Playstation 4: Thread 06 - Discontinued Edition

[Neon Ignition]

I feel it's both something that probably should be available, I honestly don't feel Sony gains anything from denying it, but at the same time a bit of a storm in a teacup. Like backwards compatibility, it's more something a small but vocal percentage use and care about and Sony likely knows as much hence not caring.

[Asura]

It sucks that business folk are stopping this happening. I'm sure Devs would want to allow it. Sony are doing it because they are winning. If either of the other two had a clear lead their business bods would do the same.

Yeah, the reason why Sony are standing in the way of it isn't anything to do with online play specifically.

It's because as a user, cross-play would mean you could buy Fortnite cash on Xbox One and use that content in-game on PS4. This is a problem as platform-holders typically keep 30% of all transactions made on their platform.

This is similar to the current situation with Apple and Amazon. It's impossible to buy Kindle books on Amazon from Apple devices (even in Safari). It's possible to read Kindle books on the Apple devices but not buy them, as Amazon refuses to give Apple the 30% cut. It's anti-consumer, but Apple and Amazon are both market leaders in their respective fields, so there's no reason for either of them to concede to the other.

[Family Fry]

Everything I bought on fortnite via my Epic Account is now tied to PSN only, I can not use them on switch or Xbox even though I can use an epic account on those platforms. In future does this encourage me to stick with PSN especially if I want to play on my switch on the go? or do I just cut my losses now and open a new epic account and buy a new battle pass and bucks via Nintendo?

The Apple and Amazon scenario is a good one to use, I mean imagine if you bought 100 kindle books on your amazon account but because you read them on iPhone last year you now can’t read them on your new android phone, outrage would be unreal.

I feel this is another scenario Sony will just get away with, much like adding a fee to play online with PS4, no one gave a **** about that in the end.

[_SD_]

Random question...
Sony are seeming getting stick for not allowing cross platform play. I personally don't care much if they do, but what is everyone elses thoughts on cross platform?

Don’t piss your customers off 18 months before you and your main competitor plan to release new hardware... Fortnite might not be the game of the moment when PS5 releases, but if Sony are going to carry on with their current cross-platform policy I can’t see it ending well for them. And I can’t see Microsoft messing up this next console launch either...

[Digfox]

This is similar to the current situation with Apple and Amazon. It's impossible to buy Kindle books on Amazon from Apple devices (even in Safari). It's possible to read Kindle books on the Apple devices but not buy them, as Amazon refuses to give Apple the 30% cut. It's anti-consumer, but Apple and Amazon are both market leaders in their respective fields, so there's no reason for either of them to concede to the other.

That's a bad analogy and not what is happening here. Basically in the above scenario the iOS user is being completely locked out of their Amazon Kindle account and asked to create a new one. They aren't able to access ANY of their content.

I feel it's both something that probably should be available, I honestly don't feel Sony gains anything from denying it, but at the same time a bit of a storm in a teacup. Like backwards compatibility, it's more something a small but vocal percentage use and care about and Sony likely knows as much hence not caring.

On a case-by-case basis I think this is a genuine problem. Fortnite is a service. Customers spend hundreds and thousands of pounds/dollars and hours on their account. The game has been built from the ground up to be run on timed events. It isn't feasible to expect users to have multiple accounts. It has been sold as a 'platform'. That customers can expect to 'place shift'.

Even worse is this issue is also affecting customers who linked their Epic account to the PS4 version of the now defunct Paragon. So people who have never played Fortnite on PS4 but are STILL expected to create a new Epic account. And we don't know if there are any unforeseen consequences such as whether the new accounts being created for Switch are being locked to the user's Nintendo accounts (i.e. they might not be able to remove them if Sony changes its stance). And of course Sony's whims may change about other formats which they might decide to lock users out of in the future.

I think as we have moved more and more onto GaaS/Live Services this problem has been created. And I think platform holders are going to need to be more flexible or risk the wrath of consumers.

Epic for what it's worth have also sat on their arses and done nothing. They knew this was a problem long before this came about (i.e. since the start of the year users have been raising issues about not being able to play on Xbox on their very forums). They never addressed the problem and didn't communicate anything in advance. Without knowing the details, because neither company has responded, it's likely Epic could probably offer a solution but I guess are too busy counting their $400m plus in revenue each month.

These two parties deserve all the criticism they are getting.

[Brad]

Just came here to say Epic allowed Sony to do this. It's not Sony's game.

[Brad]

I sound like the Sony defence force
Just think Epic are complicit in this.

[Asura]

Just came here to say Epic allowed Sony to do this. It's not Sony's game.

Yeah, I was gonna say. It doesn't make Sony's move any less anti-consumer of course.

[cutmymilk]

People on here have spent hundreds on fortnite skins?

[Asura]

People on here have spent hundreds on fortnite skins?

I doubt anyone here has, but people certainly have.

Freemium games tend to work like that; the vast bulk of players spend nothing, about 5% of the userbase spends about £20, and then a small core of the userbase spends hundreds.

It's like most things. I mean think about Warhammer, most people don't play it (or might've played maybe one game with someone else who owns some of it), then you get some kids who might own an army of miniatures, then you get people for whom it's their entire life, and their whole house is full of the stuff.

Most people don't smoke weed. Some people smoke it occasionally. There's a small group of people for whom it's the focus of their entire life; they have weed-related paraphernalia on every mantlepiece in their house and a massive Jamaica/Bob Marley flag in their living room.

[Digfox]

People on here have spent hundreds on fortnite skins?

I doubt anyone here has, but people certainly have.

Freemium games tend to work like that; the vast bulk of players spend nothing, about 5% of the userbase spends about £20, and then a small core of the userbase spends hundreds.

I don't think we have many Fortnite Battle Royale players on here, do we? I've had this debate with [MENTION=5941]Asura[/MENTION] a couple of times, but those are more mobile player spend numbers. The few times we have seen stats they suggest that a much higher number PC/Console, or 'core' gamers are spending money on microtransactions. That said it's definitely correct the majority won't spend money or small amounts.

However you've missed a key point point I made - people have spent hours grinding as well. Fortnite's MTX Battle Pass system is specifically built to encourage spending time in the game to earn cosmetic rewards. So players have potentially spent either lots of money, time or both.

There's another thing about this. And it's a trend that's not just true of Epic. Something these developers and publishers often forget, and that is that the customer is always right. People have spent money, and Epic have a duty to those people who are now locked out of content they paid for or earnt and we never told this was a problem. To me that's refund territory.

[Brad]

People on here have spent hundreds on fortnite skins?

I bought four skins...

[Asura]

I've had this debate with @Asura a couple of times, but those are more mobile player spend numbers. The few times we have seen stats they suggest that a much higher number PC/Console, or 'core' gamers are spending money on microtransactions.

We don't really have a consistent picture for freemium games on console, admittedly, because they're too new to form a good picture as of yet. Too few have been successful and of those, we don't quite know enough. Core gamers are certainly more likely to spend money on microtransactions than some players, but it's a picture that is complicated by a few factors, like them often being a captive audience (i.e. they've bought into a game already so are more likely to spend more).

Fortnite is a tricky one as it's free-to-play. I suspect it's more like a mobile game in terms of its figures because a few other games, like World of Tanks, also exhibit this overally structure. That being said, some of this is "gut feeling".

There's another thing about this. And it's a trend that's not just true of Epic. Something these developers and publishers often forget, and that is that the customer is always right. People have spent money, and Epic have a duty to those people who are now locked out of content they paid for or earnt and we never told this was a problem. To me that's refund territory.

It's a tricky one, but I think Epic might be the ones who have the problem, if they have genuinely sold Fortnite as something people expected to have "available everywhere" with a parity of experience. Does it do cross-play with PC?

This whole situation should serve as a reminder, at least, to some people, who still make this same mistake. Corporations are not your friends. Sony are probably having meetings about this in the aftermath of E3 to decide what to do, but the meetings aren't about what their fans want; it's about what earns them more money. They're trying to play a zero-sum game where they want to be the only platform-holder. They're aware the current furore probably loses them money, but they'll be working out if fixing it costs them money in the long run. It all comes down to money.

[Brad]

Yep ^^^^^

Sony went to Epic and said "want exclusive" or whatever, and Epic said OK. The problem is Epic's to solve. They have to go to Sony and say "how about not exclusive?" and Sony can either say "ok" or "how much?". Or Sony could just give it up for free, but I don't see an incentive for them to do that.

[Digfox]

We don't really have a consistent picture for freemium games on console, admittedly, because they're too new to form a good picture as of yet

We have seen figures for DLC/MTX spend on console/PC before and they trend much higher than single digit figures. You're right, gut feelings atm but I suspect at some point clues will leak out on just how successful Fortnite is. The estimated revenue streams are simply too huge to be just a few percent of their player base.

It's a tricky one, but I think Epic might be the ones who have the problem, if they have genuinely sold Fortnite as something people expected to have "available everywhere" with a parity of experience. Does it do cross-play with PC?

Yes, you can 'cross-game' (so play your account) on Android, iOS and PC versions of the game. Obviously Epic accounts without a PSN profile linked to it will have more choice. And there is an option for 'playing' with friends on different platforms (or being in the cross platform matchmaking).