GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Epic's Attempts To Secure Fortnite PlayStation Cross-Play Revealed In Emails With Sony

New documents reveal Sony disagreed with Epic Games' push to enable cross-play on PlayStation.

22 Comments

A series of emails exchanged between Epic Games and Sony in 2018 have offered a look at the latter's hesitation to allow cross-play between PlayStation and other platforms, even for a massive game such as Fortnite. The emails were shared by The Verge, having surfaced as part of the just-begun Epic v. Apple trial.

The emails show an exchange between former SIE senior director Gio Corsi and Epic Games vice president of business development Joe Kreiner. In Kreiner's email, he suggested Epic can get whatever it wants after "Fortnite became the biggest game on PlayStation." As such, Kreiner made some proposals to entice Sony.

"We announce cross-play in conjunction with Sony," Kreiner said. "Epic goes out of its way to make Sony look like heroes. You get to pick the when/where/how."

Kreiner even suggested "[doing] something extra special" for PlayStation Plus subscribers--like a unique character--to help Sony "drive PS Plus adoption even more." He also proposed that Epic "brands its E3 presence with PlayStation," look into exploring more titles--such as a VR experience--for the PlayStation ecosystem, and extend the Sony company-wide Unreal Engine 4 license.

Sony apparently disagreed. Corsi shut down Kreiner's proposals, suggesting cross-play was not a "slam dunk" regardless of a game's popularity.

"I appreciate the points you've listed in the mail, there are a lot of great ideas in here for continued partnership however cross-platform play is not a slam dunk no matter the size of the title," Corsi said. "As you know, many companies are exploring this idea and not a single one can explain how cross-console play improves the PlayStation business."

An additional document reveals that, once cross-play was allowed on PlayStation, Sony required developers to sometimes pay a royalty fee for cross-play games. This was based on a calculation comparing the popularity of the PlayStation version of the game and the amount of revenue generated on the PlayStation Network. It's unclear if this policy is still in place or if Microsoft or Nintendo have similar arrangements.

We've reached out to Sony for comment and will update this story if/when we heard back.

Prior to allowing cross-play on PlayStation, Sony was known to be an opponent of the concept. Rocket League developer Psyonix made it clear in 2017 that Sony was preventing PlayStation cross-play, and Sony subsequently said publicly that its reasons included protecting its userbase. Of course, Fortnite now offers cross-play across all platforms with the exception of iOS, which stopped receiving updates last year.

In other Epic, Fortnite, and PlayStation news, it has been revealed that the popular battle royale title makes the most money on PlayStation 4. Elsewhere, Sony announced a $200 million investment in Epic to create a "metaverse." For more details, check out our roundup of all the developments so far in the Epic v Apple trial.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 22 comments about this story
22 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sladakrobot

So,it leaked and i feel i gonna puke!

Sony was against crossplay not coz they wanted to protect their gamers (what about kids) as they officially stated but coz Sony didnt now if this would benefit Sonys pockets!

I thought,after backpaddeling,that Sony allowed crossplay just not to end like a bad guy...

How wrong and naive i was thinking lol

After Sony figured out how they could charge for crossplay,they allowed it...hard cold greed and not the concern about kids was the reason behind all of this.
And no,MS doesnt charge for crossplay...Sweeney himself confirmed it.

Sonys formula on how to charge money works only with big and popular titles and this was also the reason why Sony rejected smaller devs and their games (Wargroove) coz no money could be made.

I just wonder why is there no sh!tstorm about this as,imo,this comes very close to the EA report where they force players into mtx-heavy game modes.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Edited By Lach0121

Sony "for the players" "for the gamers"

You literally are lying through your teeth when you say that crap with your stupidly stubborn stance on cross-platform compatibility.

You are hamstringing, and out right "fining" / punishing the developers when they have any success on other platforms, and hide it behind obvious Bullshit of "protect PSN revenue." Gotta get that something for nothing...

For the players my fucking ass.

Keep this shit up Sony, as it gets revealed, your fanbase will stagger, as it fucking should.

3 • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@Lach0121: For the players... oh yeah that is nothing but slogans. Sony is for profits.

So is EA -its in the game.

Monsantos -growth for a better world

Nazis - make Germany great again, also Trumps.

So hmm, yeah man- do they really care if you are happy... not really, they like your money though. And why would Sony allow cross platform play, to make xbox owners happy? I mean Sony players are happy as pigs in shit, they have tons of games, tons of exclusives and plenty of people to play with. Why would Sony give 'non-ps4 owners' a reason .... to.. not buy playstation consoles? How would that benefit the 8th gen 800lb gorilla in the room that has a 2:1 margins in hardware sales, by far the largest tie in ratio (hardware to software,). Hmmm I mean, I never heard any Sony fanboys yelling, "boy howdy we wish XBL players would come over here, throw crazy stuff in chat, while rage quitting ever other match". I never heard that.

Oh yeah, just wanted to remind you that StateFarm's "like a good neighbor, statefarm is there". Yeah, they are not actually. I mean they are not gonna water your plants, feed your dog when your gone. It is a slogan.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Edited By Lach0121

@jenovaschilld: Most of that is long form attempt at condescension. Give it a rest.

I don't give a damn about your questions either.

Find a sony fan to fellowship with.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for IcyBlaze_XZ
IcyBlaze_XZ

142

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

“fOr tHe pLaYeRs!1”

2 • 
Avatar image for letsgame82
letsgame82

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Epic tried to sweet talk Sony to get cross-play and Sony politely declined , normal business practices between partners, I scratch your back you scratch mine. The funny thing about cross play is that it became the most requested feature by mainly Xbox gamers because last gen a lot of them found it hard getting into games or suffered long waits in match making for online multiplayer games like COD and Xbox used it as an opportunity to act like the good guys by pushing for cross play. PlayStation connecting their install base to Xbox community mainly benefitted Xbox gamers than it did Playstation

4 • 
Avatar image for m4a5
m4a5

3290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

@letsgame82: Regardless, the fact that Sony was as stubborn/greedy as they were, despite seeing the pressure put on by gamers, was BS. Especially when there was no technical limitations against it.

Ps. it benefited gamers the most. Next is a crossplay voice chat system that allows devs to connect gamers further...

2 • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@m4a5: Would it benefit the gamers.... yeah. Would it benefit Sony... not really.

I mean these are corporations that want to make money.

So last gen you are Sony - the 800 lb fuc%ing gorilla in the room with 120 million consoles sold with a 2:1 margin against your competition. Also you have the strongest tie in ratio (software to hardware) well over both MS and NIN. Epic would make more money if they allowed cross play, and MS would be happy to have a larger pool for XBL. So what does Sony get out of it....?? (Will make a few xbox players happy) The Sony camp players are just fine, they have plenty to do and plenty to play and a shitload of exclusives. How will Sony profit by allowing cross play ... this will only give a reason for non-PS console owners to ... not buy PS4s.

I personally am a gamer, I follow the games. Could care less what console, digital platform they are on. It is all about the games. No fanboy here. But I can clearly see that Sony would have nothing to gain, and some to lose. So why do it, so it would make another console's owners ...happier?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for m4a5
m4a5

3290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

@jenovaschilld: Oh, I get the hypotheticals. But I'm not going to be loyal to a million+ dollar company because I might like their products. Their bottom line might be affected a bit, but it was a very anti-consumer stance regardless.

There was a clear turning point (PC, Xbox and Switch cross platform stuff was being championed), and Sony basically said "we don't care about gamers, we care about money more". Bad PR plays into it too (though I know not as many gamers were willing to hit Sony in the wallet for it). And then this makes it look worse for Sony, as Epic gave them a great way out.

Bottom line is that they didn't have enough to lose to excuse their poor attitude towards gamers for this decision. Especially when that business decision (by a gaming company) was screwing over gamers...

As someone who mains PC, it was a godsend to finally have games to play during Covid with friends with different consoles (though it's still heavily reliant on in-game custom voice chats). I'd imagine that it would've got much worse if they didn't cave to the pressure as early as they did (which wasn't as early as it should've been).

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@m4a5: I do not blame you, I have never been loyal to a brand or box that plays my video games since the 4th gen, post arcade. As I have owned just about all of them since.

But I also do not blame Sony or hold a grudge towards them, as it was in their own self interest. Again you keep saying ... against gamers... but really- I never heard any Sony fanboys yelling, "boy howdy we wish XBL players would come over here, throw crazy stuff in chat, while rage quitting ever other match". I never heard that. I mean the 120 million consoles that shipped were not looking at all to join another ecosystem, because they were quite happy on their own.

And technically, Sony never really caved, they bought into Epic through investments and licensing, and now make money on the back end. Like SquareEnix, they own 30-40% of their stock, so after a game gets saturated on the ps, and ported to another platform they also make money on that. Fornite has sold about as much as it is going to on PS, and both have made a killing. Sony sold access to make even more money. That is some profitable caving in.

So how do I feel about this.... I am okay with it. Why, because when Sony does a strong self interest move like this, it also causes other platforms to also up their games. And this constant cycle drives competition which drives innovation, controls prices, and ultimately more IPs and choices.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for m4a5
m4a5

3290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

@jenovaschilld: I would say they caved, from what I remember they backtracked their "we have no plans on allowing cross-play" statement months after making it.
Mind you, they phrased it as "we're looking into allowing cross-play as beta", but it clearly was backtracking (aka caved).

And just because it doesn't affect the majority doesn't mean it wasn't against gamers. Heck, it was also an anti-developer stance too, as it's better for MP games to pool the console (and maybe PC) players for a better experience overall.

I do get the angle of corporate self interest (as this theoretically does also help their competition), but I'd rather speak out against that and see the community benefit.

Lastly, I do see your angle on it too. It did help MS and Nintendo to work together more, which does also benefit the communities. But it doesn't mean we can't remind Sony of their stubbornness :P

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@m4a5: But it doesn't mean we can't remind Sony of their stubbornness :P.. Agree there.

OH WAIT! I do want to throw this one last thing out there. And I want you to be honest as can be about this to. :) You and I both know Microsoft, and Nintendo. Well the world definitely knows more about Microsoft then any other corporation at least.

If shoes were on the other foot, and MS and Nin were in Sony's position with the above (huge lead, high tie-ratio, etc) and Sony was the one just dying to expand its online multiplayer pool esp in games like Fortnite- Would MS and Nin do it differently ???

Upvote • 
Avatar image for m4a5
m4a5

3290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

@jenovaschilld: I don't think it's realistic to see Nintendo having the big player base for the more traditional games (they're in their own world most of the time lol).

Otherwise, for MS, I don't know. I can't say if this pro-consumer streak we see with MS was directly caused by Sony's console lead, or if it was just amplified.
Which, keep in mind that MS is no longer focused on Console sales, but on software sales (such a change I think lines up more with the leadership shake up not too long ago).

But as a big company also beholden to their stockholders, I could see MS being stubborn too. They certainly have also been humbled in the past. And there are reports that MS was in a similar position around a decade ago (but I can't say if there was at least a technical excuse back then).

Either way, I would call them out on the anti-gamer stances if they did :D

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@m4a5: Amen, awesome post.

2 • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@letsgame82: i thought friends with different consoles had the most benefits? Oh well

3 • 
Avatar image for tbird7586
tbird7586

835

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

They deserve each other

Make sony look like the heroes lol even though they're actively holding cross play back this shows you how stupid both of these companies think their customers are

Upvote •