Developers Accuse Sony of 'Playing Favorites' With PS4's Cross-Platform Support

After years of fighting the idea, Sony announced last September it is finally bringing "cross-platform gameplay, progression, and commerce" to the PlayStation Network, with Fortnite as the first example. Months later, the company's efforts have yet to gain wide traction and now we may have identified the bottleneck: Sony. Several major third-party developers have accused the company of standing in the way of letting the PS4 versions of their games play nicely with other platforms. ArsTechnica reports: "We just launched Wargroove with crossplay between PC, Switch, and Xbox," Chucklefish CEO Finn "Tiy" Brice wrote on the ResetEra forums. "We made many requests for crossplay (both through our [Sony] account manager and directly with higher-ups) all the way up until release month. We were told in no uncertain terms that it was not going to happen." Brice's comments came days after new Hi-Rez Studios CEO Stew Chisam tweeted at Sony that the studio was "ready to go when you are" for cross-play on Smite, Paladins, and Realm Royale. "It's time to stop playing favorites and tear down the crossplay/progression wall for everyone," he said.

In a follow-up tweet, Chisam explained that Xbox/Switch cross-play has led to a direct improvement in the Paladins online user experience, including reduced wait times, more balanced matchmaking, and fewer "bad" matches overall. Brice's comments in particular come in direct response (and contradiction) to a recent Game Informer interview in which Sony Interactive Entertainment chairman Shawn Layden said that cross-play was open to pretty much any PS4 developer that wants it.

It's pretty obvious what they're doing

[rsilvergun]

if the community isn't big enough to support the PS4 players and the game is bringing in money for Sony they allow Cross Play.

Also, if the game is big enough the publisher can threaten to pull the game they'll allow Cross Play.

If you fall somewhere in the middle then you're SOL.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

If you fall somewhere in the middle then you're SOL.

And if you give Sony your money, then you're equally SOL. I don't get why people keep rewarding them. Is there really an exclusive worth the pain?

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Sony is far from perfect, but at least they aren't Microsoft.

I have no love for Microsoft, but it's clear that they are more responsive to their customers than Sony. That's not saying much, but there's not a lot of choice in that market. (I've given up on console gaming for now, mind you. I sold all mine to a local shop and moved on. I can emulate the classics.)

worse

[meglon]

It's far worse to be Sony'd than it is to be Munson'd.

Playstation is "For the Players*"

[dstyle5]

*Except when Sony doesn't want it to be. Speaking of Sony and Nintendo, hopefully they jump on the accessibility bandwagon now that Microsoft has set the bar with their Adaptive Controller.

Saw on Facebook that a friends son is using one now. Great that he can more easily play games with family and friends. :)
https://www.xbox.com/en-CA/xbo... [xbox.com]

Re:

[DontBeAMoran]

Maybe your power cable is not properly grounded?

Re:

[Shikaku]

Sony was so angry someone figured out how to escape the PS3 Linux jail that they removed the OtherOS option from all PS3s in its entirety for one guy trying to do it. That was over a decade ago, I still see not much has changed.

What ends a boycott?

[tepples]

If they hadn't put DRM malware on CDs I wouldn't have boycotted them (still do).

The Sony Music DRM malware incident was not only with a different part of Sony but also in 2005, which is fourteen years ago. When should a boycott end? For example, should a boycott end once the people responsible for a bad decision are no longer with the company? Or should people, say, boycott Red Hat in 2019 because of parent company IBM's actions in the 1930s?