Xbox Boss Wades In On Sony's Decision To Block Minecraft Cross-Platform Play

Now where did I leave my popcorn...

Not like Switch players are at risk, with no messaging or voice chat lol

@teamshortcut now where did I leave my tired, and unfunny comment...

Sony take ur purse and GTFO

@Pigeon No, Microsoft wanted to use Xbox Live servers for the Xbox version, which SE wouldn't allow because they use their own servers for it and PS3(when it still existed)/PS4 and PC players are share the same servers together, just like FFXI did with PC/PS2/360

Strange when you think about it, they let the 360 users play on SE servers with PS2 and PC players for FFXI, but wouldn't let Xbox One users play with PS3/PS4/PC players for FFXIV

Another Sony boss clarified this and basically said he didn't know why that was said lol. It's basically that Sony makes more money if their consumers convince their friends to buy a ps4 so they can play together. Sony loses money from cross play.

@Pigeon They wouldn't allow the game to be played without an Xbox Live subscription or third party servers.

Not that it mattered FF XI took up most of the 20GB hard drive.

Sony is playing politics and attempting to sell more of their own systems and games. The fact that they are claiming it's to protect children is flat-out insulting and shows their greed is even further than people have assumed Nintendo's was. Sony has a history of stealing pretty much everything. I don't really think that Sony will last much longer if they tank the gaming area because they don't have anything else to fall back on anyway.

Just Sony being arrogant again

i irony is when Sony tried to this this last gen and MS refused nothing was said but when MS decided to do it and Sony refuses suddenly Sony is attacking Microsoft

besides would MS even be doing this if the XB1 had actually sold as well as they hoped and it had been the PS4 that was the low seller?, NO they would be doing just what Sony is now

are Sony being arrogant, probably but no more than MS or Nintendo have been in the past

also MS did the exact same thing with Final Fantasy XI AND it's the main reason they haven't got FFXIV

Nintendo will going up like PhoeniX.
Sony will going down like ashes.
Microsoft will cut their support for Sony then....

Sony can stick a fork in it. We don't need them at all.

Here's the thing though. There's a recent update to this story where Mojang said that the way they're implementing cross-platform play in Minecraft is by having every single user sign in to Xbox Live. This includes everyone even the Switch players. So aside from NN account, users will also need to sign up for Xbox Live.

https://www.vg247.com/2017/06/15/minecrafts-new-cross-play-feature-needs-you-to-log-in-with-xbox-live-on-all-participating-platforms-says-mojang/

Actually, Microsoft is making players use Xbox Live on other platforms for cross play. I can sympathise with Sony for not wanting to do that, from a business point of view.

If Nintendo made this kind of call, Microsoft would have just said "Nintendo have always done their own thing" and it would have been brushed off. That being said, Nintendo would have worded it a lot better and not offended another company in their reasoning. Nintendo are known for being backwards but not offensive. I think Sony or the representative who said this was expecting that kind of outcome but then they insinuated something pretty negative so of course Microsoft would have to respond like that. Microsoft must love taking the high road and getting to show off how their gaming philosophy is better than Sony's.

Sony can say this for now, but Nintendo's portables sell better than Sony's consoles and Nintendo just became all portable. I'd laugh if Sony fell on its face due to hemoraging money from every division but playstation. Because that is where they are now.

@psycho_punch which is why it's actually a business decision. They don't want to make their players cozy up with the main competition.

That's just an excuse Sony are using.

@Equinox Please, explain their dishonesty.

@psycho_punch Which is pretty darn easy, all in all.
How is that bad for the "price" of crossplay?

Lol, not that he is wrong but off course he would say that. They own Minecraft. : -p

@speedracer216 Of course. Everything any of these platform holders ever does is mostly business decision. Sony rejecting cross-play, and Nintendo deciding to join in (regardless of the Xbox Live requirement) are respectively what they think are best for their bottom line.

@Equinox Microsoft are actually the most consumer friendly of the 3 this generation (since Phil Spencer took over after Don "24 hour check in" Mattrick got fired)

Obviously they're doing it to improve their image/features available to potential customers, but they're still pro-consumer actions.

It's the decision of "we're bigger than them so we don't have to play their games" kind of mentality. Because Sony is the leading player (for the time being) right now they believe that even if they don't do it will make no difference as long as PS4 sells. Imagine if the PS4 started up like the PS3 situation Sony would had no choice but to allow this.

Phil Spencer.. The guy that said he didn't like exclusive content and games, yet every announcement at the Xbox conference was preceded by ''launch exclusive'' or ''exclusive''. I think that Microsoft is the last company allowed to talk about business practises after their mandatory always online for Xbox One at launch and the entire Kinect ordeal.

The thing is, Microsoft (or even Nintendo) would've said the same if they were in Sony's position. I don't think Sony are inherently more evil by doing this. It's just a business strategy. It sucks, maybe, but the other two ain't saints either.

The only difference is that Sony should've prepared a better excuse and shouldn't have allowed Jim Ryan to open his mouth and make something up on the spot.

@CrazedCavalier If you're Sony with 60M+ user base, it hurts you by encouraging your users to sign up for accounts on Xbox Live, a directly competing online platform, which only benefits Microsoft as it improves their market share.

Lame on Sony's part (and I'm a HUGE Sony fan). Between this and the rocket league garbage I'm not sure what they are thinking...

I see Sony playing at being the spoilt little brat again.First Monster Hunter World (if the rumours are true) and now this, not wanting to play fair with the other kids and taking their ball home. The arrogance is starting to leave a bad taste

@chriiiiiiiiiis I think the big part is that it's the attempt from Sony to create a narrative (that could be repeated and amplified by their cheerleaders online) about cross play that it's somehow "unsafe".

That's a more positive narrative than "we want to defend our marketshare by making it hard to switch away from Playstation". That's obviously the reason why they're against it but it's such a negative story for them that they've clearly taken a decision at a high level to portray it in another way.

@StuTwo For the players......

You tell 'em Phil...

@PlayedNSlayed It's a good line that summed up a very well managed marketing positioning.

For any company the size of Sony (or Microsoft or Nintendo) the business side of things has to come first.

The only surprising thing here is that Sony, who've managed the perception and narrative surrounding PS4 impeccably from day one have left themselves a little bit open on this one.

@ThanosReXXX Historically, which one has been more secure: XBL or PSN?

@Octane That's talking about multi-plat games snapping up extra content on one console. I'd rather have a game come out slightly later on another console than the same time but without certain extras.

And really? Bringing that up after four years? They didn't follow through with it and Don Mattrick has been gone for years.

@psycho_punch How does it improve their market share? It doesn't cost anybody a cent (if anything it costs MS more).

Some of y'all are so desperate to push a "bad guy MS" narrative. Cross-play connects the playerbase and makes the game more attractive (I've seen people say they're interested in the game solely because of this announcement). Nintendo and Sony still get a cut from money spent in the game and from people buying the game on their platforms. It's a win-win situation.

@psycho_punch From your comments, it's quite clear that you don't have any idea whatsoever as to how cross-platform play works.

It would NOT require Nintendo or Sony players (or Microsoft players) to subscribe to ANY of the other services at ALL.

You just play from your own system using that console's specific service and the servers connected to the cross-platform enabled game take care of the rest, simply expanding match-making from the console specific servers to all of their servers, so the combining is done at their end.

Which means that there is no extra effort or purchase required for it at your end.

EDIT: I was wrong in assuming that there would be no account needed for cross-play, but instead of deleting those lines, I'll leave them up here for all to see, because I'm not afraid of admitting that I made a mistake. My bad...

Having said that: normally, it would not have to be necessary for it to work, as I described in the original comment. But apparently, in this case, Mojang wants to use Microsoft's servers, and as such it seems to be so that you would indeed need an Xbox Live account. Luckily, you can also subscribe for free, so until we learn more about this, it is probably smart to not immediately assume the worst and start to have nightmares about having to pay a monthly fee to Microsoft...

@CrazedCavalier Xbox Live, by a mile.

I wasn't going to buy the Switch version of Minecraft, because I own the PS4 version and PC, but Sony's actions really throw a wrench in the works. Also FYI if you have a Microsoft account through a Windows laptop you have a Live account so that step is done, I have no problem using Xbox live for Minecraft because it probably makes it easier for cross platform to be managed, you also don't need money for just signing in, you'll still be using Nintendo's online

@CrazedCavalier P.S. Thanks for the sanity.

@ThanosReXXX From the sound of it, it's you haven't read the story about how Mojang is implementing cross-play in Minecraft.

@CrazedCavalier market share is majorly about statistics. Signing up more people into Xbox Live means more numbers for Microsoft to use however they like.

This isn't about pushing any other narrative aside from the fact that that's how Mojang is implementing cross-buy, and that's what the immediate implications are, including Sony who have refused to join the partnership. On the flip side, there are also people who are pushing the "Sony is bad guy" narrative when there seems to be some rational to their business decisions in light of the new updates.

@CrazedCavalier Does that mean that you thought I was being sarcastic with my "You tell 'em Phil" comment?

I actually like the guy a lot. He's smart, sympathetic and has a keen eye and a good ear for what the fans want, and in any interview he gives, he always comes across as a very relaxed and genuine guy.

None of the idiosyncrasies and hostilities that Don Mattrick always used to spew into the ether.

@Menchi187 different management at that time.

@ThanosReXXX Why are you calling out @psycho_punch when he included a link to the article explaining that you do have to sign up for another service? Those first 2 sentences of yours are way off the mark. So much so I recommend you go back and delete them. Xbox Live may not be a paid service, but it's still an account. Now that I own an Xbox, and I've both had Gold and not had Gold, and a lot of paid and not paid is the same.

If it turns out that link is wrong then my apologies, but I am in agreement with Sony if that's the case. I would not market signing up for an Xbox account for my fan base and have them see how much better Gold is than PS+.

@rjejr Yeah, a lot of people don't seem to understand how companies can make money out of just simple head count. This is pretty much how YouTube celebrities earn so much money with just mere view statistics. This is also how Facebook became a multi-billion business even without asking people for money when they sign up.

@psycho_punch How they are doing it, is of secondary importance. It doesn't matter in what way they will be doing it, the cost will not be for the user.

If you have your own console and are using that console's online service, then any cross-platform game will take care of the rest. The method of how that is done, is of no consequence (cost-wise) to the end user.

Even in this case, where it says in the article that you linked to that you need an Xbox Live account, it never mentions needing an Xbox Live Gold account, so even if the article is correct and you'd need to make that account to be able to play cross-platform, then there would still be no cost, because you could just sign up for a free account.

For all intents and purposes, it wouldn't be any different than signing up for a Ubisoft or EA account, so there's really no reason whatsoever to be all up in arms about this.

And Xbox Live is the most stable online service, so Minecraft players on all systems would benefit from that.

@rjejr and the above is why...

@brutalpanda Don't get me started about Iwata's incompetencies....

@rjejr P.S. totally off-topic and unrelated, but here you go. Told ya...

While I want cross platform playing, in this instance I totally understand PlayStation for one reason. To cross platform minecraft, you have to sign in with a Xbox live account. If I was Sony, I wouldn't want Xbox live anywhere near PlayStation.

@ThanosReXXX When people use a winking emoji, they're generally being sarcastic from my experience.

Overall I find this to be an interesting development. Always saw Sony and Nintendo conquering the gaming world together, Sony home, Nintendo handheld, and MS getting out of console manufacturing since all of their games work on PC anyway. It's "Console Launch Exclusive" @octane

But now this. Would MS and NINTENDO team up to take on Sony? MS is a non-factor in Japan, they'll sell maybe 3 XXX in Japan. But Nintendo Switch still has zero FPS that I'm aware of. Skyrim is FP but it's not a shooter. The 2 gaming companies actually do complement each other very well. Not saying they'll merge or anything, but they are less in competition than Sony and Nintendo.

Not expecting Mario Odyssey on Xbox, but maybe the Mario Minecraft skin, or Bayonetta 3 releases on both. But Switch may help Sony kill Xbox X and Xbox 11 so Nintendo doesn't have to help them out too kuch, just play nice together, something Sony and MS tend not to do.

@CrazedCavalier Yeah, I can understand, so fair enough. FYI: the smiley was actually meant for all the "Microsoft is bad m'kay?" people.

I actually agree with your points. And even though there may be something to that "players will have to subscribe to Xbox Live" thing, I highly doubt it's going to cost the gamers extra cash.

@ThanosReXXX How they're doing it is of primary concern for Sony, who have as much accountability to their stakeholders, as they have to their consumers. Having to sign up for Ubisoft, EA, etc. is not parallel comparison since they do not directly compete with Sony's PlayStation Network; those are third party publishers who happen to have their own network infrastructure to support playing games on Sony's console.

Just because you aren't shelling out for anything doesn't mean you aren't contributing to someone's business. Like I said, signing up to Xbox Live works almost the same way as any other "free" service on the Internet, like Google's, Facebook's, Twitter's, etc.

Sony on that high horse though~

@ThanosReXXX Thanks for the Pikmin 4 link, I responded to that yesterday. Short version - if you announce Pikmin 4, then 2 full years later a new Pikmin game releases, and then 2 years after that another new Pikmin game releases, well that first game is Pikmin 4, the next is Pikmin 5. It doesn't matter which game he was actually talking about if we have to wait 4 years for a game he told us was already done.

Guess switching Wii U games to Switch takes longer than they thought.

Yeah, but let's get real: This is Microsoft basically using Minecraft as a Trojan Horse to worm its way into Sony's PlayStation Plus and PSN users and consumers mind-share (and Nintendo's online users too), clearly in a bid to steal their business away and get them all playing on Xbox Live at some point in the future. And this falls perfectly in line with the recent news that you'll actually have to have an Xbox Live account just to use this cross-play feature, regardless of the system you're playing the game on. Sony is just clamoring to come up with any reason/excuse because it knows it can't really let it do that--it just happens to be a pretty crap and transparent reason/excuse that it came up with.

@Octane I think the "exclusive" situation is not that different from things like Nintendo's mobile situation and revealing NX in March 2015. Nintendo didn't want to go into mobile development but investors pretty much forced them to. At least "launch exclusive" is a kind of fake exclusive so the only real exclusives were the first party games like Crackdown 3 (which obviously would be exclusive, imagine Super Mario Odyssey on PS4 and XB1 ).

@rjejr Responded to it? Must have missed that, and I haven't seen a Pikmin 4 article on here.

But agreed, the wait is taking too long, especially since he has said multiple times that it was near completion, so you'd have to wonder what the deal is with needing so much time to port it from Wii U to the Switch.

It's still part 4, though, since Hey! Pikmin isn't a main series game but a spin-off.

P.S. For once, I took your advice and I edited my comment. Didn't quite do it as you suggested (as you will see if you scroll up to check), but I hope you appreciate the effort anyways...

@ThanosReXXX But it is VERY different than signing up for Ubi or Squenix accounts, they don't make and sell competing hardware. Nobody can say - I'm not buying a PS4, I'll buy a Ubibox or SquenixSwitch instead. Once PS4 subscribers have to sign up for a free Xbox Live account it will be in their heads that they have one. And they'll talk to all their friends who have one. And they'll see how nicely it ties into their PC gaming. And they'll realize they don't need a PS4 they can just game on PC.

Live Gold is much better than PS+. I think you said "hands down" about that earlier. No way no how Sony requires people sign into an Xbox Live account on their PS4. Sony doesn't allow EA Access on PS4 b/c it competes with PS+, so there's that precedent as well.

Might it have to do with players needing an Xbox Live account to play online?

https://mynintendonews.com/2017/06/14/minecraft-ceo-confirms-xbox-live-login-on-nintendo-switch/

@psycho_punch True, Ubisoft and EA don't have any hardware, but strip that away and it's the same, so the hostility towards this really is a bit too much.

Sony would have done the same if they owned Mojang or Minecraft, so it's definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

@rjejr So, conclusion: Sony is WAY too uptight about these kinds of things. But of course, Microsoft and EA are both the devil's offspring...

@ThanosReXXX I'm all about the effort. We're you less angry?

And what do you mean no Pikmin 4 article, I wrote on it last night?

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/06/fret_not_pikmin_4_is_still_progressing

@rjejr Ah, okay. Must have missed that one. (HOW did I miss that one?) I just scrolled through the articles on the front page to check if there was anything interesting there before getting into this hornet's nest...

@psycho_punch P.S. Edited my original comment to you, I was "a bit" too quick with my assumptions there. Mea culpa and all that...

@rjejr And how so, less angry? I'm almost never angry. Apparently it comes across as such, but if I'm going against something in an article's comments section, it is mostly me wondering how people can come to certain conclusions or simply disagreeing, but almost never angry.

The only thing that could make me angry, is continued and baseless negativity, because I truly despise the glass half empty view of life.

@psycho_punch: The fact that they're also blocking Rocket League seems proof enough that there is more to this than you're suggesting. I find it unlikely that Rocket League's creators would be using Microsoft of Xbox Live to provide this service or would require an Xbox Live account. So yes, this is probably little more than a more than Sony's decision to hold it's player-base captive to its platform.

@Grumblevolcano Internet meltdown for sure.

@Alikan
Indeed. That is where they have been for some time now. Granted they are climbing out of their junk status credit rating. They cannot afford to fuss and whine and make their few profitable divisions look less desirable. As we have seen before all it can take is a single misstep to harm your customer base. Today's winner can easily turn into tomorrow's loser.

Sony has the high ground Phil.

I love Phil Spencer. And for me, Microsoft has a great ecosystem. I had a PS3 and hated PS Plus and the OS. With my xbox one, it's very consumer friendly. The backwards compatibility is such a big deal because I missed out on all those games. I'm glad to see Nintendo embrace a company like Microsoft. A switch +xbox feels like a better value than a switch+ ps4.

@SomeBitTripFan Of course. These platform holders build walled gardens with that very thing in mind. It'd be nice for us to tear those down once and for all, but I bet a new equally anti-consumer corporate device will replace it.

@ThanosReXXX

True, Ubisoft and EA don't have any hardware, but strip that away and it's the same, so the hostility towards this really is a bit too much.

You are presenting something hypothetical and equating it to something in reality. The fact is that those are third party publishers whose infrastructures do not compete with Sony's. It's not even the hardware that's the point of interest here but the online gaming platform (XBL VS PSN).

Sony would have done the same if they owned Mojang or Minecraft, so it's definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Again, hypothetical. Also, no one is calling whomever whatever; no one is claiming anyone is anything in this case. Now since while we're delving into the hypotheticals here, if MS became a third party publisher, and XBL stops being direct competitor to Sony's PSN, then Sony would probably have not much issue cross-playing through that. They don't seem to mind users signing up for Square-Enix accounts to play FFXIV on PS4.

Sony surprises me as I thought it would be Nintendo who would not allow cross play.

@psycho_punch And yet they also refused EA's Access service, so there's that. That's why I said strip away those differences of one party also being in the hardware business and all we're really talking about is an online service subscription. (you would also HAVE to strip it away in order to be able to correctly compare them and assess if it really is as bad as it sounds or not, or if people are overreacting)

And of course it's true that it might just be hypothetical, but it is essentially exactly the same in this regard as signing up for Uplay or EA Access.

And we ARE talking factual about having to make an account on Xbox Live, so that part isn't hypothetical, making it something that we actually can compare to the other services, since it doesn't need Microsoft's hardware for the cross-platform service, just the subscription.
EDIT:
And then there's also the whole refusing Rocket League cross-platform play. No Xbox Live needed there, so one would have to wonder what's up with that, then...

@Hikingguy Friendships

It makes sense, but I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around Japanese Nintendo HQ guys sitting around a meeting talking about sharing with MS HQ guys, they are such different companies.

I think by now we all know how that "unprecedented partnership" with EA turned out.

@Hikingguy "Nintendo would obviously make the hardware"

Well considering the Switch is an Nvidia Shield tablet - damo has said as much on numerous occasions - wouldn't it just be easier for Steam to team up w/ Nvdia? Shield Tablet. Shield Handheld. Shield TV. Nvidia has all of the hardware console bases covered.

Nintneod does have the games, so they could give them to Steam (Valve still own Steam?) but I'm nto sure what Ntinedo gets out of Valve in return? Nintneod doesn't need Valve to release it's games on PC, it's doing just fine w/ mobile now.

Seems like Steam has everything to gain and Ntinedo has nothing but PC support they probably don't even want.

@rjejr Interesting you'd say that. Given XBox's frail position within Microsoft, and Sony's dominance this generation leading back to their PS2 levels of arrogance, XBox has been really really nice and collaborative with Nintendo of late. After this whole Sony debacle, and with the whole MH debacle with Capcom, I've been thinking of direct or indirect partnerships with XBox and Nintendo going forward. But I don't think it would go too far unless XBox ends up on the auction block (and it could.)

I'm honestly conflicted between Playstation and XBox. With some of the behavior out of Sony these days, I have half a mind to switch to XBox for my #2.....I just feel dirty dealing with Sony anymore. And yet they have a lot more exclusives that interest me than XBox. And I can't forget that Microsoft is no less an evil company (possibly worst in most respects), and their 360 era leading into XBone launch shows they're capable of being just as obnoxious. At least Nintendo hasn't been obnoxious since Arakawa retired

@Equinox This ^. It's why I ended up favoring Sony between the two (at least Sony isn't also monitoring every time I reboot my PC and load a browser...and making sure there's back doors for Big Brother to never miss an NL post I make...)

OTOH, Sony = MPAA, RIAA, the copy protection that actively infected PCs like a virus, and their financial services business that exists only in Asia but is among their biggest divisions......I can guess how they operate. And we can't forget the Nintendo Playstation debacle.

Both companies are really nasty companies run by 30 floors of lawyers, basically. Which one is more evil probably depends on which one you're more in a position to get stiffed by which of their divisions.

Sony is just being cocky because they are top dog. Looks like they have forgotten the days of PS3 Fat version.

@Hikingguy I think the best explanation of 3rd party AAA games and Nintendo comes if you yead the full interview with Myiamoto and Guillemot at Eurogamer. I think Miyamoto quite nicely answered the question about 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms without even trying.

Miyamoto: "Ubisoft has provided a lot of support for [Nintendo] hardware and they understand how it works. They've made products which are very satisfactory and fit the market we're shooting for."

This whole philosophy....Sony, Microsoft pay to get games like Crew 2, and Skull and Bones. Nintendo pays to have their dev teams collaborate to make a totally different game. They're shooting for a certain market. They didn't get Crew 2 and Skull and Bones because that's simply not their prioroty. It doesn't fit their direction. They wouldn't mind if they had it but it's not something they'd go out of their way for. Kind of a difference between all the internet fans that want a Nintendo PS4 and Nintendo's on intentions.

I'm not sure they see a "third party gap" because they're intentionally creating a different platform. A gap implies they're seeking parity with every other platform and falling short. If they're trying to simply build a totally different platform, there's no gap. WiiU simply failed to actually build a complete platform out of what it had so it's a bad example to compare, but short of WiiU they seem to always build an extensive library and ecosystem that's at least 80% unique content. Before Microsoft entered the ring there was no such thing as a "gap" because no platforms really overlapped that much. Each had their own library plus a FEW multiplats. But the separate libraries defined the systems. Microsoft came in and decided all PC games shoudl overtake consoles. With their success, Sony followed, as they always do, leaving Nintendo looking like the only one "not seeking parity" while they're the only one still actually building a console ecosystem, while Microsoft is just a console to play PC games on, and Sony straddles somewhere between. They have more of a platform library than MS, but not as much as N.

Steam isn't a platform. I mean ecosystem-wise it has become that more or less, but it's not actually one. It's a digital goods retailer and a DRM client that runs on Windows PCs. And some weird branch that runs on Linux PCs. Along with SteamOS that's just a Linux flavor. I'm sure Valve would love to become Nintendo's official digital retailer. And I'm pretty sure Nintendo intends to run their own instead, and claim 100% of revenues rather than pay off royalties to someone else. Much of the money they make is charging licensing fees to Ubisoft, Activision, Konami etc. I'm not sure those companies want to pay fees to BOTH Nintendo AND Valve just to get a game on a Nintendo Steam Box. The result would be Nintendo Playstation-like. Valve would have effectively coopted Nintendo's own hardware, just so Nintendo hardware could play games that haven't traditionally yielded profits for them anyway. (Also, Steam couldn't "make games run on Nintendo" Each developer/publisher would still have to do that, unless Nintendo just became a PC. Those are games built, optimized, and compiled for Windows and/or Linux OS's on Intel/AMD x86 hardware. Steam can't change the build targets, It's just a store/DRM client/and they have some degree of QA process like N/Sony/MS does.

Though I don't hold Valve in much higher regard than Sony/MS. I was there at the beginning and remember when they tried to unleash the most offensive, anti-consumer DRM ever forced upon the internet. Keeping in mind most of Valve is former Microsoft guys....back from the Win9x "So Lotus Notes Won't Work" era.....so...yeah...

@Jessica286 Just like Microsoft got cocky from the days of the PS3 fat edition and jumped the shark at XBone launch. They're like alternating mirror images.

I'm quite disappointed in Microsoft's attempts to vilify Sony over such a small thing. I can't say I'm too surprised that it is working though, what with all the knee-jerk reaction mentality of internet commenters.

I'm still a bit confused about this. If it's unifying the console versions where the worlds are restricted by an invisible wall, with the PC versions where worlds are infinite, (or so I'm told) how is that going to work? Will PC players just walk off into the nothingness while Switch and XB1 players just stand there, unable to cross?

@SmaMan All new Minecraft versions (Win 10, Switch, XBOX One, etc) will be getting infinite worlds

Exactly! Sony's suggestion that MS and Nintendo aren't keeping their networks safe enough is ridiculous. Sony doesn't even know what that word means, I think.

Although it's probably not the real reason anyway. It probably comes down to financial reasons or simply arrogance.

Phil Spencer is a chill dude.
What happened is not "chill".
And when even Phil Spencer is saddened by a rival console's way to handle business, you know something's just plain wrong there.

There's really no defending Sony on this.

I hope Microsoft, Nintendo and third parties continue to push cross platform play, and HARD.

Sony is just being a pathic arrogant butthurt company at this rate. Like seriously? Keeping the PlayStation Network more secure? What a joke! Microsoft and especially Nintendo have been instrumental in keeping their networks secure and Sony just blatantly pulls a Donald Trump and wags a finger at them saying it's not secure? LMAO Have you forgotten what happened in the PS3 launch? Just because you're ahead in this generation doesn't mean you act like a sore loser. Ask Nintendo for that, they were too arrogant leading up to the days of the Wii U and look what happened. Better watch out Sony because it's not just Mojang and Psyonix you've angered. Spiderman won't fire his web shooters and save the day if you pull such lame moves.

Only reason Sony is big is because Square Enix keeps them afloat.

@ThanosReXXX I don't think it was a hornets nest until you showed up.

You probably missed it b/c with the recent website redesign I miss stuff all the time. Not sure how, but I know I do.

Angry was the wrong word, but it seemed nicer than "obnoxious", which is also harder to type. So is "condescending". My wife says I talk to her in a condescending voice all the time, which I probably do, but it isn't intentional, it's just the way I always talk, she only notices it when Im right and she's wrong. Happens occasionally. You just seem angry to me when you are trying to tell someone they are wrong when it is obvious to everyone but you they are right but it's you that's wrong. Almost never happens but it did in this case. I did see the mea culpa, nice touch. I never did find the rewrite, but I didn't look to hard either.

I need to go take a shower, I stink.

Sony: Stay away from those nasty non-PSN Minecraft players!!

@ThanosReXXX @psycho_punch

So I had an interesting thought that Google was unable to help me with.

Seems like MS is finally going to show why they spent $3.2B with a B on Minecraft and have everyone who plays it log in with a Xbox Live account. Maybe they won't, but that's the vibe I'm getting. They are changing the name after the "Everything is better with butter" update to Minecraft on Xbox, PC, Switch and mobile. Other versions will be called Minecraft:Java.

So, either Sony players - PS3, PS4, Vita - will have to sign in with a Xbox Live account anyway, whether they play cross platform or not, to get unlimited worlds and all the rest, shields and parrots, or, Sony sticks with the old lessor MC:Java edition.

Seems like maybe MS gave Sony Minecraft knowing this day would eventually come. Either force Sony to allow Xbox Live accounts on Playstation, or cut off new updates to Minecraft and make Sony look like the bad guys and leave PS users with an inferior version of the game along with no cross-platform play.

Facts are very scarce to come by right now, all just speculation on my part, but thats what it feels like to me, MS flexing it's considerable Minecraft muscle, that it spent $3.2B on, as they have Sony, and pretty much the rest of the world, over a barrel.

I'm curious to see how this all plays out, but I think the story is bigger than simply cross-platform play. It's almost as if the "better with butter" edition is Minecraft 2, and MS is telling people they can't have MC2 unless people sign in with a Xbox Live account. That would help justify the purchase cost, it's a trojan horse.

@starman292 this is correct. What people seem to not understand is that Sony can afford to do this. They are industry leaders.

What I can't understand is why Nintendo Life cares so much about this. Isn't this like their 3rd article on this story?

Phil Spencer tries to come across as the good guy but I don't get good vibes off the dude...

He's bitching about Sony left, right and centre this E3. What happened to "we're all friends blah blah blah" that he usually spouts?

Sony doing that is beyond stupid. They should really reconsider their decision.

@rjejr You missed my great re-write after I followed YOUR advice to do something about it? Tssss.....

Here you go: #40.

But nice of you to acknowledge that I don't mess up all too often. I certainly try not to, but every once in a while, I have to admit that even I am only human, so mistakes are bound to happen every now and then. And I'll defend myself to the last breath as well, so it'll be heels dug into the sand and all that...

I'm a very social but also very proud and headstrong person by nature, which sometimes kind of blocks me from accepting the truth straight away, but in the end, the light bulb in my head always switches on again, and then I'm able to overrule that error in judgment...

@rjejr "Better with butter"

Interesting hypothesis, but in the end, we the customers will provably never learn the real truth of it, or at least not the whole story, so what the deal really is, is probably anybody's guess. (much like Sony's real motivation behind blocking both Minecraft AND Rocket League cross-play)

But yeah, something like this could be used as marketing leverage, so that's certainly a possibility.

For now, I'm still convinced that all this humdrum is way too exaggerated and I remain confident, for the time being, that it'll end up being a free account, and no one will have to pay a monthly fee to Microsoft to be able to play Minecraft on your Switch with PC and Xbox gamers.

If I'm wrong, I'll virtually nail myself to the wall right here on NLife for all to see...

@ThanosReXXX "and then I'm able to overrule that error in judgment..."

I know, you always get there, I just like to help speed things along.
Plus, this is the internet things happen fast, things change faster, companies say one thing then do another, you could be right one minute, wrong the next, then right again before you know it. And I'll get around to reading that rewrite eventually, trying to clear out all of my E3 email. It's coming in slower now so that's a start, but I'm being overwhelmed w/ "gifts for Father's day" email from all of the companies I get email from. I bought myself a FD gift but then returned it a few days later, things change fast in real life too.

@ThanosReXXX "will have to pay a monthly fee"

It was never about having to pay the fee, lots of "subscription services" are free ,except for out time, identity and things of that nature. See my previous email about all the junk email I have to go thru - Staples, PC Richards, Target, Amazon, Best Buy, Toys R US, Newegg, Monoprice. I don't pay them any money to drowned in email ads, they just do it. And yes, I could turn them off, I do that regularly w/ sites I stop shopping at. But if you want to play Minecraft it looks like you'll need to sign in with an Xbox Live account. So they'll have your email, and they'll probably use it. And once people have gone thru the trouble of signing up for an Xbox Live account they'll probably look into it more to see what they can get out of it. Like all drug sales, first hit is free.

How this turns out though could very well prove your point though, cross-play has nothing to do with that. If people playing Minecraft on PS3, PS4 and Vita - yes they do - have to sign into a Xbox Live account just to play the game, even without cross-platform, then Sony looks really stupid. So what doe that mean, they keep Minecraft off Sony consoles? That will upset a lot of people. So I'm very curious how all of this turns out.

But no, nobody will need to pay for Gold for Minecraft. Well probably not on Switch anyway. I'm assuming on Xbox you have to, b/c you have to pay to play online anyway. If it does turn out that cross-platform requires Switch owners to pay for Live Gold to pay online - dont' see how you would do cross-platform without it being online - then I'd think worse of Nintneod for doing that than for Sony not doing it.

We never get the whole story at the beginning, still waiting for paid Switch online as it is. Kids having to pay to play Minecraft online on Switch kind of bothers me in and of itself. We have it on PS3, never paid to play online. Interesting times.

@rjejr Ugh, don't get me started on those kinds of emails. The last couple of months were filled with birthdays and festivities in my family and circle of friends, so I did a lot of browsing and shopping and now I'm also bothered with having to unsubscribe from all kinds of news letters. Nowadays, almost all of them require you to make an account before you can actually buy something.

I actually unsubscribed from three of them this week, and I probably have to do a few more, but not all of them send me stuff every week, so I'll have to wait and see...

@rjejr Funny story: apparently I'm still registered somewhere in some database in either California or just in the States in general, because both during elections and other government-related stuff, I'm still being spammed by both sides. At the height of the elections, it was really getting crazy and annoying, with emails coming in by the dozens every week. And strangely enough, mostly pro-Trump, anti-Obama stuff...

And I also get some leisure stuff sent, which probably also has to do with me being in some database, or maybe it's because of my family still living in California, although they don't have the same last name as me.

@ThanosReXXX "Ugh, don't get me started on those kinds of emails."

And now you know why I always have 250 unread emails in my inbox, I tend to just ignore them. And now maybe you can understand why Sony doens't want to require PS4 users to have to sign up for an Xbox Live account to play Minecraft on PS4. MS would probably be able to tell which Live accounts were logging onto their MC servers from PS4, and they would make sure to email them offers about Xbox 1S and 1X and try Gold for free and see all Gold has to offer. It's not about the money, it's about the exposure.

Nintneod probably doesn't care b/c they dont' think Switch owners would want an Xbox.

Here's an article about not having to pay for Gold to play on Switch. Seems amateurish, but whatever. I never thought they'd make people pay for Gold anyway, having them sign up for an Xbox Live account is about the marketing emails, not about the income.

http://heavy.com/games/2017/06/minecraft-cross-platform-play-xbox-nintendo-switch-xbox-live-better-together/

@rjejr "I just like to help speed things along"

That won't work in my case: you must have missed that bit where I said I was headstrong and will dig my heels into the sand...

Eventually, I'll move, but only when I want to and when I'm good and ready.

"And now maybe you can understand why Sony doens't want to require PS4 users to have to sign up for an Xbox Live account to play Minecraft on PS4"

No, that still doesn't fly with me, especially since it's not just Minecraft but also Rocket League, and that game doesn't require an Xbox Live subscription at all, so Sony are still idiots far as I'm concerned.

And their marketing stooge is even worse than Reggie, because the reasoning for "protecting" PS4 players literally makes zero sense.

@ThanosReXXX "Sony are still idiots far as I'm concerned"

"still" Have you considered the possibility that your already present disdain for Sony is clouding your judgement on this one? What games on Xbox require a PSN account to sign in to play? Or a NNID?

I don't know what's up w/ Rocket League, but I agree 100% w/ Sony on signing in to an Xbox Live account to play a game on PS4, PS3 or Vita.

And yeah, that guy is worse than Reggie, Reggie just doesn't answer anything, he doesn't say stuff as stupid as that. Well usually anyway.

@rjejr No, that's not it. This is not me hating them for personal reasons, this is me thinking they're ridiculous and dumb with these current measures they're taking, so I meant "still" in relation to this specific issue, no matter what the reason for the multiple cases of not letting people cross-play is.

And if Minecraft was Sony's, then you can bet your bottom dollar that they would have done the same thing, so it's not only bad, it's also hypocritical as hell, to say the least. Sony doesn't care for it's customers at all, much like any other company, including Microsoft and Nintendo.

They only care about keeping healthy and making a profit. If they can make people feel good in the process, then that's just a nice bonus, and good for customer retention, which will in turn result in even more profit.

Maybe a better question to ponder would be why Nintendo DID agree to this, apparently without ever blinking, so it might not be all that cut and dried.

And you should never agree 100% with the decisions of ANY company, since we never know their full, true motives. And the ones that Sony currently offered are complete and utter bs from the general perspective.

They could make it better by explaining the real reason, but since they won't, it's simply going to be people agreeing or disagreeing with them, based upon what little information we actually have, much like we are doing right now.

@psycho_punch I have a NNID, XBL, PSN, STEAM, APPLE, GOOGLE ETC...

Sony's rationale doesn't even make sense!

@liveswired Sure, but you did not create your XBL account because a PlayStation game told you, you should right?

It's rather simple I think: you won't see a McDonald's store set up signage pointing you the nearest Burger King. Sony's rationale won't make sense when you're unwilling to understand it.

Sony's excuse for this was stupid, I can't really believe someone would say its right.

They don't want to protect anyone, they simply want you to buy a PS4 if you want to play with your friends. Should they be so insecure if they're market leaders? I mean, you could hypothesize that most players that want a PS4 already have one, and his friends have one.

For the players, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. They deserve as much flak as any company gets when they are anti-consumer.

@ThanosReXXX "Maybe a better question to ponder would be why Nintendo DID agree to this, apparently without ever blinking, so it might not be all that cut and dried."

Have given that some thought. I decided there could be a few factors. MS put Minecraft on Wii U back when Nteido was barely putting anything on Wii U. The Switch install base is so small right now that Nintnedo thought i twas worth the Xbox Live log-in to get Switch a better version than PS4, less about MS, more about 1-upping PS4. And I don't think Nitneod cares if Switch users have to sign in w/ a Xbox Live account, they aren't in direct competition w/ MS, certainly not in Japan, even Wii U is outselling Xbox in Japan.

Or maybe MS just gave them a lot of money? Sony and Nintendo may both be Japanese companies but there relationships with MS are very different. Like they are both struggling to be 2nd in sales to the PS4 60mil.

So that's a bunch of reasons off of the top of my head, probably the real reason is none of those, but hey I tried.

@rjejr Well, you made a good effort, at least. Not sure about the whole 1-upping Sony, though. Reggie might once have been about kicking stuff and taking names, but those days are long gone and Nintendo doesn't seem to have a competitive bone in it's body anymore, adhering to their blue ocean strategy, letting the "others" fight amongst themselves.

Either way, we'll never know the whole truth about why Nintendo did and Sony didn't, but in my honest opinion, it does reflect badly upon Sony, especially since it's not just about Minecraft.

If that would have been the case, then I would at least have been able to muster some degree of understanding for it, regardless of my personal feelings towards them as a company.

But enough of my Sony and Microsoft musings, the current heat wave over here has inspired me to don the jacket of court jester once again...

@ThanosReXXX "the current heat wave"

One of the good things about living on island that will be under water in 50 years is that I have a constant sea breeze of 20mph cooling me off and keeping the temps tolerable. Well except for early last week when it was in the 90's for 3 days. Better than LA where it's been 103.

Those are all F by the way, I don't do C.

Stay cool.

@rjejr These guys don't do F either, just C, but it still sound shot.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/20/us/weather-west-heat-wave/index.html

@rjejr I've done the math: currently, my in-house temperature is 83.3F, and that's with the balcony doors of my fourth floor apartment wide open...

Can't have that for too long, though, since I live along the canals and in the evening, all the lovely insects tend to come and visit me. I do have one of those blue-light electricity lamps, but that only goes so far in helping me, so if I keep my doors open for too long, then I'll be running around the house swatting stuff for hours before I've finally gotten rid of them all.

And no, I don't have a screen door...
This apartment is a real hassle where putting up/hanging up stuff is concerned, because all the walls are hardened concrete, which is a b**** to get through, and the balcony doors and framing are made of some sort of alien steel, which is hard as nails as well, so the only option would be a loose screen that I could either clamp in between the sliding door, or a curtain of some kind that I can glue/stick to the frame.

But I've been planning that for years now, and in the end, I'm just too lazy to bother doing it, so by the time that I want to, I won't need to, because by then, summer will be over again...

@ThanosReXXX OK, anything over 80' is way too hot to live in. When we hit 80' we hide in the basement. I have 1 of these $15 screens that uses velcro, they must have something similar over there.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Magnetic-Mosquito-Screen-Door-Heavy-Duty-Mesh-Velcro-Hands-Free-Magnetic-Magic-Closer/157125190?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=1284&adid=22222222227056874387&wmlspartner=wmtlabs&wl0=&wl1=s&wl2=c&wl3=161413020378&wl4=pla-268849840962&wl5=9004519&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=112561964&wl11=online&wl12=157125190&wl13=&veh=sem

No screens. Maybe you'd be better off getting arrested for a misdemeanor that can get you locked up for the summer? Jails over there probably have AC.

@rjejr Everybody dwelling in the basement? That doesn't sound creepy at all...

But all joking aside: unfortunately, I have no basement and because I'm on a higher floor, heat naturally builds up (and stays) here, so there's little I can do, other than airing the place during the daytime. That build up is great in winter time, because once the older neighbors on the lower floors start cranking up the heat, I don't have to crank it up as much myself, but around this time of year, it's a little less comfortable to be living on this floor level.

So, besides opening the doors, I just move like a human sloth, drink extra water or tea, and use my martial arts training to keep my mind and body calm, so I'll live. Sometimes, if it really is too much, I simply do a cold shower rinse in the evening, and sleep on top of the covers.

This is the hottest period over here. Won't last much longer than until mid July, with the occasional spike popping up until mid August, but that'll be it.

I do have to say that with age, a lower tolerance of heat has also entered my life. Don't know about you, but I used to be perfectly fine half a lifetime ago, and in temperatures much higher than this.

But over here, it's also a more sticky heat. When I'm abroad, I can also bear higher temperatures much better because generally, it's dryer. And it's probably a psychological thing as well: when you go to countries like Spain, Greece or Tunisia, you'd expect it to be that hot, but not over here...

My sister said she was bringing over a standing fan later this week, so that'll give me some added comfort for the weeks to come.

@ThanosReXXX It's not the heat, it's the humidity. I know that's an old joke, but today it was about 85' but low humidity so we were outside playing basketball. Well shooting from the foul line playing H.O.R.S.E. Yesterday it was only 78 but about 96" humidity, nobody wanted to move.

I need to bring my fan up from the basement. It's so dirty and rusted I keep telling myself to buy a new one but it works so....

They have these cooling towels over there? Never tried 1 myself, but like I said I'm kind of ok w/ the heat, it's the humidity that kills me, so I don't need a wet rag wrapped around my neck.

https://www.fullsource.com/ergodyne-6603/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwj6PKBRCAARIsALU_3EZeF3XJ66WgK5CaF4bKB6qvOiuFrFQ_Logb3q3l7Ady0kjWfyh0wCAaAkDAEALw_wcB

By they way, it will be summer in about 2 hours, so when you wake up and read this, happy summer, it has officially begun.

@rjejr You mean humidity tolerance in relation to aging or did you just use the official term for what I call "sticky heat"?

Roger on the fan, but it sounds like you need to give it a good clean first. Wouldn't be much of a delight to have your face and body coated in dirt and corroded metal dust...

As for the wet rag around the neck: not really necessary AROUND the neck, but splashing or dabbing cold water or a cold towel on the back of your neck helps a bunch, although obviously only temporarily.

The back of your neck has a lot of nerve endings and blood vessels running through it, so if you cool that, it also helps cool you down in general, because of the blood flow.

And summer's official? Yay...

@rjejr By the by, now that we're completely off-topic again anyways, this might interest you:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/switch-con/switch-con-worlds-first-hdmi-hub-for-switch-and-s8

And apparently, it also has "no more issues with overheating", which I didn't know there were in the first place, although that was always what I wondered about with these "dock-less" contraptions...

@ThanosReXXX "By the by, now that we're completely off-topic again anyways, this might interest you:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/switch-con/switch-con-worlds-first-hdmi-hub-for-switch-and-s8

And apparently, it also has "no more issues with overheating", which I didn't know there were in the first place, although that was always what I wondered about with these "dock-less" contraptions..."

Sorry, didn't know what part to copy n paste.

At some point the guy says "3x" cheaper. But it isn't 3x cheaper, it's only like $20 cheaper. Maybe he meant 30%? Anyway it doesn't come w/ a HDMI cable or a UBS-C power adaptor so it's kind of worthless for the price. And do we even know it will work? I thought Ntinedo put a proprietary chip in the dock to keep it from doing TV out over any ole' USB-C to HDMI adapter? I knwo it works in the vid, but what if Nintnedo falshes the firmware in the switch to only let it work w/ their dock some how?

And I'd be much more worried about the Switch over heating laying on it's back blocking the air flow then in the official dock. Maybe the heat is warping the Switch body in the dock, but this thing could flat out melt everything.

I like the Nyko one, stands up, $45, w/ the USB-C charger and HDMI. So it's the dock w/ the front and back cut off, for half the price. NO USB could be a problem w/ external HDD and Ethernet but for a travel accessory i'ts pretty good I think.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/6/13/15793502/nyko-portable-docking-kit-nintendo-switch-dock-e3-2017

@rjejr That's a lot of questions and the only answer I have for you is "well, you'd better ask the guys who are actually making this contraption, since I haven't got a clue"...

I only pointed it out to you because of our previous discussions on whether or not the dock is useless and that there should/could be a better solution for it.

If this one actually IS better, remains to be seen, but at least it's indeed another solution.

Good point on the proprietary chip in the dock. No idea how they tackled that, but my main concern is the overheating, and they claim to have fixed that, but I have no idea how, since the images show it simply lying on its back.

The only solution I can think of is keeping it running in under-clocked/handheld mode, even when connected to the TV, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of connecting it to the TV in the first place.

@ThanosReXXX "The only solution I can think of is keeping it running in under-clocked/handheld mode, even when connected to the TV, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of connecting it to the TV in the first place."

Well I don't think it would entirely defeat the purpose. If I could buy a $199 Switch w/o the $90 dock or $15 grip but that meant I'd have to settle for 720p on the TV via a UBC-C to HDMI and power cable I could live with that.

http://www.targus.com/uk/usb-c-to-hdmiusb-cusb-a-adapter-with-power-delivery-black-aca921eu

I wouldn't spend an extra $45 on this stand though if that's what you meant. If I'm paying extra for TV out I want proper TV out.

@rjejr Yeah, that is kind of what I meant in regards to this new solution. They claim to have solved the overheating problem, but nowhere do they explain how or at what cost, and if it is indeed by only allowing the system to operate in handheld mode, then that is a big loss and a handicap as well, if you're going to play against others online or on a local network, since if they do have a dock and they can let their game go 1080p/60fps, then you'll always be slower than them.

So, then it would not only be the cost of the device, but also the loss of performance, which is an absolute no go for me. But maybe I'm making assumptions here.

Like I said: I only pointed it out to you because I genuinely thought that it might be of interest to you because you don't like the regular dock. Personally, I don't give a crap about this contraption, but I just happened to come across it while browsing and looking for something else entirely and the first person that came to mind when I saw this, was you, so there.

End of story...

@ThanosReXXX I'm over the dock, I want a SwitchTV, aka the SwitchBrick. No screen, no USB-C, no HD Rumble, no Joy-Con, no Grip, just a box, a power cord, HDMI and a Pro. As long as it works wirelessly w/ the Joycon almost every game will work except the touchscreen ones and I can live w/ that. I figure they could make that for $199. The current Switch tablet body is probably only $150 after you remove the HD Joycon, Grip, dock and USB-C power. Now remove the 6.2" 720p touchscreen, I think that's $130, then add $70 for the Pro. I'm tempted to wait. I've also been drinking in the hot sun all day so there's that.

@rjejr Drinking a lot? Water, of course. Gotta stay hydrated, right?

I presume you named Switch TV after Shield TV, but if Nintendo ever decides to make a regular console again, it's obviously not going to be named Switch.

If it's a stationary brick that only connects to your TV, but still based on the same hardware (but of course WAY more powerful, since if it's going to happen, it's going to be the next generation) then they would have to re-brand it the Nintendo Stay...

But if I would have to think about it in a more serious manner, then I would like for them to pick a strong name, in case they do revert back to a real home console. I was always kind of partial to some of the old code names like Ultra and Revolution, but since these were dev kit names, we already knew that these were never going to be the final names, sadly...

But it could also very well be so that now they have chosen this road that they are going to stay on it, so only making more hybrid devices from now on, devices that will gradually become more and more powerful until the gap between them and stationary consoles is all but non-existent.

And that actually could happen. Smart device hardware is gaining power much, much faster than any other computing hardware, so unless consoles gain access to quantum computing any time soon, that gap is indeed going to become smaller and smaller each generation.

@ThanosReXXX Switch Stay is ok, except Switch is about taking the Joy-Con on and off, hence the clicking sound (it's not about switching between TV and portable, dont' let anyone tell you otherwise) so naming a screenless home console version "Stay" doesn't make any sense since Switch isn't named "Travel" it's called "Switch". So while Switch Stay does kind of work, it doesn' trally, bc/ they can still market a Switch TV, yes, like Shield TV, as something that is small enough and simple enough to take to a friend shous eif it' sjust a brick, a power cable and HDMI cable. And sinc emost peopel have HDMI cables, and if they charge it via USB power adapter like a lot of devices do these days, then you woudlnt' even need to bring any wires, just assume your firend ahs some laying around. So it's not Switch Stay, it's Switch TV that you can bring to a friends house b/c/ it's so portable. They can market it next to the purple lunchbox w the handle that would be about, what, 8x as large? So if Gamecube was supposed to be portable w/ that handle, a tiny Switch TV, literally the size of a paperback book, would be much easier to travel. And you wouldn't even need to bring the dock.

I think it will happen. Not for a few years, and at launch it will only be for the West like the 2DS, no reason to release it in Japan, not after PSTV crashed and burned. It's just an easy bonus for them for people who have kids w/ a Switch but want 1 for the TV that people don't take w/ them. So it's the Wii Mini. Maybe it will be $99 when Nvidia dumps the X1?

3 years would be perfect timing for me, that's when my kid takes our Switch off to college.

@rjejr No, not Switch Stay, Nintendo Stay. Don't go screwing up my brilliant ideas...

And if the Switch was about taking off or putting on the JoyCon controllers, then it would have been called the Nintendo Click, or Latch On, or Connect, or Slide, or if they are going to provide different add-ons, they could have called it the Nintendo Mod.

No, I don't have to let anyone tell me what I already know to be right in the first place: the Switch truly is about switching from TV to handheld, there's no if's and's or but's about it.

And that trimmed down edition might happen, or maybe it won't. I'm not so sure about it, since there wasn't any Wii U Mini either, so the last time they did that was two generations ago, not counting the handhelds, obviously.

And good luck with that Switch going on a college trip. Regardless of how careful your son will be with it himself, a college dorm is hardly a good place to keep stuff like that if you want it to survive unscathed, so here's hoping it's going to be okay, otherwise he will be able to make one of those "Smash My <enter console name>" videos on YouTube...

@ThanosReXXX Before they can make a Ntinedo Stay they need to make a Nintendo Sit. (That's supposed to be a dog training joke, not sure how well it worked.)

"the Switch truly is about switching from TV to handheld"

In the west, yes, but I'd bet in Japan a large number of consoles go from handheld to tabletop a whole lot more. Still a hybrid, still Switching, but switching from 1 player in a lap to 2 on table, not on a TV. Single player handheld to multiplayer tabletop is the Japanese version of Switch. Some people probably don't even hook up their docks to the TV in Japan so they can use the charging cable hooked up directly to Switch in their bedrooms. Once you hook up the dock to the TV you have to charge it in the dock, meaning you can't play handheld while it's docked so it's probably easier to just lay in bed and plug it in while playing. As smartphone obsessed as they may be I'm sure not everybody has a USB-C sharing cable laying around, it's still fairly new tech.

In comparison I'll bet some people in the West leave their Switch in the dock most of the time b/c they can't play while driving back and forth to their jobs. Those are the people who could use a 2nd Switch TV while their kids play in handheld or tabletop mode.

Of course no Wii U Mini, they never even lowered the price of the thing from $299 since launch, just lowered the $349 Deluxe to the canceled $349 Basic, not even after it died. And they moved all of it's last games to Switch.

Had they gotten the Wii U to work w/ 2 Gamepads, as was promoted by Nintneod before and during launch, then they had an excuse to sell the Gamepads separatly - for historical purposes I do believe the Wii U will go down in history as the only console to ever sell w/ only 1 of it's main controllers - then they could have sold the Wii U w/o the Gamepad to save a few $, Pro instead, but since they never sold the Gamepad separatly they couldn't do that, and then it died a very fast death in about 3 years. 3 year life is not long enough to make a lot of revisions.

@rjejr The dog joke came across, good one.

And I thought about adding the table top mode to my previous comment, but in my mind, that's just another portable mode. The big difference being in and out of the dock.

And in Japan, they'll have one of those slim, fancy-schmancy wall-mounted wooden planks that we saw in that first reveal trailer underneath their also wall-mounted flat screen TV to put their Switch dock on. Gotta save space in those tiny apartments...

They'll use it more as a handheld, but that doesn't mean that they aren't going to use it on the TV at home.

And why would you want to play it handheld when at home, unless someone else is using the TV? Play and charge isn't really comfortable either, if you ask me. I never liked it in the handhelds, I don't like it in the Wii U, so chances are that opinion isn't going to change once the Switch arrives on my doorstep.

As for that second GamePad thing with the Wii U: I always thought it was a stupid thing for them to say, since I never saw it happening. Power-wise, the Wii U would never have been able to handle that, so anyone that took that statement seriously probably never considered that.

It was already quite the achievement to run a game in two seamless streams, one in HD and one in 480p on the GamePad, without any lag, but there was quite a bit of tech and power going on to make that possible. A second Pad would almost certainly have created multiple issues, gameplay lag being the very least of them.

But what about that SNES Mini, aye?

@ThanosReXXX "And why would you want to play it handheld when at home, unless someone else is using the TV?"

That is why. My kids play on the Gamepad all the time while the other plays on the PS3, PS4 or Xbox. My youngest will also sit in his brothers room playing on the Gamepad while he plays on his PC. Kids like those screens. And they play w/ both the 3DS and Gamepad plugged in. Playing w/ the Gamepad plugged in is pretty much a given considering it's relatively short battery life. I do think the plug on the Switch is a fail for table top mode. It was necessary for the dock, but they should have found a way. Oh, I know, make a dock like the charger for the Gamepad and let the screen be on while it's charging.

"But what about that SNES Mini, aye?"

They should release it in the US on August 21 but only in areas under the gray line.

@rjejr The ENTIRE area under the gray line? Why not only in your general area? Screw 'em all, I'd say...