iOS release of 'Fortnite' rakes in over $25M in first 30 days

Posted:
in iPhone edited April 2018
Epic Games' "Fortnite" -- a free-to-play third-person shooter, which took off after adding a battle royale mode copying "PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds" -- amassed over $25 million in its first 30 days after being ported to iOS devices, according to research data shared this week.


"Fortnite" on the iPad.


The feat is all the more impressive because "Fortnite" for iOS has only been out of an invitation phase since Apr. 1, said analytics firm Sensor Tower. Average daily spending on in-app purchases is now over $1 million worldwide.

In the U.S. people spent $9.5 million on the game within the first two weeks of April -- making it second only to Netflix's $12.6 million. That put it above other lucrative apps such as Tinder, Pandora, and YouTube.

If "Fortnite" can "maintain its current hysteria-level popularity" for a few more months -- and it comes to Android by this summer -- the game could potentially reap over $500 million by the end of 2018, Sensor Tower projected.

In comparison, Nintendo's "Super Mario Run" made $56 million in its first year, ordinarily a large amount for any app. Both games pale in comparison to the success of "Pokemon Go" however, which took in some $1.1 billion.

"Fortnite" and the mobile version of "Battlegrounds" have sometimes been described as a watershed moment in mobile gaming, proving that PC- and console-style games can be successful despite interface and processor limitations. Phones and tablets have become increasingly powerful, and in some cases may be a person's main computing device.

AppleInsider reviewed the title, calling it an excellent port to mobile, and a "good, if challenging, game for those wanting to dip their toe into the competitive survival genre."

"Fortnite Battle Royale" requires an Internet connection and iOS 11 to play, and is playable on an iPhone 6S, iPhone SE, iPad Mini 4, iPad Pro, iPad Air 2, iPad 2017, and later devices.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,016member
    It still needs proper MFi Controller support.
    I can’t  play it with either my Logitech Powershell or my Steelseries Nimbus
    jbdragonrandominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 15
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,148member
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    edited April 2018 GeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 15
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,016member
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    How stupid do you think people are?
    jbdragonfastasleepspaceraysMuntz
  • Reply 4 of 15
    Even if you don't have an interest in battle royale shooters, this level of success probably gives a boost to more PC/console style games being ported to iOS.
    jbdragonfastasleepMuntzrandominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 15
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    How stupid do you think people are?
    they're not stupid, but some are definitely fooled into thinking a freemium game is cheaper by paying just a few pence or pounds every so often vs paying up front to own it entirely. They'll often end up paying at least 10x the price of a regular game and still not have unlocked the whole thing.
  • Reply 6 of 15
    smiffy31smiffy31 Posts: 173member
    adm1 said:
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    How stupid do you think people are?
    they're not stupid, but some are definitely fooled into thinking a freemium game is cheaper by paying just a few pence or pounds every so often vs paying up front to own it entirely. They'll often end up paying at least 10x the price of a regular game and still not have unlocked the whole thing.
    There are no game unlocks for Fortnite, the IAPs are for customising the avatars, everyone plays on equal footing regardless of $s spent.
    techprod1gyfastasleepspaceraysMuntzrandominternetperson
  • Reply 7 of 15
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,040member
    adm1 said:
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    How stupid do you think people are?
    they're not stupid, but some are definitely fooled into thinking a freemium game is cheaper by paying just a few pence or pounds every so often vs paying up front to own it entirely. They'll often end up paying at least 10x the price of a regular game and still not have unlocked the whole thing.
    In general, that seems to be the case. For this game though, you don't have to pay anything. The Pay stuff as far as I know is for silly stuff that doesn't give you any advantage in the game over someone else that has paid nothing. I hate the so called FREEMIUM games also, and generally don't download them, which is getting hard to do these days. I'd rather just pay upfront for a game.
    GeorgeBMacMuntzwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 15
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,148member
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    How stupid do you think people are?
    Well , since you ask, by definition, approximately two-thirds of the population scores are between IQ 85 and IQ 115. About 2.5 percent of the population scores above 130, and 2.5 percent below 70.

    edited April 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 15
    I really hope they port this to AppleTV.  It can't be that difficult and would be a real shot in the arm for ATV as a gaming platform (or perhaps Apple has already decided to forget that plan).
    Muntzwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 15
    sirlance99sirlance99 Posts: 1,142member
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    Obviously you’ve never played or you would know that ALL IAP is purely cosmetic and not pay to win. So, yes, you play for free and be on the same level as someone who has spent $100’s on skins and emotes. 

    This is is actually how games should be. 
    spacerayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 15
    FranculesFrancules Posts: 110member
    Lol no offense but the only thing i liked about that game was jumping out of the plane. haha
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 15
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,792member
    Francules said:
    Lol no offense but the only thing i liked about that game was jumping out of the plane. haha
    Aren't you thinking of PUBG?
  • Reply 13 of 15
    nhtnht Posts: 4,429member
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    If you have discipline (or just no money) you can grind your way to success in many f2p games.  In which case the cost is time and serving as a target for the paying customers to beat on until you level up.
    fastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 15
    nht said:
    MacPro said:
    If ever there were proof needed that 'Free apps' with 'in-app purchases' should be avoided this is it.  The term 'trap' comes to mind.
    If you have discipline (or just no money) you can grind your way to success in many f2p games.  In which case the cost is time and serving as a target for the paying customers to beat on until you level up.
    That's me to a tee.  Over the years I've played lots of these types of games and with the exception of one splurge for a cool tank in World of Tank Blitz, I never make an in-app purchase.  For some games this is fine, for others it's a complete waste of time.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 15
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    No one is forcing folks to spend money.
    Imagine a world where people only eat soup. And everyone buys bitter vegetables for their soup. They don’t like the vegetables, but they buy them and put them in the soup anyway. Everyone does it. They don’t have to do it, but it’s a matter of social standing. Anyone who doesn’t is universally, collectively shamed. Say three entire generations have grown up doing this; a child born into that world wouldn’t know any other way to be. No one forces him to do these things; convention just dictates it. Even without the negative social response of “shaming”–let’s say the child has never experienced it or even seen it–the societal pressure to continue doing what others around you do would make the very idea of not doing it never occur to you.

    Now imagine this behavior was artificial in nature. Calculated. Created. Pushed out there, entirely legally. Not “forced” on people–because no forcing was needed–simply “suggested”, such that eventually everyone did it. Were they lied to? Of course; they were told from below that ‘everyone is doing it’ and told from above ‘this is what the classy people are doing’; and so the silent majority believed they were in the minority–all alone, in fact–and so one day they went to buy those vegetables.

    No one forced them; you’re absolutely correct. They’ve just never known anything, as a lifestyle, other than keeping up with the Joneses.
    How stupid do you think people are? 
    Extremely. In general, at least. Why else do you think that society provides, by law, for certain protections? It’s not to save the life of the moron too stupid to figure out he shouldn’t drink and drive. He’s not worth saving. It’s to save the life of the people the drunk driver mows down. Why do you think we have animal rights laws? It’s not because animals have rights. It’s because abusing animals (abuse meaning either “mistreating them physically” or “using too many of them and damaging the balance of the ecosystem”) is a reflection of the psyche of the human performing the abuse. A person willing to abuse an animal is a danger to himself and others (humans), either in a physical sense (mistreatment of animals = mistreatment of humans) or in a societal sense (being a poor steward of the environment threatens the survival of the nation).
    edited April 2018 watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.