Support NeoGAF

[EDMIX]

it fuggin should be that way if I buy a game on my ps5 thats also on xsx I should be able to access it on that platform as well it should be like movies anywhere that gives me access to all the films that I purchased on different distribution platforms

lol nahhhhh

I get it based on what Sony might do as they own PSN, thus owning PSP, PS3, PS4, PS Vita, PS5 had having all sorts of combinations makes sense for a cross buy situation

Same with MS with XB and PC, they have a vested interest as they own the Windows OS.

Same if Nintendo where to do something like that with.......ok same if they did something like this with another platform, regardless it makes sense based on the publisher.

HOWEVER based on a 3rd party, why the fuck would they make a game on like 5 platforms, oh but shit you can get all versions if you pay 1 time? That fucking game wasn't MADE 1 TIME sir, thus who would cover the cost to bring it over to many platforms?

So if MS has their game on PC and XB, they own Windows, they own XB.

If ANOTHER PUBLISHER brings their games to XB and then makes a PC version, their focus is getting each version to sell, they have no ode to sell Windows the OS nor XB the platform, their focus is selling their actual game, so if it takes more time to put into the PC version, why would they then want to get less money so you can have all those versions with zero price difference disregarding that it actually cost money to make another version? So I don't know if I can argue this about 3rd party games, it just makes no sense and what we are talking about isn't a simple copy and paste and I don't get the benefit of the 3rd party to spend more, to make less or something.

 

[Three]

Nah they absolutely would.

If they didn't then they would allow keys for PC games purchases to be universal (or at least allow a function to transfer said key) instead of being tied to a particular storefront.

I think publishers would absolutely allow that if the storefronts were willing to offer the things that cost money and come with the particular storefront (like say cloud saves) outside of just using it as a launcher and not taking 30% from the sale. I don't see what the publisher has to lose. Do people buy PC games twice on two separate storefronts for the publisher to benefit from not offering this?

 

[L*][*N*K]

 

[Ozzie666]

Over Jim Ryan's dead body. Such a customer friendly move would seem impossible. I would love to pay 1 fee for a game across PC, Xbox, PS5. Who wouldn't? Cross save and cross play is pushing it already. Gamepass is the closest thing really if games are available on PC and Console. The publishers would absoutely freak out since PC and Console are treated as dfifferent products. For example if Xbox released a PC handheld and found a way to make xbox console titles work on it, it would be against publishing agreements. It's also why Valve was able to carry over the PC library to their hand held PC, not a console.

Gaming indsury and big publishers already have their feet on our necks in so many different ways and twice on Sundays.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

A lot of platforms would do cross-purchase when everything you are purchasing resides within the garden of their platform. But if you think about it, is that really cross-platform?

This is one of those things that only works if on one person is doing it. But if everyone starts doing it, then they just find another way to still link you to their platform.

And I really hate this movie reference people always bring up when trying to talk up the next new thing they want games to do or have. Two completely different markets. It's like people forget movies have their first outing at the box office. And those that don't, are platform-locked to whatever streaming service they are on.

 

[Kiya's Guard]

If you buy a game on playstation and are able to play it on pc, that would hurt potential console sales, brands don't want that, they need fidelity (Microsoft doesn't care because almost all pc gaming is done in windows, and even if it's on steam or similar they are trying their own with the ms store). And of course Nintendo would never want their games elsewhere

 

[Montauk]

No. Never.

 

[gooner4life_uk]

Very unlikely because the platform holders take a cut of digital sales, they also have a licencing fee for publishing on their platform, so if it did they would probably charge you upwards of 80% more than what a game costs now and logistically it's more to manage for the publisher of the game etc.

 

[SportsFan581]

If ANOTHER PUBLISHER brings their games to XB and then makes a PC version, their focus is getting each version to sell, they have no ode to sell Windows the OS nor XB the platform, their focus is selling their actual game, so if it takes more time to put into the PC version, why would they then want to get less money so you can have all those versions with zero price difference disregarding that it actually cost money to make another version? So I don't know if I can argue this about 3rd party games, it just makes no sense and what we are talking about isn't a simple copy and paste and I don't get the benefit of the 3rd party to spend more, to make less or something.

There are many third-party play anywhere titles on the Xbox store: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/xbox-play-anywhere

It's really still one store however, they only have to deal with one revenue split and MS is providing the infrastructure in either case. The dev doesn't care which version of the game you are playing at any given second. Cross-buy spread across different stores (Epic, Steam, MS, etc.) would be much more difficult to get squared away on the revenue side.

 

[Little Chicken]

Microsoft does this between Xbox and PC.

I don't see it happening across Xbox-PS-Switch.

I think Sony should also offer a single licence across PS and PC.

 

[SportsFan581]

I think Sony should also offer a single licence across PS and PC.

I think we'll see this at some point, just because it allows them to potentially sell PS+ subscriptions to the PC market. Hopefully they will continue to support steam even with their own launcher.

 

[March Climber]

I think Sony should also offer a single licence across PS and PC.

Agreed. I think a good compromise here would be Sony having a PC storefront where you can play any PS games you own natively on PC if you wanted to.

And I really hate this movie reference people always bring up when trying to talk up the next new thing they want games to do or have. Two completely different markets. It's like people forget movies have their first outing at the box office. And those that don't, are platform-locked to whatever streaming service they are on.

To help clarify, movies anywhere is not like a typical streaming service. It is working with purchasable UHD/Blu-Ray/Digital Codes, comparable to a storefront.

The reason you hate the reference is because you are attempting to equate a streaming option to a storefront, when movie streaming services are more comparable to something like Gamepass or better yet the PS Plus Premium options where you can only stream PS3 games but not outright buy them natively. The services movies anywhere uses, is more comparable to a storefront like Steam store, PS store, Xbox store, etc.

I hope that clears things up.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Only if PC is in the equation, and the games have to be day and date.

So beyond Microsoft, I doubt it.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Unlikely, every storefront gets a cut, and I don't need yet another launcher on my PC. Thank god Microsoft is launching their games on steam, so I don't need to deal with their store.
Sometimes I sub to gamepass for a month when I want to try some of their exclusives, but after that period I just buy the games I really like.

 

[Bojanglez]

Most viable way to achieve this is for the publisher to issue additional codes at 'cost' price for some kind of special addition or additional access.

So for example a $70 if we assume each store will take 30%, then you can purchase the game for $70 and it comes with one access to that one store, but you could then buy additional store access rights for $20 each and that store gets 100% of that $20 (so they are not losing out in any way).

I may probably rely on some kind of industry standardised scheme like UltraViolet or Movies Anywhere for movies where a single account must exist that links the systems so that keys can't be sold.

I would happily do this to get games on Steam and PS5 at the same time, whereas now I have to choose and maybe wait until a sale for the other. In this model both Steam, Playstation and the publisher should be happy.

I doubt Sony or Nintendo would agree to this initially.