Phil Spencer Discusses Why FFXIV Isn't on Xbox (Contradictions?)

Head.spawn said:
Ehh, it sounded like you said the only reason Xbox did well last year was because of one bundle, and now Sony has 'better' bundles? Unless you were just pointing out random bundles for some reason and contrasting them because..
Click to expand...

Well, there was also the Advanced Warfare bundle, but the AC bundle made up the vast majority of the XBO's sales for last holiday season. To put it in layman's terms, it went wild.

As for Sony, Star Wars is a large franchise that extends beyond video games and there are 3 bundles for just that game alone. With Episode VII coming up in December, I bet the bundles will be advertised at every showing in every theater. As for Black Ops 3, not only will the PS4 version get some content first, but the PS4 will also be the de facto platform for tournaments.

Dreadx_Jecht said:
If you like games like tales of zestiria, Dragon quest heroes, soma, disgaea 5, Bloodborne the old hunters, and if you wanted to play the uc4 beta, ps4 is just fine for the holiday, let alone what's coming in 2016, also, why are you bringing up something completely unrelated in this topic? Feeling backed into a corner?
Click to expand...

Nice job forgetting Sword Art Online: Lost Song xP
 
Holy mother of god usopp what is happening in here lol. Are people that upset because Phil is getting called out on bs?! Yes its bs when yoshida and square themselves have said the reason why ffxiv isn't on Xbox. Hell i remember reading early this year actually that square is still trying.
 
5Twist said:
Well, there was also the Advanced Warfare bundle, but the AC bundle made up the vast majority of the XBO's sales for last holiday season. To put it in layman's terms, it went wild.

As for Sony, Star Wars is a large franchise that extends beyond video games and there are 3 bundles for just that game alone. With Episode VII coming up in December, I bet the bundles will be advertised at every showing in every theater. As for Black Ops 3, not only will the PS4 version get some content first, but the PS4 will also be the de facto platform for tournaments.
Click to expand...

I thought it just had more to do with their overly aggressive pricing than anything.

/2 cents.
 
Blackleg-sanji1 said:
Holy mother of god usopp what is happening in here lol. Are people that upset because Phil is getting called out on bs?! Yes its bs when yoshida and square themselves have said the reason why ffxiv isn't on Xbox. Hell i remember reading early this year actually that square is still trying.
Click to expand...

why not call him out directly on twitter?
 
Wait... Are people in this thread saying Sony would allow cross play with Xbox One?

The day two rivaling video game consoles have cross play, is the day hell freezes over.

Square just had to pick either xbox or ps and chose ps for obvious reasons. However they could still bring it over, but not with cross play.
 
Blackleg-sanji1 said:
Im sensing there's a joke here im not getting sense i skimmed the thread..
Click to expand...

troll.png
 
The Citizen Kane of Games said:
Wait... Are people in this thread saying Sony would allow cross play with Xbox One?

The day two rivaling video game consoles have cross play, is the day hell freezes over.

Square just had to pick either xbox or ps and chose ps for obvious reasons. However they could still bring it over, but not with cross play.
Click to expand...

FFXI still works on PS2, PS3 (with BC), Xbox 360, and PC all on the same servers. FFXIV would have worked, but Microsoft already got SE in bed and got multiple FF games on it's system, now it doesn't need it's audience as much.
 
The Citizen Kane of Games said:
Wait... Are people in this thread saying Sony would allow cross play with Xbox One?

The day two rivaling video game consoles have cross play, is the day hell freezes over.

Square just had to pick either xbox or ps and chose ps for obvious reasons. However they could still bring it over, but not with cross play.
Click to expand...
what evidence do you have to support otherwise?
 
The Citizen Kane of Games said:
Wait... Are people in this thread saying Sony would allow cross play with Xbox One?

The day two rivaling video game consoles have cross play, is the day hell freezes over.

Square just had to pick either xbox or ps and chose ps for obvious reasons. However they could still bring it over, but not with cross play.
Click to expand...

Gotta love so many people posting this, completely ignorant of XI
 
Kusagari said:
Gotta love so many people posting this, completely ignorant of XI
Click to expand...

I will say that Sony's more permissive attitude toward cross-play was logical for them at the time: walled gardens are to the benefit of the market leader, and detriment of whoever currently trails in sales. For most of the prior generation, Sony was in a position where not being able to play with friends on X-Box Live was one of the major reasons to buy a 360 over a PS3 in North America. They had every reason to want cross-play to happen.

That said, I don't think they will change their policy stance this generation. They've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "For the Gamers" PR push, and the competitive advantage to be gained remains relatively small. (As most indicators are that the difference between Live and PS+ adoption is not as large as the margin between PS4 and XB1 sales.)

The more perplexing thing is why Microsoft haven't changed their stance. The policy stopped breeding competitive advantage years ago. My guess is that it just hasn't taken enough of a spotlight due to relatively few developers inquiring about the possibility of cross-play; it's probably more a matter of "the policy is dumb, but it hasn't really come up so we haven't gotten around to doing anything about it" rather than "we really still think this is the right approach for us".
 
Imperfected said:
I will say that Sony's more permissive attitude toward cross-play was logical for them at the time: walled gardens are to the benefit of the market leader, and detriment of whoever currently trails in sales. For most of the prior generation, Sony was in a position where not being able to play with friends on X-Box Live was one of the major reasons to buy a 360 over a PS3 in North America. They had every reason to want cross-play to happen.

That said, I don't think they will change their policy stance this generation. They've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "For the Gamers" PR push, and the competitive advantage to be gained remains relatively small. (As most indicators are that the difference between Live and PS+ adoption is not as large as the margin between PS4 and XB1 sales.)

The more perplexing thing is why Microsoft haven't changed their stance. The policy stopped breeding competitive advantage years ago. My guess is that it just hasn't taken enough of a spotlight due to relatively few developers inquiring about the possibility of cross-play; it's probably more a matter of "the policy is dumb, but it hasn't really come up so we haven't gotten around to doing anything about it" rather than "we really still think this is the right approach for us".
Click to expand...

Besides SE, most companies just had separate servers for the different platforms last-gen, as cross-platform play becomes more common with new releases this gen, the want for it will increase and MS will increasingly look like the odd person out.

ATM most cross-plateform play is mainly indie games (and some SE properties)
 
Imperfected said:
Your X-Box One is capable of communicating with distant servers because it has a modulator/demodulator and a connection to the physical network infrastructure that the distant end it's trying to communicate with is on. The device does not require X-Box Live to do this. X-Box Live is not a physical telecommunications network. X-Box Live is not an Internet Service Provider. X-Box Live is not a modem.
Click to expand...

What the hell is the babble talk you are throwing out? Trying to sound more technical then needed isn't helping your argument. NO the device doesn't require Xbox live to do that, but the software created for Xbox live does!

X-Box Live is useful or necessary for some games because those games have no dedicated servers to handle server-side operation of the game or matchmaking services in games that use peer-to-peer connections. MMORPGs have their own servers, they do not need or want to communicate with or "over" (whatever that means) X-Box Live at any time.
Click to expand...

Again, you don't know what you are talking about. It doesn't matter if the game has dedicated servers or not. if the traffic flows through Xbox live, allows users to make purchases through xbox live, the same encryption protocol exists. If it were as open as you are trying to say ( correct me if that isn't what you are trying to say since I can't make heads or tails at the point you are pushing ) then not a single developer would need to go through MS to allow this. They wouldn't even have to tell MS that they are connecting to players outside of xbox live.


Microsoft forcing you to connect your device to their servers before it can establish a connection with an outside agency is not a physical or logical requirement, it is something they've done artificially for (at best) the arguable goal of protecting users from themselves. There is absolutely no reason an MMO on XB1 could not be permitted to connect directly to servers without using Live as an intermediary, which has long been the argument against such services being behind Live's paywall.
Stop right there, I didn't say it was a physical requirement. it's a SOFTWARE requirement! I'm not going to even bother responding to the rest of what you wrote as it's completely nonsensical and has nothing to do with what I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Blackleg-sanji1 said:
They cant cuz There is no evidence i dont see why people keep ignoring the fact square has said over nd over again that they want ffxiv on xbox its not on them or Sony its on Microsoft.
Click to expand...
word. although, there is a lot of crossplay happening with PC and xbone now, right?
Imperfected said:
I will say that Sony's more permissive attitude toward cross-play was logical for them at the time: walled gardens are to the benefit of the market leader, and detriment of whoever currently trails in sales. For most of the prior generation, Sony was in a position where not being able to play with friends on X-Box Live was one of the major reasons to buy a 360 over a PS3 in North America. They had every reason to want cross-play to happen.

That said, I don't think they will change their policy stance this generation. They've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "For the Gamers" PR push, and the competitive advantage to be gained remains relatively small. (As most indicators are that the difference between Live and PS+ adoption is not as large as the margin between PS4 and XB1 sales.)

The more perplexing thing is why Microsoft haven't changed their stance. The policy stopped breeding competitive advantage years ago. My guess is that it just hasn't taken enough of a spotlight due to relatively few developers inquiring about the possibility of cross-play; it's probably more a matter of "the policy is dumb, but it hasn't really come up so we haven't gotten around to doing anything about it" rather than "we really still think this is the right approach for us".
Click to expand...
ffs11 was on Ps2, not 3. this was before sony had to deal with all the batshit shit with Ps3. although the 360 launch did come closer to when the Ps3 came out.
 
Armaros said:
as cross-platform play becomes more common with new releases this gen, the want for it will increase and MS will increasingly look like the odd person out.

ATM most cross-plateform play is mainly indie games (and some SE properties)
Click to expand...
...it's only PC and Ps4. i'm guessing we're not counting the wii u here, but i don't know if the PC platform is supposed to have a specific owner - I guess mS themselves because it's windows, but mS doesn't really benefit from PC game's sales do they?

EDIT: sorry again for double post
 
The Artisan said:
word. although, there is a lot of crossplay happening with PC and xbone now, right?
ffs11 was on Ps2, not 3. this was before sony had to deal with all the batshit shit with Ps3. although the 360 launch did come closer to when the Ps3 came out.
Click to expand...
Which makes it all the more stupid. Its a freaking mmo with a subscription why not let it on ur platform and allow others to play with whomever they see fit? Its really not hurting them at all. Which also makes me wonder is this why xbox doesn't have rocket league?
 
For more info:
SE already had Dragon Quest X, an online game, available on Wii, WiiU, PC, 3DS, soon for PS4 and NX. They also discussed about the possibility of porting FFXIV to NX.
So Sony and Nintendo don't have any problem with cross-play, why would anyone think that Sony prevent cross-play with MS?
 
Ghost Slayer said:
For more info:
SE already had Dragon Quest X, an online game, available on Wii, WiiU, PC, 3DS, soon for PS4 and NX. They also discussed about the possibility of porting FFXIV to NX.
So Sony and Nintendo don't have any problem with cross-play, why would anyone think that Sony prevent cross-play with MS?
Click to expand...
Something involving straws and people attempting to grasp at them I think.
 
Blackleg-sanji1 said:
Which makes it all the more stupid. Its a freaking mmo with a subscription why not let it on ur platform and allow others to play with whomever they see fit? Its really not hurting them at all.
Click to expand...
how does crossplay hurt them at all in the first place? what do they lose from allowing it? xbone peeps will still buy xbones & xbone games, they just have the opportunity to play online with MORE people.
Which also makes me wonder is this why xbox doesn't have rocket league?
Click to expand...
I asked the same thing several pages ago.
 
Dreadx_Jecht said:
Final fantasy 11
Click to expand...

Touche, I actually played that, I didn't realize there was PlayStation gamers on there as well (I didn't play long).

It's obviously incredibly rare.

It's just weird that we only see people calling out MS over this, when I don't see Sony actively making a push to make this happen with every other game ever.


edit: fuck, lol. there is a Smite ad at the bottom of my gaf page "Now on PC & Xbox One".. It really is ridiculous that they don't have cross platform play in instances like this. But Xbox-to-PS, it's not surprising. It would be incredibly surprising to see that happen. On the other hand, we know Xbox One to PC cross play AND cross is an active goal on their agenda for some games.
 
Ghost Slayer said:
For more info:
SE already had Dragon Quest X, an online game, available on Wii, WiiU, PC, 3DS, soon for PS4 and NX. They also discussed about the possibility of porting FFXIV to NX.
So Sony and Nintendo don't have any problem with cross-play, why would anyone think that Sony prevent cross-play with MS?
Click to expand...
Hmmm dragon quest 10 is cross play as well?? No chance this comes west im guessing
 
Head.spawn said:
Touche, I actually played that, I didn't realize there was PlayStation gamers on there as well (I didn't play long).

It's obviously incredibly rare.

It's just weird that we only see people calling out MS over this, when I don't see Sony actively making a push to make this happen with every other game ever.
Click to expand...
What other game are they supposed to push for?? If Microsoft doesn't allow it what exactly are they supposed to do?
 
I'm going to recap what I said earlier. That there could be technical limitations, that without permission from MS can't be employed.

Anyway this information about how the data between games is encrypted isn't known generally, unless you have created a game or read documentation for xbox live. I found one report where they attempted to hack or see what was in the network traffic for Xbox one, and they found that all the data in games is encrypted.

If you jump to page 563 http://www.dfrws.org/2014/proceedings/DFRWS2014-7.pdf

It says:

"When we investigated the network traffic of both games, Battlefield 4 and Dead Rising 3, we discovered that the network traffic was encrypted. We could not see the exact actions that took place, meaning we could not see the mode the user was playing in or who they were playing with, however we were able to tell what game was being played by the captured traffic. Battlefield 4 was distinguished by a TLS Certificate shown in Fig. 14. The initiation of Dead Rising caused a lot of network traffic, and although
the content of the files was illegible they could be directly linked to Dead Rising by their file name"
 
Head.spawn said:
Touche, I actually played that, I didn't realize there was PlayStation gamers on there as well (I didn't play long).

It's obviously incredibly rare.

It's just weird that we only see people calling out MS over this, when I don't see Sony actively making a push to make this happen with every other game ever.
Click to expand...

What would sony have to do with anything unless they try to prevent cross platform play, which they don't from what I know. For their own games they only have a sony console version. They have cross play between those consoles/handhelds usually, and sometimes cross buy.

With sony it seem to be up to the developer.
 
oldergamer said:
I'm going to recap what I said earlier. That there could be technical limitations, that without permission from MS can't be employed.

Anyway this information about how the data between games is encrypted isn't known generally, unless you have created a game or read documentation for xbox live. I found one report where they attempted to hack or see what was in the network traffic for Xbox one, and they found that all the data in games is encrypted.

If you jump to page 563 http://www.dfrws.org/2014/proceedings/DFRWS2014-7.pdf

It says:

"When we investigated the network traffic of both games, Battlefield 4 and Dead Rising 3, we discovered that the network traffic was encrypted. We could not see the exact actions that took place, meaning we could not see the mode the user was playing in or who they were playing with, however we were able to tell what game was being played by the captured traffic. Battlefield 4 was distinguished by a TLS Certificate shown in Fig. 14. The initiation of Dead Rising caused a lot of network traffic, and although
the content of the files was illegible they could be directly linked to Dead Rising by their file name"
Click to expand...

Then don't use the xbox live network. Like final fantasy 11. It's like connecting to effing Netflix. That doesn't go thru the xbox live network and isn't encrypted. But cause of this policy if some one tried to bypass the xbox live network. They probably wouldn't pass cert. That's the reason we don't see it.
 
oldergamer said:
I'm going to recap what I said earlier. That there could be technical limitations, that without permission from MS can't be employed.

Anyway this information about how the data between games is encrypted isn't known generally, unless you have created a game or read documentation for xbox live. I found one report where they attempted to hack or see what was in the network traffic for Xbox one, and they found that all the data in games is encrypted.

If you jump to page 563 http://www.dfrws.org/2014/proceedings/DFRWS2014-7.pdf

It says:

"When we investigated the network traffic of both games, Battlefield 4 and Dead Rising 3, we discovered that the network traffic was encrypted. We could not see the exact actions that took place, meaning we could not see the mode the user was playing in or who they were playing with, however we were able to tell what game was being played by the captured traffic. Battlefield 4 was distinguished by a TLS Certificate shown in Fig. 14. The initiation of Dead Rising caused a lot of network traffic, and although
the content of the files was illegible they could be directly linked to Dead Rising by their file name"
Click to expand...

Encrypted data is not some kind of skyrocket science. Anything transfer on Internet required it for the sake of user and/or provider information.
 
Imperfected said:
I will say that Sony's more permissive attitude toward cross-play was logical for them at the time: walled gardens are to the benefit of the market leader, and detriment of whoever currently trails in sales. For most of the prior generation, Sony was in a position where not being able to play with friends on X-Box Live was one of the major reasons to buy a 360 over a PS3 in North America. They had every reason to want cross-play to happen.

That said, I don't think they will change their policy stance this generation. They've gotten a lot of mileage out of the "For the Gamers" PR push, and the competitive advantage to be gained remains relatively small. (As most indicators are that the difference between Live and PS+ adoption is not as large as the margin between PS4 and XB1 sales.)

The more perplexing thing is why Microsoft haven't changed their stance. The policy stopped breeding competitive advantage years ago. My guess is that it just hasn't taken enough of a spotlight due to relatively few developers inquiring about the possibility of cross-play; it's probably more a matter of "the policy is dumb, but it hasn't really come up so we haven't gotten around to doing anything about it" rather than "we really still think this is the right approach for us".
Click to expand...


The console the 360 shared ffxi with was the ps2, not the ps3
 
Ghost Slayer said:
Encrypted data is not some kind of skyrocket science. Anything transfer on Internet required it for the sake of user and/or provider information.
Click to expand...

If you have the ability to decrypt it yeah.... This has nothing to do with "anything" transferred on the internet. I'm talking about xbox live games communicating with the Xbox live service.
 
oldergamer said:
Again, you don't know what you are talking about. It doesn't matter if the game has dedicated servers or not. if the traffic flows through Xbox live, allows users to make purchases through xbox live, the same encryption protocol exists.
Click to expand...

I'm going to restrict myself to only replying to this, and hopefully you can extrapolate from there the rest of what you need to understand.

Data Traffic does not flow through X-Box Live. X-Box Live is not a physical telecommunications infrastructure. This is how communications work:

Local End -> Network -> Distant End

The local end is your device. The network is your ISP. The only part X-Box Live plays in the procedure is providing a distant end to connect to, either directly (in the case of Marketplace pages and account validation), or indirectly (matchmaking to locate a valid peer to serve as the distant end).

You send data to X-Box Live only when you need to, otherwise your data is sent to the dedicated game server (which usually is not a part of Live) or peer (ie, other user). The data does not route through X-Box Live on the way there somehow. That would be a routing nightmare and would make the service absurdly high-latency in the vast majority of physical locations in the world. The data routes as such traffic invariably does: through a series of intermediaries determined to have the lowest overall ping at the time of transmission.

This constant refrain of "encryption" is baffling and completely unrelated, given the way an MMORPG's client-server relationship works. A client (a PS4 or XB1) does not have to be able to communicate with another client in any way, shape, or form, and in fact will not do so in the network architecture. A client communicates only with the server; the server then communicates with other clients on the original client's behalf. The fact that other clients might be PS4s or PCs or iPhones has absolutely no bearing for anyone other than the network engineers who have to make sure their server can properly handle traffic from multiple sources.
 
otakukidd said:
Then don't use the xbox live network. Like final fantasy 11. It's like connecting to effing Netflix. That doesn't go thru the xbox live network and isn't encrypted. But cause of this policy if some one tried to bypass the xbox live network. They probably wouldn't pass cert. That's the reason we don't see it.
Click to expand...

They probably made them some sort of deal since it didn't include PS3 cross play. I'm not sure why that was the only game of its kind, but I'd be willing to bet that since it was ps2 and not ps3, it was a non issue.
 
oldergamer said:
They probably made them some sort of deal since it didn't include PS3 cross play. I'm not sure why that was the only game of its kind, but I'd be willing to bet that since it was ps2 and not ps3, it was a non issue.
Click to expand...
So its a fucking policy problem and not a fucking technical problem. They did it then cause they wanted jrpgs on the system and win over square to get final fantasy games on the system.
 
oldergamer said:
They probably made them some sort of deal since it didn't include PS3 cross play. I'm not sure why that was the only game of its kind, but I'd be willing to bet that since it was ps2 and not ps3, it was a non issue.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about FF11, SE just never made one for PS3 since PS3 had backwards compatibility. I was able to play my ffxi on PS3. I would have rather they made one for PS3 native or a port but it was alright, got the job done.
 
oldergamer said:
Again, you don't know what you are talking about. It doesn't matter if the game has dedicated servers or not. if the traffic flows through Xbox live, allows users to make purchases through xbox live, the same encryption protocol exists. If it were as open as you are trying to say ( correct me if that isn't what you are trying to say since I can't make heads or tails at the point you are pushing ) then not a single developer would need to go through MS to allow this. They wouldn't even have to tell MS that they are connecting to players outside of xbox live.
Click to expand...
I'll be as blunt as i can in this reply
The work arond of the bolded exist and it's FF14. All the purchases aside from the game ( all the in-game stuff ) is done on square servers. That's why you can pay for a subscription once and it'll work either on PS3, PS4 or PC ( or all of them at once ).
THere is NOTHING that would prevent the same system to exist on live.

Anyone who's played the game would understand this easily. especially if you've switching between pc and consoles.
This talk of encryption is a falsehood. yes purchases on XBOX live have their security and it's separate from one used by steam or sony but that's not the problem here.
 
Imperfected said:
I'm going to restrict myself to only replying to this, and hopefully you can extrapolate from there the rest of what you need to understand.
Click to expand...

As someone who is currently studying Networking, I understand what you are saying and I am baffled why people keep saying you are wrong.

R_thanatos said:
I'll be as blunt as i can in this reply
The work arond of the bolded exist and it's FF14. All the purchases aside from the game ( all the in-game stuff ) is done on square servers. That's why you can pay for a subscription once and it'll work either on PS3, PS4 or PC ( or all of them at once ).
THere is NOTHING that would prevent the same system to exist on live.

Anyone who's played the game would understand this easily. especially if you've switching between pc and consoles.
This talk of encryption is a falsehood. yes purchases on XBOX live have their security and it's separate from one used by steam or sony but that's not the problem here.
Click to expand...

I was going to reply the same thing but I see you got the bolded covered, basically there is nothing preventing MS from having FFXIV except that bloody policy of theirs, it's like their indie policy they know it hurts them but they never remove policies. Their loss I guess.
 
Sangetsu-II said:
I was going to reply the same thing but I see you got the bolded covered, basically there is nothing preventing MS from having FFXIV except that bloody policy of theirs, it's like their indie policy they know it hurts them but they never remove policies. Their loss I guess.
Click to expand...
they want power. they want control, to dominate. well, that is the impression serversurfer gave me way back in january in the thread where sony sold 18.5 million consoles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Which UBI IP should Phil Spencer and XBOX purchase?
2
85
3K
Holammer replied
Phil Spencer's Legacy as told by Phil Spencer
2 3
106
7K
Negotiator replied
Game Pass ‘not for everybody’, says Xbox boss Phil Spencer
News Clickbait 
6
415
Lunarorbit replied
[Windows Central] "It's literally tens of millions of hours." Xbox CEO Phil Spencer on Xbox Cloud Gaming's "dramatic growth,"
2
65
3K
thicc_girls_are_teh_best replied
Xbox will show the PlayStation logo in their showcases from now on, says Phil Spencer
4 5 6 7 8
365
16K
Mibu no ookami replied
Top Bottom