Microsoft has made no secrets about its cross-platform ambitions, and it's about to turn up the heat.
So Xbox live is coming to all platforms like a service or is it something different?
Microsoft wants to be the Netflix of gaming...
The whole point of cross play is that you dont have to buy into one ecosystem. What us the point of forcing people to use your ecosystem when they never had to in the past. The get people to pay for live for f2p games so I'm sure the will let Microsoft change people to play Minecraft on mobile devices as well.
@Eonjay it’s already used for cross platform minecraft play, and people don’t have to pay to use it
MS cant even be the kmart of gaming. Not when everyone else is doing better than them in every area. PSNow has the same streaming service with a much larger library of games.
@Eon That may be the point of cross play, but MS is most certainly all about getting people to buy into one ecosystem. It has been since the introduction of Live services on Windows. Which is why all their products, even enterprise solutions, center around Live in some way. Cross play gives MS visibility, and keeps them relevant even if people aren't using their ecosystem. It also bolsters those who are using their ecosystem, by expanding the relevance to those who are currently using it.
Never they don’t have the games for it.
@Eonjay I think you need to look up the definition of "forcing".... I don't think it means what you think it means.
@Zeref this @Eonjay guy needs to look up the definition of cross play and cross platform, since he is absolutely mixing everything. Logic would help too.
No Microsoft wants to be the “Windows OS” of gaming ie become the standard. I actually think this would be bad, as it will mean if you want to play a specific game you will have to exclusively subscribe to thier service and play by their rules. Pretty much rules out used game market. I don’t think Nintendo would submit to this but Sony could have some future ass clown of a CEO who might think this will be a great idea 5-10 years from now (investors first...). Now for those loving/praising all digital future, imagine having to pay 99$ a month just on a game pass, and X ammount still to play online or piece meal some other BS service. If they are only game in town, they control the pricing.
I always said they will be a multi platform service, and always get down voted.. Here you go, looks like it's going that way.. Which is a good thing tbh...
What that means is that developers can implement Xbox Live features into games across plattforms. I assume its kinda like when you have the option to log into Uplay, Origin in EA/Ubisoft games.
The thing is the ps now service can not compete , It does not work well.Its old tech on a very very small scale.All it is is a small company sony bought and they are not heavily investing in the tech and are just renting servers. Companies like MS have more top quality self owned servers around the world than almost anyone and they have a big dedicated team developing its own version of the software. Right now it does not matter at all but in the long run this format is what everyone will want just like any other streaming service. So you better have the structure for it. Sony is kinda fucked in this aspect but not because they pretty much can just sue some big companies service and pay them. Its just not a first party product so it will be tricky . I hope they figure out a solid solution. I would love to play ps exclusive games that can properly run well at native res and can handle multiplayer. Time will tell !!
MS is adament about destroying consoles.
Microsoft has experience with Azure and can see the direction compute is going. Of course as usual they are well before their time and unfortunately have to cater to those who only can digest incremental changes.
They are refering to when they launch its cloud service that will run the entire xbox platform. So why would they not try to put it on the switch if they want it on every phone,tablet and tv computer
So all I need then is a ps5 and a switch and use switch for exclusives like Mario etc and xbox live for MS exclusives and use my ps5 for exclusives and all my 3rd party games. That won't turn out well for MS
@sprinterboy why not Sony and Microsoft don't make alot off console sales anyway they make it from software and services so Microsoft putting there's on all devices, mobile other consoles pcs even smart tvs opens them up to more than both Sony and Nintendo have together.
@mcstorm Sorry but are you OK or are you sick? Every single company in the world that sells hardware has more profit with accessories, services and etc... HP with printers, cars with accessories and etc, tvs and smartphones are different because they release new models all the time but u get me why would anyone buy 10 ps4s or xboxes? Plz...
No, as the article states... "Microsoft already has a few games with Xbox Live support across mobile devices, most notably via Minecraft, which requires an Xbox Live login on Android, iOS, and Nintendo Switch. Until now, Microsoft reserved Xbox Live support on those platforms for its own games, but now now, Microsoft is aiming to bring Xbox Live cross-platform play to even more titles. Developers will be able to bake cross-platform Xbox Live achievements, social systems, and multiplayer, into games built for mobile devices and Nintendo Switch, as part of its division-wide effort to grow Xbox Live's userbase." Developers have the option of implementing Xbox Live features to their crossplay titles.
I think it's a community link between platforms. Like the Nintendo online mobile app, but cross platform with achievements, friend list and other bits. If it ends up being that game pass on other platforms. That would be insane.
Gamepass is coming to iOS/Android/PC and strong rumors for Switch as well.
@Zeref a lot of those games on gamepads aren't supported on the switch. So I got this feeling it won't get it. Unless Nintendo do their own version?
sounds like another step in not needing another Xbox
Let's pretend you are correct for a second. Imagine if Microsoft gets paid by 500 million users? At that point, selling 20 million consoles a year is going to be less important for them, and being an Xbox gamer becomes much cheaper for all of us. Since you're not correct, there is money to be made and games to be played in all spectrums of the gaming rainbow.
“Microsoft wants to bring Xbox Live cross-platform gaming to Android, iOS, Nintendo Switch, and more“ Nintendo should’ve never let them put Minecraft on Switch. Microsoft wants to use other devices to promote their own service. So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4. Xbox isn’t selling well so the want to become a service. They know they’re lagging behind PSN’s massive 90+ million active users. Xbox Live only has 64 million. They want to slap Xbox Live on every device they can to get that number up.
You seem upset
Xbox Live is still the best. https://www.polygon.com/201...
“You seem upset” Just stating facts. Microsoft are using its competitors such as Nintendo Switch to grow their on service. They also tried to do the same with Sony but they didn’t allow it.
@Vastro based on an article from 2016? LOL it's already 2019 dude where is MS when Sony just announced PSN alone is making more money than its whole gaming division, though?
Xbox live is no better and PSN has far better games, so no.
Xbox the new Sega.
Xbox Live is still the best, it only went down twice this past week!
PSN is better than xbox Live. Hands down. Plus, everybody and their uncle is on PSN.
I didn't get that impression. Seems like he simply disagrees with MS's approach. Many of us do.
Stating facts is being upset now? lol, only on n4g
Your thoughless comment is enough to show you have nothing to argue for because you have nothing to show for your sorry pathetic ass xbox...and nope i'm not upset, i'm amused by you brainless xbots hahaha
@zackeroniii You seem happy
@xexai, and since when have Samsung tv's been a direct competitor to Sony's Playstation.
What exactly are you losing if Microsoft is successful in expanding their service? Do you have Sony stocks or something? Also Uplay and Origin log-ins have been allowed for a long time on PlayStation. Whats the difference?
Seriously why do so many people give a shit how much any of these companies make? Awww they think they actually care about them LMFAO
You don't have to have Sony stock to be invested in their product, which a PS owner is the moment they buy the console. That's just how console ecosystems work. I'd rather money spent by PS customers go to PS, rather than have MS use Live to infiltrate and siphon money away to MS. I have a lot more faith in PS to reinvest the money in a way that will satisfy me as a PS gamer. That's why I bought the PS and not Xbox. Same goes for Switch, but their lackluster online offerings make them particularly vulnerable to MS' ambitions.
It's just fanboyism, it's almost like the playstation selling more is more important than the gaming experience. If MS ever destroys playstation in sales, don't worry it will still be a playstation with it's own experiences, ps doesnt need to outsell everyone to outsell everyone.
@vasto 2016? 3 years ago mate Where as here in 2019...... https://www.eurogamer.net/a...
LMAO, I guess you dont know how to read. The article is talking about which network is best. PSN and Live always go down from time to time and they will continue to do so. PSN goes down more than Live does. Thats just the nature of online networks. Have you been living under a rock? https://venturebeat.com/201... https://www.newsweek.com/ps... That has nothing to do with which Network is the best which is what the article is talking about. Xbox Live is the better than PSN. It has been tested many times and Xbox Live always beats PSN. http://compass.xbox.com/ass... Nice try though!
Xbox live was down twice this past week though!
@Vasto Lets be honest here, most people game on PSN these days whether you like it or not. As far as stability, Ive never had a problem with PSN that was combersome, but when my xbox 360 was breaking down every 6 months, it didnt matter if Live was on or off. As to this generation i wouldnt know because its hard to find a game worth playing on the cbox one in the first place.
@S2 “As to this generation i wouldnt know because its hard to find a game worth playing on the cbox one in the first place.” that’s funny, i have 480 games right now on my xbox one. It’s pretty easy to find good games worth playing
@S2Killinit Well considering the definitive version of 3rd party games are on the X, and they sell the most, I’d say there are plenty of good reasons to game on Xbox. RE2 looks fantastic on the X.
'343_Guilty_Spark' Why lie. . Since when were multiplats selling more on the Xbox for you to make such a blanket statement. . Some of you guys are becoming more desperate as the gen goes on.
@vasto I can read, I stopped reading at 2016 if I'm honest. I've been a PSN user since 2007 on PS3, I was a Live user on and off at the same time. And there was a clear difference between the two. I've been a PS4 user since day one, and other than the Christmas outage a few years back, I've not had any issues. I've only been an X1 user since Christmas, and other than the outage I linked to I've had no issue either. I like and use both services and I can't tell the difference tbh, and no polygon article from 2016 will change my mind. So TTFN bud ,
All i know is that my friends are on PSN, and it works perfectly. We play both regular and VR titles and its a blast. I highly doubt i would have been happy if i only had an xbox this generation. Or the previous for that matter as there is just too many games to miss out on Playstation. Its a no brainer to me. Xbox will be a second or third choice when it comes to gaming for me. PSN is larger and works just as well as Live if not better, and like i said all my friends are on it. @krib Everything is relative. I figured that was implied. Apparently i have to expressly say it, Im comparing. @343 So then according to you whoever comes out with a console later and has extra pixels, is the version to own. To me the extra pixels arent worth missing out on games and VR. It really isnt.
You mind does not have to be changed. What you think does not matter. Xbox Live is faster, stable and more reliable than PSN. You can keep sticking your head in the sand or you can actually read the IHS Markit report that has nothing to do with Polygon. They are just reporting the news. http://compass.xbox.com/ass... PSN cant compare to Microsoft's world class Azure network. Its common sense.
@vasto You keep banging that drum mate, I'll enjoy playing on PSN and Live. Enjoying Games >>>>>>>&a mp;g t;> caring about who's network is best. "What you think does not matter." It does to me, and that's all that matters to me, like I said I use both, have no issues with either, so why would it bother me that one is deemed better than the other? What possible affect can that have on me?
I didn’t say they were selling more on Xbox I said 3rd parties sell more in general
@someone72 Pure raping people eh? Wow. Yeah I don’t think MS will be quoting you on that any time soon. Not helping.
"pure raping of people on service features like psnow" And?..... Go on what other services that are voluntary and are not forced on you in anyway are they "pure raping" us on? You do know that rape is a horrible act, that is when someone is forced into sex against their will? To compare anything that you can choose to pay for or not is a very ignorant and pretty pathetic.
okay so you are basically anti-consumer and anti-microsoft, got it!
"just stating facts". No you are editorializing and injecting your opinion, "Nintendo should've never let them put Minecraft on Switch". "So glad Sony stood strong and didn't allow xbox live sign in on PS4".
"So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4" WTF are just sprouting on about. Edit: btw I'm playstation.
What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers? What’s wrong with them trying to get more profit? And on that note, what’s wrong with login into Xbox live for Minecraft? You have no problem logging into other accounts like Blizzard account for games like Hearthstone or Overwatch, yet it is a problem with you login into Xbox live account to play a game that MS owns? Well....
"yet it is a problem with you login into Xbox live account to play a game that MS owns?" This is an SDK. It is not for games that MS owns. It is for other third party devs to implement in their own games.
@King_Noctis "What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers? What’s wrong with them trying to get more profit?" So...when Sony decided to not allow cross-play so they can keep all their fanbase for themselves to make more money, it's suddenly wrong?
@Razzer but the OP is expressing his concerns on a specific MS owned game,which is what King is referring to “Nintendo should’ve never let them put Minecraft on Switch. Microsoft wants to use other devices to promote their own service. So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4.“
@Krib I'm not sure anyone here is really looking at what this really is, but yes you are right. That post is off-base as well. This has nothing to do with Minecraft on Switch. Bottom line is that if a game dev has created a game that hooks into Xbox Live then they can use this to extend Live services to other devices that allow it. MS doesn't need to release an SDK for what they already do.
There's nothing wrong with what MS wants to do. But, Sony didn't disallow minecraft cross play content sharing on PS because it required XBL login, they denied it because MS required you to log in to XBL to get updates for said game. I don't think people who bitch about what happened in that scenario understand what was going on, or what MS was trying to do. It was all on MS for locking new Minecraft features behind logging in, and there was no reason they couldn't have rolled out the anticipated update at the time, and just not have done the cross content sharing on PS platforms. Sony requires that all content be curated and distributed through their own services, and expressly forbids log ins being required to gain updates. MS was trying to bypass compliance standards, and Sony would have said no to anyone in that situation. If MS provided updates through normal channels, there would be nothing in the compliance standards that would disallow a 3rd party sign in for other functions of minecraft, and there are games which do allow this, such as some EA games needing Origin log ins to track progress stats in MP games, or to log into their servers for matchmaking purposes. Even for FFXIV, Square has to roll out its updates for PS on PSN. But Sony allows the 3rd party log on for everything else. In the minecraft scenario, MS didn't get what it wanted, so they took their toys and went home. They could have gotten the MAU's if they had implemented it within compliance standards, because Sony isn't against MS publishing on their system, but they are against companies trying to bypass them for their own gain.
But you were ready to nail Sony to the tree for wanting to make a profit? Double standards ftw.
"What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers?" Nothing, but why should they force people on other platforms to create an XBL account in order to cross-play with Xbox users?
ziggurcat1h ago "What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers?" Nothing, but why should they force people on other platforms to create an XBL account in order to cross-play with Xbox users?“ They only do that with minecraft. A MSowned game, so that being said they can do whatever they want with it. If you want crossplay on aMS owned game, then sign into their servers. Or else just be Happy a MS game is even on PS. Especially since it’s consistently a top seller every year