• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Borderlands 3 Cross play doesn't support PlayStation because of Sony cut.

Status
Not open for further replies.

The_Mike

Banned
Nov 5, 2017
5,087
8,206
750
Denmark
mod edit: duplicate thread


While every platform developer wants to connect friends across platforms to be able to play together, the only reason for Sony to even consider cross play is not because of "for the players", but pure greed.

Offering a glimpse into the kind of corporate chicanery that sometimes stops nice things happening for no good reason, Pitchford went on to say that "for certification, we have been required by the publisher to remove crossplay support for Playstation consoles."


Now: folk are getting angry at Sony about this. But Borderlands 3 is published by 2K Games and Pitchford specifies it was removed at the request of the publisher, not Sony. Why? Because Sony wants a cut of any cross-play title that achieves success, believing this is justified to "offset the reduction in revenue." This policy itself only came around in 2019 after many years of the company refusing to entertain the notion whatsoever.

Barring a sudden shift in position from Sony (or 2K) this is likely to be how things stay. This is also likely why Randy Pitchford is making a public deal out of the situation: the more developers and publishers that refuse to play ball with Sony, and embarrass the company in public, the likelier it is that things will change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Jul 15, 2020
3,415
8,655
745
Sounds like a move just right for the players. There's seriously no way to support this at all. Shame on them. Hopefully it changes soon.
 

SlimeGooGoo

Party Gooper
Jun 29, 2020
2,532
6,989
670
believing this is justified to "offset the reduction in revenue"

Because people that already own a Playstation and bought a game to play on a Playstation will suddenly decide to spend money on other platforms, and not on Playstation.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
 

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
1,350
2,240
320
If it is true that it’s down to the Sony cut then all developers and publishers should just say it and force Sony to change their policy. It’s epic and apples fault that this info is out there now, so people should be able to be open about the reasoning imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

Pull n Pray

Member
Mar 12, 2021
176
176
210
If it is true that it’s down to the Sony cut then all developers and publishers should just say it and force Sony to change their policy. It’s epic and apples fault that this info is out there now, so people should be able to be open about the reasoning imo.
Likely there are NDAs that preclude just coming out and saying it. But because of what came to light about Sony in the Epic v Apple case, you might see more developers allude to it like Pitchford did.
 

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,062
6,865
815
Australia
Because people that already own a Playstation and bought a game to play on a Playstation will suddenly decide to spend money on other platforms, and not on Playstation.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
It’s about people NOT buying PlayStation. If I can cross play with my PlayStation friends, I don’t need to buy a PlayStation for to game with my friends. That’s what this type of walled off ecosystem is all about - using your friends to force you to buy into their ecosystem in order to game together.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: The_Mike

//DEVIL//

Member
May 28, 2014
2,244
1,552
690
From a gamer point of view this is bad.
But as a company it kinda make sense .
PlayStation has a higher user base per game than Xbox and pc combined ( or usually that’s the case most of the time )

so in general . People playing online a specific x game is higher on PlayStation which makes the Xbox / pc almost dead online after a while .

so in general . Gamers usually prefer to buy the game where most user base are . Which is Sony and that’s where Sony get profit ( from selling the game to micro transactions on Sony console etc )

if Sony allows their user base with Xbox and pc, then that’s less reason to buy the PlayStation brand console / game and less money for Sony as a company but MS gain .

I really don’t know how to explain it properly but you get idea .
So since Sony is allowing to share their user base, they require a cut.

as a publisher that doesn’t make sense to them since they don’t really care where the game sells as long as it sells and get money. So they opt out of cross play to pay Sony.

this is like you own a big swimming pool that you rent for people and your biggest competitor has a small one and the tourist company that brings these people wants you to build a bridge between these 2 pools. Why would you do that ?
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Zones

Thief1987

Member
Jan 8, 2018
611
1,537
460
Do you have an alternate theory?
No, but without evidences this article is worthless and doesn't need separate thread. Everyone can assume and speculate why it was removed, and this whole article doesn't have any more substance than random forum post.
 

FrozenFlame

Member
Jan 4, 2020
491
777
320
It’s about people NOT buying PlayStation. If I can cross play with my PlayStation friends, I don’t need to buy a PlayStation for to game with my friends. That’s what this type of walled off ecosystem is all about - using your friends to force you to buy into their ecosystem in order to game together.
Console and/or PS+ and/or the Ps version of the game. Being to play with friends or simply because of the active community. Still, somehow they'll still say that they care about players and small developers...
 
  • Like
Reactions: The_Mike and ZehDon

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Jul 15, 2020
3,415
8,655
745
That won't stop a certain few on here.
Having a hive mindset is never a beneficial thing. Just means some people don't have the ability to think on their own, as the corporation they support, does it for them.
 
Last edited:

Zoro7

Banned
Sep 15, 2013
1,877
6,613
690
I mean we had too much positive news about PlayStation recently. This was long overdue. I love the way OP specifically makes the other platforms sound like saints and not money hungry corporations. Hint: they are all the fucking same.
 

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,062
6,865
815
Australia
I mean we had too much positive news about PlayStation recently. This was long overdue. I love the way OP specifically makes the other platforms sound like saints and not money hungry corporations. Hint: they are all the fucking same.
Whoa - Microsoft, Nintendo, Google, and Apple are charging third party developers and publishers for cross play support, just like Sony? Can I get links for this - this is massive news!
 

Zoro7

Banned
Sep 15, 2013
1,877
6,613
690
Whoa - Microsoft, Nintendo, Google, and Apple are charging third party developers and publishers for cross play support, just like Sony? Can I get links for this - this is massive news!
I didn’t say that. Microsoft had until recently been charging people to play F2P games online. That’s just as shitty yet was never made a big deal?
Nintendo locked a feature behind the purchase of an amibo. These are recent things yet completely overlooked. My point is they are all in it for the money.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

The_Mike

Banned
Nov 5, 2017
5,087
8,206
750
Denmark
There is zero evidence in this "article" that it was removed because of "sony cut", just assumptions and nothing more.

Of course Gearbox does all this simply to just spread lies, because the devs are one sided fanboys like the ones on the Internet.
If it is true that it’s down to the Sony cut then all developers and publishers should just say it and force Sony to change their policy. It’s epic and apples fault that this info is out there now, so people should be able to be open about the reasoning imo.
I doubt Sony will change their policy.
They probably see it as an easy way to earn cash.
They don't lose anything on not supporting it, remember before Sony opened up about it? A big majority thought it was good for Sony not playing with or against other platforms for some weird reason.
Probably a loud minority, but there were not many supporting the idea back then.

I mean we had too much positive news about PlayStation recently. This was long overdue. I love the way OP specifically makes the other platforms sound like saints and not money hungry corporations. Hint: they are all the fucking same.

You are putting words in my mouth. But it's understandable, it's easy to do misunderstood on the net.

They are equally assholes in different areas, but this thread is really just about the cross play news.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FoundryMusic

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,062
6,865
815
Australia
I didn’t say that. Microsoft had until recently been charging people to play F2P games online. That’s just as shitty yet was never made a big deal?
Nintendo locked a feature behind the purchase of an amibo. These are recent things yet completely overlooked. My point is they are all in it for the money.
So... they're not all the same then, unless we go wide, non-descript, and hyperbolically vague with something like "companies are in it for the money". This may come as a bit of shock, friend, but guess what: every company in the world is just in it for the money. This is a pointless statement that contributes nothing, other than trying to deflect from the topic at hand.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

Zoro7

Banned
Sep 15, 2013
1,877
6,613
690
So... they're not all the same then, unless we go wide, non-descript, and hyperbolically vague with something like "companies are in it for the money". This may come as a bit of shock, friend, but guess what: every company in the world is just in it for the money. This is a pointless statement that contributes nothing, other than trying to deflect from the topic at hand.
Where was your outrage at Microsoft for charging users to play F2P games online?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingkenny76

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,062
6,865
815
Australia
Where was your outrage at Microsoft for charging users to play F2P games online?
This is some danger-hair twitter bullshit. "WHERE WERE YOU WHEN [X]!?!"

I'm sure you can wade through my post history to find it like a rainbow-hair white girl on twitter trawling social media for cancel-worthy material. You can search NeoGAF by poster and thread title; shouldn't take you too long to dig it up. I also complained about Microsoft requiring XBLG for Netflix access back in the day; not sure if that was on NeoGAF, though. Those were fun times. Happy digging.
 

Zoro7

Banned
Sep 15, 2013
1,877
6,613
690
This is some danger-hair twitter bullshit. "WHERE WERE YOU WHEN [X]!?!"

I'm sure you can wade through my post history to find it like a rainbow-hair white girl on twitter trawling social media for cancel-worthy material. You can search NeoGAF by poster and thread title; shouldn't take you too long to dig it up. I also complained about Microsoft requiring XBLG for Netflix access back in the day; not sure if that was on NeoGAF, though. Those were fun times. Happy digging.
Thank you for proving my point a 100 times over. Pleasure doing business with you.
 

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,062
6,865
815
Australia
Thank you for proving my point a 100 times over. Pleasure doing business with you.
Possibly the most pathetic response you could've given. Why even bother posting this? Let me know when you've finished reading all of my posts on NeoGAF to find what you're looking for. Should only take a day or so.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Zoro7

longdi

Ni hao ma, fellow kids?
Jun 7, 2004
8,894
6,622
1,890
Under jimbo, SCE feels more and more island'ed off.
I get that he wants to buy the playstation brand or ecosystem whatever.
But not this way. The management during early ps4 days were the best of SCE.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.