PS4's Upcoming Game Sharing Feature Limits You to 60 Minutes Per Session

Share Play can only be used in 60-minute chunks, though there is no limit on the number of times you can use it.

The new Share Play feature in the PlayStation 4's forthcoming 2.0 system update sounded extremely exciting when it first announced earlier this week. However, there is a major restriction on how Share Play can be used: a 60-minute time limit.

Following a report by French site Gameblog (via Attack of the Fanboy), Sony has confirmed with GameSpot that Share Play users will be limited to 60 minutes per session. There's no limit on the number of times you can use Share Play, meaning you can conceivably start Share Play up again and continue playing. Of course, this is hardly ideal, and likely not what people envisioned when Share Play was revealed during Sony's Gamescom press conference.

Share Play was pitched by Sony as a "virtual couch" that allowed for "an online local co-op experience." A PlayStation Plus member can share a game over the Internet with a friend, who can take control to either play alone or to play local multiplayer as if he or she were in the same room.

SCE Worldwide Studios boss Shuhei Yoshida offered up some additional details on how Share Play will work in an interview with Famitsu (as translated by Kotaku). Comparing it to Sony's new PlayStation Now streaming service, he said, "How it works is, for example, say, a friend has a game that I don't. I ask them to let me play it, and if they send me an invitation, I can access their PS4 and play while watching the video that is streamed."

He didn't specify how much time could pass between these steps; it's possible the owner will need to be at his or her console to grant access at the same time as when someone wants to play a game. What it means for sure is that the person doing the sharing will be unable to use their system while someone else is remotely playing a game on it.

Some of this certainly dampens the enthusiasm I had for Share Play, but it's not all bad news. Yoshida said the feature works with all PS4 games without any effort on the part of developers. Additionally, save games are tied to the player's account, allowing you to try a friend's game, buy it, and then pick up from where you left off.

The 2.0 update that introduces Share Play--along with the ability to upload saved videos to YouTube and search for PSN users by their real name, among other things--is coming sometime this fall.

Chris Pereira is a freelance writer for GameSpot, and you can follow him on Twitter @TheSmokingManX
Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Written By

Twitter/Xbox Live/PSN/Nintendo Network: TheSmokingManX

Discussion

373 comments
medafaded
medafaded

My only problems with this is the streaming, how well will it stream? audio? all that good stuff. Another issue, I dislike the way they make it seem like they are doing this for the sony gaming community, and not for themselves. We are pretty much going tho be sony salesmen. This concept was NOT given to us because they love us, someone was smart enough to say hey! When you share a game, that may interest the other party to go out, and purchase the game. Not bad, just dislike the way they manipulate us.  

swantn5
swantn5

60 minutes is more then enough time at least i think i so

sampson3121
sampson3121

it's understandable that they don't want people hooking up with a friend whos going out and saying, let me play all night while you're gone.doesn't dampen a god dam thing, my friends are not allowed to be playing in my house when i'm not home, and the concept is a virtual couch.....play 1 hr and then start it up again, whats the problem?

skiggy34
skiggy34

OMG! This totally is ruined!!  Here I am gloating to all my friends about this share program and now I read this???  Its still a cool feature but what the hell good is 60 minutes? Meh

mzompicchiatti
mzompicchiatti

No one here is considering that the stream quality / input lag will depend on the host console's upload speed...

oldtobie
oldtobie

Steam's game sharing is better.

xboxalwayswin
xboxalwayswin

This is actually a good idea. Maybe you have a game that a friend of yours is considering buying but doesnt know if he wants it. Then you can easily use shareplay to let him get a taste of the game to see if he really wants it. Brilliant idea sony. I hope Microsoft comes up with a similar plan like this on the xbox one. I would love to have something like this on my xbox one

canuckbiker
canuckbiker

I get why they're doing this. Your friend can't play an entire single player game off of your console without you being there every hour up set him up. This will help dampen the software sale losses that this feature will bring. It's still a bit of a let down for those of us that would like uninterupted co-op game sessions with our friends.

porterhoarder
porterhoarder

All I gotta say is cod zombies. When I wanna zomb out with a buddy and the round lasts 3 hours plus, the one hour limit will put a damper on this function.

mattress805
mattress805

60 minutes seems completely fair to me. Just a brilliant idea overall.

TwinStripeUK
TwinStripeUK

Presumably this is a '... "virtual couch" that allowed for "an online local co-op experience."...' where you hand a controller to a friend, he plays for an hour at which point you make him leave the room for 15 minutes before letting him come back in and take the controller back?


I also wonder how long it will take before people start making money with this:


'Stuck on Bloodborne? Pay me $5 and I'll get you past that tricky third section - just follow this eBay link and mail me your PSN ID...'

... at which point a news headline will hit that some kid's run up a $1000 bill on his parent's credit card.

Nice idea, but I can't see them handling it properly (just look at the mess with Twitch when they launched that).

But then again at least they're not charging you $30 to play laggy versions of games you already own, eh?

Fine_TableLamp
Fine_TableLamp

Why not just make more games with actual split screen co-op?

MuffintopX
MuffintopX

They just don't want you leaving your ps4 on all night and letting friends play through entire games of yours without buying them, or you being there to enjoy the point of sharing the experience with a friend.

liamredding
liamredding

Will the other player be able to earn trophies for you or would they keep them for themselves

paparolo
paparolo

Such short time, I can understand the reasons behind this, but at least they could have made it 2 hours sessions, I seriously hope they don't put any sort of "cool down" time between sessions and you can resume right away.

Playing co-op with this for games that do not have network based co-op will be nice.

alcapello
alcapello

Oh, this is perfect for looking up boss strategies!!

Beasley2K
Beasley2K

People that are complaining either don't understand the concept or simply haven't read the article.


While it must come as a surprise that there is a MINOR restriction and not unlimited access like most people first assumed, this is nothing to cry about.


First of all, does anyone want someone else playing their console for much more than an hour? It was obvious from the beginning that the host's console would be unavailable for use while this feature is in effect, so no-one can complain there - after all, it is remotely controlling the console and not sending a free copy of the game. So do people really want someone preventing them from using their console for hours on end?


Second, while it's limited to only an hour per session, there is no limit to the number of sessions you can have. It says that in the article. So it's not just a one-hour trial like people think, and saves are linked to your account, meaning you can pick up where you left off. So in essence, you can play a game from beginning to end, just for one hour at a time.


Honestly, what is there to complain about? All I can guess is that people are upset that they won't be able to essentially get a free game like the first thought, or people that complain at everything that just want to s*** all over Sony. However you look at it, this is a phenomenal feature if pulled off correctly, and is something that no other device provides.

not_even_goten
not_even_goten

So does this let a friend play a game of your ps4 through his ps4, or is it the game sharing the xb1 was going to have and what Steam now has.

Ripper_TV
Ripper_TV

On top of the horrendous limit this feature will simply not work because of the latency. If your friend doesn't live down the street, you can forget about it right now.

daikkenaurora12
daikkenaurora12

thats not too bad.  Wish it had atleast 2 hours though.

TheRealBigRich
TheRealBigRich

I need to know if you can play against someone in a game of madden or 2k using this. Not play with against

runningman5ksmak
runningman5ksmak

yeah this game sharing feature coming this fall I believe . 60min is plenty of time for a person to no if they really like it when you share a game to them.this feature will be brilliant I will probably use it all the time

nikon133
nikon133

@sampson3121 I agree with you. Yeah, playing longer would be more convenient, but there would be more space for abuse. As it is, 60 minutes is more than enough to reach end of level or at least next checkpoint, so restarting game session is not deal breaker. Eventually, the way I see it - this is more for people to see if they like multiplayer in the game; if they do and want to play through whole game, I will encourage them to buy a copy - or buy a copy myself if I am the guest. Good games (and their developers) deserve to be supported.

f50liv_manawi
f50liv_manawi

@skiggy34 Did you not read the article? 'There is no limit on the number of times you can use it'. So there you can re-invite them straight after the time limit/ 60 minutes is up.

sampson3121
sampson3121

@TwinStripeUK no, it's more like, I'm going to bed now so please get the f%ck of my couch and go home.

they never said anything about 15 minutes, they want to make sure that the person is home so people won't leave the system on and let the other person play all night. this is amazing and i find it odd that someone would complain about such a great service.

canuckbiker
canuckbiker

Because only using half of your screen is stepping backwards in entertainment quality.

mattress805
mattress805

Cause most people are too busy or don't live close enough to each other to take advantage of that feature. It's fun on Rayman legends though and Dead Nation.

porterhoarder
porterhoarder

No. If my friend comes over and plays a game on my ps4 he won't get any trophies on his. Same idea.

mattress805
mattress805

The first thong you said. It lets your friend play your game thru his ps4 with you when he doesn't even have the game. This ideas is ingenious. Especially people like me that play A Lot of co op to the point that I actually buy my online friends copies of games that I want to play in co op, if they don't have the funds.

Beasley2K
Beasley2K

@Ripper_TV I'm pretty sure Sony have considered that themselves and have already sorted it. No offense, but I'm sure they know more about this than you do, and don't you think the problem of latency will have be suggested at some point?

sampson3121
sampson3121

@daikkenaurora12 why, what would that do? i mean take a bathroom break, grab a drink or look out the window for a second. then start playing again.

TwinStripeUK
TwinStripeUK

@sampson3121 @TwinStripeUK Well they haven't mentioned 15 minutes as an actual figure, but considering the actual process involved (send a request asking to join the game, get the response, send a connection message, get the friend to connect), then 15 minutes is going to be an average.


It sounds more as if the system is set up to get people to end up purchasing the game themselves out of sheer frustration at having to go through this every hour, at which point they then stop sharing the game, so the user then has to send out another request to another friend and the cycle begins again...


Fairly cynical and underhanded, I'd say, but pretty clever too.

Regardless, its viability will probably rest on how it performs - if it's like Remote Play, then that'll be pretty good; if it's more like Playstation Now, it'll suck (based on the fact that the vast majority of Co-Op games and those that people will require 'help' with are going to require quick reactions or precision control, and Playstation Now has already proven to be pretty poor at doing those).

xXl_z3r0_lXx
xXl_z3r0_lXx

@canuckbiker Are you kidding me? Almost all of my best times were with friends, or even family members, all in one room around the same screen. The only excuse devs have for not including split screen is to cut corners and save money.

canuckbiker
canuckbiker

This should work well with Diablo 3, and many indie games.

liamredding
liamredding

I meant in the concept if I couldn't get a particular trophy,I meant could my friend achieve it for me?

liamredding
liamredding

I meant in the concept if I couldn't get a particular trophy, could my friend achieve it for me?

carl0ski
carl0ski

@porterhoarder @porterhoarder 

depends the mode chosen.


if i use the feature the game launches with my psn and save game is in my psn

other options

view other consoles session, take control other console session both obviously same psn.as owner.

however other options, 

play coop game modes remotely essentially it is really split screen mode where second screen is broadcast to second ps4.

lastly take primary control of the ps4 operation to play the game as if disc were in your console including launched in your psn account. in thia case the owner will be unable to use the inuse ps4 fully


Ripper_TV
Ripper_TV

@Beasley2K @Ripper_TV Sorry, but no. Even PS Now just doesn't work, if you live far from the Data Center. You haven't tried it or live close to one.

sampson3121
sampson3121

@TwinStripeUK @sampson3121 doubt it will take more then 5 minutes and PS Now works fine on my connection. they don't have to do it at all, and people don't have to use it either.Not talking about you but it's funny how people need to get upset or seem to think the world owes them something, even when a company gives them a service like this, they complain about it being 60 minutes until they need to start the process over again, and even though they'll be able to start where they left off in the game it's still just not good enough.

nikon133
nikon133

@xXl_z3r0_lXx @canuckbiker For games where both/all gamers are sharing same screen, yes. Fighting games, FIFA and other sports games. But for games where each gamer has his own screen? Split screen doesn't work that well, IMHO. Not only that it limits your horizontal or vertical field of view, but also draws your attention from your part of the screen to other(s). As such, I prefer on-line for games like that (racing, 1st/3rd person shooters etc). Good headset will do for in-game chat, and screen estate/unspoiled immersion will cover for lack of being able to elbow your mate.

nikon133
nikon133

@sampson3121 @TwinStripeUK Same here. I'd expect that invitation to a friend already in friends list can be done in 1 - 2 minutes, really. Unless there is some sort of obligatory data (game code) transfer between consoles that gets deleted after 60 minutes and has to be re-done.

But even then, 60 minutes is plenty for someone to determine if he/she likes game. If yes, buy a copy. If no, well why should you play more anyway?

xXl_z3r0_lXx
xXl_z3r0_lXx

@nikon133 @xXl_z3r0_lXx @canuckbiker Alright mister no fun allowed, look at it this way. We've got bigass HD monitors with unreal screen economies that didn't exist back when multiplayer gaming was at it's peak. We have 3d tvs that can be used to give more than one person the ability to use the whole screen on games that wouldnt be able to normally be played that way. 21:9 monitors/tvs are a thing now, and pretty soon, will be a very affordable thing. We're at a point in technology where single system multiplayer could be at it's absolute best. The real problems are that no one is trying, everything has to be a realistic simulation these days, AND NOBODY SEEMS TO REALIZE THAT THERE ARE MORE GENRES THAN GUN AND CAR. It's not limited technology or entertainment value, it's a lack of creativity, and the audience's unwillingness to care about anything but total immersion and graphics quality. It's not always about what seems real and what doesn't. That's not all that determines the level of fun a game can be. I just recently got myself a new tv, and the old one, an old CRT that used to be the living room tv, I moved to the floor behind the couch as a place to keep it before I could haul it off to goodwill. I recently had the idea to dig up the old PS2 and Gamecube. I played Tony Hawk Underground, Star Wars Battlefront, Zelda Four Swords, and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles with my brother, sister, and some friends. I haven't had as much fun playing games in years. None of us have. It was an absolute blast, and there is absolutely nothing realistic about those games (save for tony hawk of course). We had no problem getting completely immersed in them, even with the horzontal/vertical splitscreen in tony hawk. 

I haven't played any of my newer games in a couple of weeks because those old ass single screen games are so much fun to play with people. Yes, online multiplayer is good, but that is no excuse to never include splitscreen.

nikon133
nikon133

@xXl_z3r0_lXx @nikon133 @canuckbiker What on earth do you mean "Mister no fun alowed"??? :)

My friends and I are all 35 - 45 old, married or with partners, most of us with kids, all of us working. We don't have time to converge at one of ours homes and play locally too often, but we can steal some time and play together remotely, while still being "available" to our families - and saving on travel time. At some point in life, most people must make some sacrifices. I'll gladly sacrifice sharing sofa with mates for some quality multiplayer online with limited time I have for gaming nowadays.

I mentioned shooters and racers only as an example, mate. Of course there are other genres that can do multiplayer/co-op. Hold your righteous rage ;)

In addition - I'm not saying that games cannot be played split screen - I did a lot of Blur with friends as we had PS3 in office for a while - but I do prefer full screen for my game. 3D screens with interlaced fullscreen multiplayer require glasses - I already wear glasses so I don't enjoy this much. 21:9 is not the thing now, not in NZ at least, and I'd be surprised to see a game taking advantage of that form factor yet.

And then, we all also play various PC multiplayer, which doesn't work well with split screen in general.

It's all down to personal preferences, and those depend on number of factors, some highly individual. Remote multiplayer/co-op work fine for me and my friends. Back in the days, my best friend and I used to spend time at each other's home playing together single player campaigns and swapping place in front of monitor (and before that TV, with 8-bit home computers), and that was some of the most memorable "co-op" we played back in the days... original Doom, Quake and Quake 2, Blood 2... when online was in it's infancy, or didn't exist at all... but times change.