The official statement on the policy is that crossplay with Xbox/Switch is that two games are in beta. Wargroove, for example, is not in Sony's crossplay beta. So that is how I said "to be fair". You can choose to believe it or not, but that's my take away.
Let's use the Xbox Parity Clause as a perfect example. We all know that there was a parity clause with indies before XB1 launched, but then that parity clause went away once Phil Spencer came along. Here is one of his statements regarding the matter:
https://www.dualshockers.com/xboxs-...lause-theres-no-clause-explains-how-it-works/
Phil says that he thinks the parity clause is dead, but then says there never was a clause in the same breath. This, to me, is similar to Shawn saying that "the developers just need to talk to Sony", but obviously Sony's communication is not working with said developers. Also, in the following paragraph Phil is basically stating what their clause is about if your game comes to Xbox later, then make it "special" so their consumers don't feel like being left out for not releasing at the same time as other platforms. This is a common theme for platforms that get games later due to timed exclusivity where their is special content that won't be seen on the original games launch. In other words, good PR to move the discussion to be about timed exclusivity in the event that XB1 does not have launch parity.
The same applies to Shawn's statement. The vocal consumers want crossplay on every game with every platform, but Sony has a beta going on with two games that allow that to happen. Once it is out of "beta", then maybe every game with crossplay is available at release. Regardless, Sony is "loosening its restrictions" on crossplay like MS did with the "parity clause".