I just read that Yoshi is still in talks for the Xbox and SWITCH versions. I'm totally not trolling here but didn't we just get rid of the ps3 for power reasons? Is the switch powerful enough to run XIV decently? Would Nintendo ever give up control to allow XIV to do what it does? Discuss!
XIV on Switch and Xbox
Printable View
-
06-06-2017, 12:38 AMEmorelleXIV on Switch and Xbox
-
06-06-2017, 12:44 AMVesparYoshi has been in talks with MS for years regarding an Xbox version. In the past though, Microsoft wouldnt change its policy regarding shared servers with Sony, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emorelle
If MS is willing to change their policy to allow for cross-system server play, then an Xbox version would likely move forward. (Either that or Xbox users would be all on their own, with their own community)
As for switch... this has me worried. We just got rid of PS3 support.. Why do we wanna bog it down again with limited hardware specs like that of the switch? -
06-06-2017, 12:45 AMFelis
Will only happen if Microsoft forget the "own server only for XB players"
-
06-06-2017, 12:46 AMKosmos992k
Xbox version is in Microsoft's court, they have the power...
A switch version would be a retrograde step, we just phased out the PS3, why lumber the game with inadequate platforms to support again?
P.S. no switch isn't powerful enough, it's not even as powerful as an nVidia Shield. -
06-06-2017, 12:46 AMKuroneko_JutahProbably not gonna happen for either one. The Switch version would have to be in its own environment and possibly licensed out a la Korea and China. As for Xbox... well, they're still insisting that people pay for Gold to access any sort of online content and Square is holding a hardline stance that they would rather not force one platform to pay the subscription to the game in addition to a subscription to Gold. This also feeds back into a Switch version, as their online services will cost money eventually (though at a much cheaper rate than Live).Quote:
Originally Posted by Emorelle
-
06-06-2017, 12:52 AMEmorelle
With the upgraded Xbox coming it would be such a great addition to their games list. The switch like the rest of you has me completely baffled. I can't even believe its being talked about. I was hoping for some friends that it being for Xbox would be an announcement at E3. Oh well!
-
06-06-2017, 01:04 AMsilverlunarfoxI wouldve thought the upgraded XBox would've been perfect for XIV since they seem to like pruning their list of games to where the PS4 looks freaking amazing (I have both systems but I have friends who would want to play and only have Xboxes....) But I'm assuming server issues is where its at more than Xbox Gold. I tend to agree in liking Microsoft's servers, however Square's are just fine and they need to let go....Quote:
Originally Posted by Emorelle
As for the Switch.......just....no please.....I don't even know why its being talked about. I don't hate the Switch, but I think its unnecessary in terms of limitations it would have. -
06-06-2017, 01:10 AMLirion
I think the problem with MS is that they want you to pay for Live to play FFXIV, while the FF team don't want the player to have to pay for two subs to play the game. On PS4 you don't need Plus to play FFXIV.
If I'm not mistaken I think this was the reason why we're not seeing FFXIV on a MS console. -
06-06-2017, 01:17 AMsilverlunarfoxHere's the thing, PS4 uses PS Plus, for uh, I dont know what aside from being able to play online and access certain apps. (I really think Plus is a waste even tho i have it) Xbox uses Xbox Live Gold, which pays for everything you would get on PS4 but ALSO their own server usage if a game decides it wants to use it. (The only reason I justify paying for the gold cost as well, which I also have) What it comes down to, is they'd prefer heavily to use their servers. There are certain apps and games you can play (but perhaps minus some online capability in games) with just a Silver account which is free. So in the end I don't think it has anything to do with the sub fee to gold. UNLESS MS insists they have to use THEIR servers not SE own servers. It's just a sticky situation business wise, and no one wants to give. Remember XI used to be on Xbox...I also see it as Xbox is less interested with Japanese games on their console. PS4 is clearly the JRPG central with Xbox getting the snub or Xbox not seeing worth in having those games on their system. The issue is much broader than a sub fee, or server usage, but also over player base, sales, interest, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lirion
-
06-06-2017, 01:34 AMKosmos992kHere's the thing. PS4 uses PSN for uh...network services such as authentication of users and license checking. PS Plus has zero to do with that. You don't have to be subscribed to PS Plus at all for your PS4 to go online and play games that support online play without PS Plus. PS Plus is a premium service offering that sits on top of PSN. PSN is required for online play, but PS Plus is not. Then again since PSN is 100% completely free gratis, I am left wondering what your rather scattered point really is.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverlunarfox
One final point. It's up to the developers to choose what they want/need from Sony. If they want to provide their own servers then PS Plus is not required, and Sony is quite cool with that. If they want Sony's infrastructure to help them then PS Plus will be needed and Sony is cool with that too. Sony really doesn't care because either way they get royalties from game sales and from console/accessory sales, and the more games on the console, the more players buy them. -
06-06-2017, 01:38 AMLen
Yes to Xbox One, no to Nintendo Switch.
It should be abundantly clear to anyone that's actually played a Switch that the console is just not powerful enough. -
06-06-2017, 02:09 AMMaero
Entirely up to MS, it is not SE, nor Sony holding them back. MS do not play nice with others i guess..
As for the switch, yes it is not powerful enough, it has the power like that of the 360 -
06-06-2017, 02:14 AMArutan
Switch limitation.
-
06-06-2017, 03:15 AMAmelia_Pond_Behemoth
If FF14 comes to Switch, then what am I supposed to play while waiting in the queue?
-
06-06-2017, 03:18 AMWhite_Wolf_X
No to Switch and Don't care to Xbox.
PC master race anyway... =d -
06-06-2017, 04:02 AMAbriaelI've seen that quote misquoted and amplified on quite a few sites, with a few misleading titles as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emorelle
Yoshi has been telling the same thing about Xbox One first and now Switch literally for years. Personally, I've stopped asking (even because Yoshi has started to give me "the look" every time I ask), but looks like others haven't learned the lesson just yet. -
06-06-2017, 05:48 AMenthauptetYou have to have PS Plus to even play pretty much every single player games (since all of them use coop or server side processing for anti-cheating now) so I'm not sure why it has ever been an issue for them. Maybe because it was not required for PS3? It has been since PS4 so...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosmos992k
Having individual separate servers is the only thing that really matters imo. If they really care about paying for gold then their priorities are asinine as 99% of xbox users already have it and the people that don't aren't playing right now so their sub lapsed. -
06-06-2017, 05:58 AMPomelo
I'm interested in a Switch but if its less powerful than a PS3, theres no point really for ff14 to come to it, we've already done away with that.
-
06-06-2017, 06:05 AMRubenSnizzleCause microsoft is greedy, always been. They want xbox users to have gold to play 14, but SE doesn't want to, cause 14 is a sub based game and ect.. Until MS drop the 'need gold to play 14' it won't ever come to xbox. Cause as it stands, cross-play is already in effect by the host (SE) and all they're waiting on is for MS to stop being a baby and grow up.Quote:
Originally Posted by enthauptet
-
06-06-2017, 06:50 AMElkanahSince FFXI had cross platform from PS2, Xbox 360 and PC, I couldn't see why we couldn't do this on XIV with the PS4, PC and Xbox One. It was literally done in the past! XDQuote:
Originally Posted by Vespar
Does the Switch have the same kind of tech as the PS3? -
06-06-2017, 08:10 AMKosmos992kNo, the stance is the same. It's up to the developers whether or not to make use of PS Plus. If they want to remain outside that ecosystem, they have to agree that with Sony, and provide their own online service components. There is still some integration with PSN, but PS Plus is not needed. People seem to have some kind of compulsive need to imagine otherwise, but it's not the case. Now, considering that providing your own infrastructure isn't cheap, I can see why many devs choose not to do that. Also, additional features available specifically through PS Plus may be part of what they want to offer their gamers.Quote:
Originally Posted by enthauptet
But, at the end of the day, the simple truth is that technologically speaking, all that is needed to play online with PS4 is PSN for authentication and license checking - so long as the game supports this. PS Plus isn't needed, and no amount of mental gymnastics will make it otherwise. Also, this has nothing to do with PS3, it's Sony policy.
Oh, and BTW the uptake rate for Gold membership with Xbox 360 was no where near 100%, it was closer to 60% and I've seen nothing to suggest that it's any different now. It's most certainly not 99% of Xbox gamers. -
06-06-2017, 08:22 AMValkyrie_LennethMicrosoft wanted a Final Fantasy title to sell the 360 in Japan. Now they don't care, since the Xbox One is doing horribly there, so they are much less inclined to make an exception. They also want "servers for xbox only" as an option for their players. Yoshi-P disagrees, so there is a standstill until Microsoft budges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkanah
-
06-06-2017, 08:49 AMKeys2tkingdom
FFXIV for the Switch... Yeah, even as big of a Nintendo fan I am, even I don't think that should happen unless Nintendo makes a more powerful Switch. The Switch might be able to handle the settings for the PS3 version. But as it is, I don't think the Switch would be able to properly handle the upgraded base requirements that come with 4.0.
As for an Xbox version, I have very little thoughts on that. Xbox has never had any exclusives that has prompted me to buy their systems. So if an Xbox version happens, it happens. And if it never does, it'll still be business as usual for me. -
06-06-2017, 09:47 AMJadub2k
Plz twelve no switch.. its almost laughable to imply it while making PS3 Support drop & PC Spec Raise pointless lol As for Xbox, they keep saying that they've changed there stance on crossplay but nothings happening yet so obviously there still at an impass.. M$ is the one that needs to budge on this to make this happen and gotta admit... This game would possibly look amazing on "Scorpio".
-
06-06-2017, 11:59 AMthegreatonemalNo you don't. You only need ps plus to play online games. the exceptions being games that are free to play or have a sub fee. Everything else to play online multiplayer needs plusQuote:
Originally Posted by enthauptet
-
06-06-2017, 12:23 PMYISUG
i hope it never get released on the switch
-
06-06-2017, 12:58 PMHaywardThis argument has a noticeable hole in it: Dragon Quest X. Near as I can tell, it runs about as well on the Switch as any other platform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosmos992k
I can't tell how well XIV would run, but SE, unlike the lazy-a$$ed Western 3rd parties on our side of the Pacific, might have ways to optimize the game. -
06-06-2017, 01:47 PMitti18
Switch is a bad idea as it doesnt have enough power
I am ok with XBox if they agree to share servers -
06-06-2017, 02:48 PMAstralKaosWhat is your point? Dragon Quest X was a Wii (yes, original Wii)game, of course it'd work on Switch...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward
The point many are making is that making a Switch version would be ridiculous, as they've just rid themselves of the whole PS3 problem - they'd be replacing one problem with another. If you didn't know, the Switch isn't very powerful. -
06-06-2017, 02:58 PMJisKing98RIght! I'm over here trying to figure out what singleplayer requires ps+.Quote:
Originally Posted by thegreatonemal
-
06-06-2017, 03:57 PMAronys
I play all of my singleplayer games on my PS4 without PS+. O.o
-
06-06-2017, 06:57 PMMature
Make it happen yoship push them tight Xbox bastards. I'm sure Nintendo won't bother tbh
-
06-06-2017, 06:57 PMNovaLevossida
I have a Switch. This game does not need to be on that platform. It's not a PS4 or Xbox One, and it never was meant to be. It's a really high powered handheld that happens to dock really well to a TV. But that's the extent of it. We don't need the thing holding back this game like the PS3 was doing.
-
06-06-2017, 07:54 PMPaladinleeds
The Switch is really a Wii U made portable. So while it blows the 3DS out of the water, it doesn't hold a candle to home consoles like the Xbox One and PS4. I'm not even sure it is as powerful as the 360/PS3 (but I'll let someone with a better grasp of tech confirm or deny that for me).
As a result, heck to the no to a Switch version. But an Xbox One version would definitely tantalise me (since planning to move the Xbox One downstairs, be nice to be able to play it on a console, since right now I play it cooped up in my bedroom) -
06-06-2017, 08:00 PMNatsunoEh. It is more powerful than that, but I agree that bringing XIV to the Switch is a bad idea and will only hold the game back. At best it'll get a few years (maybe 5.0 or 6.0, depending on how much the Devs want to improve the game) before needing to be dropped by like the PS3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladinleeds
-
06-06-2017, 08:19 PMera1NeNo, it is not up to the developer. F2P games and monthly sub based mmo don't need to use PS+, but all others do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosmos992k
https://www.engadget.com/2013/06/12/...s-dont-requir/Quote:
Sony Worldwide Studios President Shuhei Yoshida said, "As far as free-to-play games are concerned, it's the publisher's decision whether they put it inside or outside of PS Plus."
Second source:https://blog.us.playstation.com/2013...america/#sect8Quote:
Is PlayStation Plus necessary for multiplayer gameplay on PS4?
Yes, PlayStation Plus membership is needed for PS4 online multiplayer gaming. PS4 features a significantly enhanced online feature set that will deliver innovative new online gaming experiences.
Will non PS Plus members be able to play free to play online games on PS4?
Certain titles built on a free-to-play model will not require PlayStation Plus for multiplayer functionality in North America.
-
06-06-2017, 09:27 PMMaero
Nah like i said earlier Switch has the Power like that of the 360, it is a handheld tablet i compare it to.
-
06-06-2017, 09:46 PMReplicaX
Switch would be a step back for this game, especially with PS3 support dropping for SB and SE finally making it public the old NA datacenters were bottlenecked. Also SE would have to code in and throttle down to make the mobile mode of the switch meet standards of playability. A waste of development imo.
Sony and SE came to an agreement, with Sony making a special case to their policy allowing XIV to not require PS+. The exact opposite is going on with Microsoft, they have not agreed to make a special case to their policy for XIV.
What is sad is SE pioneered the console MMO early in the genre and Cross-platform MMO play. Were the first MMO to have 2 console competitors play together. Yet for some reason MS doesn't want to make that exception again. -
06-06-2017, 10:04 PMFelisSingleplayer games, that have online features without the devs running an own network for it, require PS+ for the online features.Quote:
Originally Posted by JisKing98
Of course you can still play those games without PS+ if you ignore those online features. -
06-07-2017, 02:22 AMKosmos992k::sigh::Quote:
Originally Posted by era1Ne
Cherry picking quotes from Shuhei Yoshida in 2013, and from a FAQ on the PlayStation Blog doesn't help you.
In the very same series of interviews Shuhei Yoshida mentioned that PS Plus was required for 'realtime' multi-player online play, but this wasn't clarified, and many reports dropped that quote all together because of the lack of clarity.
However, as you can see from this information updated in Feb 2017, it's not as you say, nor has it ever been. Let me see if I can break this down for you;
PS Plus required?
So, you have to be a PS plus member to play many games online, but not all?Quote:
You need to be a member of PlayStation Plus or have a local user account on the subscriber’s ‘Primary PS4’ to play many games online.
So PS3 and PS VIta don't need Plus at all....not that it matters too much for PS4.Quote:
Online play without a subscription
You don’t need to be a PlayStation Plus member to play online on your PlayStation 3 or PS Vita, but we recommend subscribing as it allows you to take advantage of all the extra features you receive when you join.
Hmmm..... what does that mean I wonder?Quote:
You also do not need to be a member of PlayStation Plus to play non-synchronous games on the PlayStation 4.
So, if two PS4 consoles are synchronized, communicating peer to peer for playing online, they do so over Sony's network using services exclusive to PS Plus. This will affect games such as Tekken 7, Call of Duty and any other 'real time action' games that fire data packets back and forth between consoles.Quote:
Synchronous games are games where two consoles need to be synched up to communicate with each other in real time - for example if you are playing co-op or competition mode on a shooting or racing game. Non-synchronous games mean that the two consoles do not need to be communicating in real time
However non-synchronous is any game where the PS4 consoles are not communicating with each other directly in real time (peer to peer). So *any* server based game such as an MMO, where the client (PS4 console) communicates with a server, and that server then communicates with other clients (could be PS4s, PCs or anything else) is non-synchronous. Games such as this may not require PS Plus.
If a game needs to make use of Sony's proprietary network beyond simple authentication and license checking to facilitate online play, it needs PS Plus. If a game uses Peer to Peer communication between PS4s, that communication is mediated via PS Plus service. Of course with real time action games, one of the reasons for this is to prevent cheating. There has to be some level of verification and trust pretty much all the time to ensure that no one cheats. This is just one aspect of using PS Plus since your console has to be continually checked and verified to keep your peer to peer session open. The PS networking services used are provided as part of the PS Plus package by Sony and cost money, so they charge.
On the other hand, if a game uses the client server model and doesn't do direct PS4 to PS4 real time communication, then it doesn't have to use PS Plus. The key thing here though is that if the developer/publisher doesn't want to create their own server infrastructure, they will have to engage with Sony to do it within Sony's services - and PS Plus will be needed. If on the other hand the developer is happy to create it's own service infrastructure and servers, then PS Plus isn't needed.
You're always trying to frame this in terms of everything has to go through PS Plus, and that's simply not true. Nor is it true to imply that developers are not free to choose whether they use PS Plus or not.
As I said, at the start "It's up to the developers to choose what they want/need from Sony.". Yes, there are some kinds of game that need to make use of services that are only available through PS Plus, meaning PS Plus will be a requirement in those cases. But, for online multi-player games that do not have to use such services, it's the developer's choice of how to proceed. Sony will help any way they are asked to.
Free to play games have been mentioned as not needing PS Plus. That's true, on the surface, but Free to Play games on PS4 use a micro transaction model that pushes transactions through the PS Store and it's services. The old saying that there is no such thing as a free lunch comes to mind, Sony still gets it's cut via their portion of the micro-transaction fees, they don't charge the players by requiring PS Plus since that would mean the game is not 'free to play'. However, players ultimately pay Sony and the developer through the transactions - it's an alternate revenue model that supplements the operating costs for Sony.
FFXIV is an interesting case because other than purchasing the games themselves on, everything else is done via SE's subscriptions and the Mogstation, and none of that revenue goes to Sony at all. Sony is not into giving things away free, but since FFXIV's servers and online services are hosted entirely by SE and there is no need for PS4 to PS4 communication in real time with all the safeguards and other services Sony provides, Sony has no reason to charge additional fees. FFXIV is in effect the model case for MMO games on PS4 that do not need PS Plus. FFXIV isn't a 'special' case, it's simply how it works if your game doesn't do peer to peer PS4 communication or Sony provided infrastructure.
Which goes back to PSN is 100% Free. PSN provides user authentication and license checking. PS Plus is not required for games like FFXIV because they do not use anything beyond basic user authentication and license checking.