsoft are the ones to ask Sony first on this, pretty sure Sony have been quite open for this for a while

[DragonbornZ]

Its because they sent them an invitation for rocket league cross network play.

[joeorc]

@Foxtrot + 12m ago
"I don't get why people think Microsoft are the ones to ask Sony first on this, pretty sure Sony have been quite open for this for a while"

Exactly 100%

I mean you can look back at games released on Sony and see they are in fact open to the idea, but again when you have two closed networks its exactly like you, johndoe, stuna1 all stated.. Its clear why and exactly how these problems are with two closed platform networks.

Its done on a game by game basis.. Many certain gamers want All games right now to be that way, and that's Like asking one of the companies be that Microsoft or be that Sony to basically give up control for their closed network in order for the good of the consumer...

Well its just not going to happen would Microsoft give up network control after all the billions they spent invested into networks, or Sony to give up all the hundreds of millions they have invested into their online structure to just give in..

The Answer Is of course no...
It seems if this was really about doing what's right, why not all last generation with the xbox360 was in the lead, why not was this Question asked to Microsoft than? Repeatedly like its being asked of Sony this time around.

Its pretty ironic, out of the two
Sony has always had an open opportunity to allow PC & Playstation
IP's to play together if the developer or publisher wanted to..they have been open to do such..but Microsoft has not..but ironic thing is now Microsoft is treating PC & Xbox as a single platform not only for windows 10 but also the online store front software & Services..you know Xbox live gold & Silver.

That also means more & more 1st party games released for windows 10 OS is designed from the get go to put the gamer onto Xbox & windows 10 software & services and that means also windows 10 users onto Xbox live be that siver or gold subscription. They are merging the store front. And since windows 7/8.1 & Vista are not the target for the future of the Windows 10 Eco system that means even PC under Windows 10 is no longer open its now also closed if you want to talk about opening up the networks for good of all gamers..

With windows 7/8.1 & Vista that's still the case , but in the case of windows 10 & Xbox no its not so simple in working out a deal.

[TheColbertinator]

>Sony uses Double Team

>Sony's Evasion has Increased

[DivineAssault]

It most likely happen for indie titles or something.. I doubt major releases will do this.. If so, thats great but im not holding my breath..

[MCTJim]

I don't care what either side says, I would just like to see it happen. I can play online with any platform and still play with everyone...that would be perfect.

[deathtok]

This article and others like it come across as disingenuous. Sony was equally as non-specific as Microsoft in their statement; neither named their competitors.

Until last week Microsoft stomped the idea of cross-play for years. I'm glad they're onboard but let's not immediately be down on Sony for Microsoft's previous policies.

[Wallstreet37]

Sony has always initiated things like cross play across their devices and pc, while Microsoft denied those features for the longest so idk where all this bs is coming from.

Wow Microsoft finally allowed pc cross play on their console and then made a comment about possible cross play between competing systems and now their taking the lead? Lol gtfo they were the ones not allowing it all this time.

Shu gave a clear enough answer which stands in line with the same protocol used when they first started allowing pc/ps cross play and they allowed that. Pubs/devs pitch it and if its in best interest of Sony and gamers, its a go. What wasnt clear? Oh its not clear bcus like always Microsoft hampers something, sees Sony allowing and reaping benefits and now ppl want to act like their console of choice is the one pushing it lol. Got it!

[MrFisher21]

Preach Brother

[Wallstreet37]

Lol thnx.

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

^^This.

[Brohan]

They already have the option on Xbox to allow players to play cross-platform or just play amongst themselves. So for them to do it on other games wouldn't be to hard as long as the developers want to work with them to get it done.

[PistolsAtDawn]

It would be nice if we could have crossplay, starting with Division, BO3, and Destiny...and on Azure servers so we could all play on TRUE dedicated servers...not the crap Activision ones. (I know Division is Ubisoft...but crossplay for that game would be awesome too).

[TheUndertaker85]

All I have to say as a XBOne owner is...

GIVE ME SOME BLACK OPS 3 ZOMBIES WITH CROSS PLAY! EVEN THE NEW CAMPAIGN AND NIGHTMARE MODE!

There's been talk before that console gamers can't compete with PC players. If Microsoft wants to continue backing that statement, go to the next logical choice. Instead of it being pit console vs console or console vs PC get them all working together first. Incorporate cross play into co-op play first. There's literally zero reason as to why it shouldn't already be happening.

It'd also be a huge bonus to allow 360/PS3 BO3 players to do the same for zombies. They already get the shaft on a lot with the game.

[DillyDilly]

It took Microsoft 3 generations making this announcement so Sony will probably reply when the Playstation is on version 7 & the XBOX is XBOX 9,000

[uth11]

MS announced this at the beginning of GDC and all the Sony execs were at GDC, and not back at the office discussing these things.

The best they could do was give non-committal answers. They haven't formulated an official company response yet. This is making an issue over nothing.

I suspect we will something sooner rather than later. The Rocket League guys seem hot for this, and Sony already has cross-platform play there

[iTechHeads]

Sony has no reason to allow this. Stuff like the Destiny and Call Of Duty partnership have made people get a PS4. Not only for the timed DLC but for PLAYING WITH THEIR FRIENDS.

Cross Play between consoles would eliminate this advantage that Sony has.

[Aenea]

The games that could possibly benefit are multiplats, multiplats use their own servers, not MS's Azure servers. This has nothing to do with that.

If a publisher/developer wants to support this they can do this already since MS now finally gave the okay. But the developers would need to be using their own usernames (Origin, Ubisoft, etc. username) in lists of people since those are unique across networks and if they want to support voice chat they can't use the PS4/X1 platform voice chat and need to implement their own. There's nothing anymore that keeps them from doing this.

Best way would be to actually connect the 2 networks so we could invite people to party chat from the other network, that is something that needs cooperation between the two and if one of them only wants to do that under strict rules like I believe MS wants to, then it's bound to not happen.

[onanie]

Don't expect a good article from Dualshockers.