Slashdot Mirror


Fortnite is Generating More Revenue Than Any Other Free Game Ever (recode.net)

Fortnite: Battle Royale has brought in more revenue in a single month than any other game of its kind, industry estimates suggest. Recode: The free-to-play game hit a new revenue record of $318 million in May, according to SuperData Research. That puts Fornite well ahead of other breakout games like Pokemon Go and Clash of Clans, and it's all the more spectacular when you realize the multi-platform game launched on consoles just eight months ago and on iOS just three months ago. Since then, Fortnite has brought in more than $1.2 billion in revenue, all of which comes from nonessential in-app purchases, for stuff like clothing and dance moves.

20 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. Re:"free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm fine using the default skin for my beer, and my FortNite characters. That's all you pay for in the game: cosmetics.

  2. Re: "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well fortnite is as legit free to play as it gets. I don't like the game but can't knock their business model.

  3. Plenty of children using parents money.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ..for $20 cosmetic items. Yeah, as in two-zero.... ten plus ten.

    People that work at gamestop cant believe how many kids are dragging their parents in just to purchase these gift cards that let you buy skins.

    Not to mention the fact that the game is on nearly every platform now. It's a digital clothing store in the form of a video game.

    It's also pretty fun. I grew tired of it fairly quickly, but I'd never say it's a bad game. When you consider epic is pouring all their resources into it, it better be doing okay

    1. Re:Plenty of children using parents money.. by aix+tom · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It kind of makes sense. Real live is also "pretty fun" no matter what clothes you war, and the real life fashion industry makes a lot of money, too.

    2. Re:Plenty of children using parents money.. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a digital clothing store in the form of a video game.

      So in many ways it's a virtual dress-up doll. All these teenage and pre-teen boys are paying money for a virtual Barbie (with a gun).

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Plenty of children using parents money.. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      They sell gift cards for skins? Wow, just... wow.

      But yeah, it's fun even though I don't like the cartoonish look and feel. I also tried PUBG (which was not free, but sadly the devs really dropped the ball on that one. What a seriously frustrating buggy mess of rampant cheating that was...

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Plenty of children using parents money.. by avandesande · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have no problem with money for DLC as long as it's not pay to win or cut grinds etc.... it keeps the developers focus on keeping the game fun and interesting. With pay to win it creates all kinds of perverse side effects on game play.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    5. Re:Plenty of children using parents money.. by porlryan · · Score: 2

      I think you mean G.I. Joe.

  4. All Hail Shareware! by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    Back in the 1980's and 1990's we had Shareware. These were programs that you can download, copy with other and use. Some of them had a Trial Time Period, where you can use the full version for a period of time, then you have access to a reduced features, or not work at all. But most others Offered additional Levels, and other goodies if you were to actually purchase the software.

    I see many of these free to play games with extra purchases as just an extension of the Shareware concept. However the problem that I feel is most concerning is the lack of a cap in how much you are going to pay for it. Say an $80 fee (The cost of a good console game) where everything is unlocked, and you can use the game and stay current. But that isn't the case, because it is easy to nickle and dime your way into people paying much more. Often for just something fun at the moment.

    Granted this is still probably better then what people will pay for beer where they drink it, get a buzz, and then feel sick in the morning.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:All Hail Shareware! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Back in the 1980's and 1990's we had Shareware. These were programs that you can download, copy with other and use. Some of them had a Trial Time Period, where you can use the full version for a period of time, then you have access to a reduced features, or not work at all. But most others Offered additional Levels, and other goodies if you were to actually purchase the software.

      I see many of these free to play games with extra purchases as just an extension of the Shareware concept. However the problem that I feel is most concerning is the lack of a cap in how much you are going to pay for it. Say an $80 fee (The cost of a good console game) where everything is unlocked, and you can use the game and stay current. But that isn't the case, because it is easy to nickle and dime your way into people paying much more. Often for just something fun at the moment.

      Granted this is still probably better then what people will pay for beer where they drink it, get a buzz, and then feel sick in the morning.

      The old shareware games used to give you a pretty decent amount of playtime on the free version too. They didn't cut you off the moment it got slightly interesting; and it was usually a pay once and you get the whole thing when you did pay... it wasn't the constant microtransaction trickle that most places try to get nowadays.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:All Hail Shareware! by turp182 · · Score: 2

      Fortnite purchases are purely cosmetic and the store interface makes this clear.

      One cannot purchase a better experience/advantage, it's a level playing field. It's a good system in my opinion.

      That said, my son still bothers me to purchase the cosmetic stuff (and if I do then I deny actual physical purchases to drive home what "cosmetic" means - good ways to get him to do chores...).

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
  5. Re:"free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think you get the beer for free well chilled, well carbonated, in a nice high quality bottle, and comes with a free bottle opener.

    But if you want it served in an elegant stein, a decorative glass, or delivered by a hot barmaid, then you can pay $$$$ for it.

    The fact that they've made $1.2 Billion off that business model is amazing. Good for them, but damn the average person is a complete idiot.

  6. Why have we let ourselves come to this? by Bobrick · · Score: 2

    How pointless does your life have to be to see value in buying, with actual money, no less, some fancy virtual clothing for your virtual character? Some 3D model that's probably re-used again and again with different textures, took half an hour for some game artist to produce a shitload of them that the company can now charge you premium for, and extra-platinum if you get the one with the golden pixelated stars on the right side, just under the virtual pocket. No, you can't really wear it or put anything in that pocket, but look at the face of the other players when they see how fabulous your character is looking now!*

    Note: Other players' faces may or may not be visible. Virtual belt and virtual shoes sold separately. We will totally release the same clothing model with a mildly different texture soon enough and we'll offer it for a "special price" for early adopters.

    1. Re:Why have we let ourselves come to this? by mikael · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some people may not have the ground space, energy, or money to afford a real landscaped garden, mansion home, or even toy railway set, but they are happy with a virtual version that they can upgrade in their spare time.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:Why have we let ourselves come to this? by war4peace · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good for you to have strong opinions. Me, i'm not sure anyone is more right then the next person as far as entertainment is concerned.
      Person A might spend 100 grand on a really nice sports car. Person B might spend 10 grand on Fortnite cosmetics. "A friend" spent somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 grand on World of Tanks since 2011 - and still does buy premium tanks "for collecting purposes". Meanwhile person C loaned money over and over and spent them on trips all over the world, now he's proper fucked by banks. All while person D poured tons of alcohol down their guts and person E smoked their lungs to Hell and back. And the list can go on forever.

      None is better than the other, they simply spend their money on whatever floats their boat. Small condo and pixel-rich versus big mansion and never played any PC games, there's no objective difference.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  7. Cosmetic vs. pay to win by burtosis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really like freemium games that push cosmetics only such as skins, dance moves, and other non-essentials. It opens up the game to the most people, levels the playing field between players who pay and those who don't, and still allows a fun incentive to invest in the development of the game. I can't stand and refuse to become invested in games that use loot boxes using actual currency as the method to obtain end game content, must have equipment, or are the only way to get it in a reasonable amount of time.

    1. Re:Cosmetic vs. pay to win by lgw · · Score: 2

      If someone else pays money for that, how does it infringe on you?

      Are you asking "how does pay-to-win hurt a competitive multi-player game"? Because that's a foolish question.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Fortnight claims to gameplay advantage but... by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So to start with, I think Fortnight is doing this free to play right. You can truly play as much as you like, any items you can buy are pretty much just fun graphical enhancements for your avatar.

    However I would quibble slightly that the graphics only re-skins give a small advantage - simply from a camo standpoint, if you buy a darker outfit you are going to be harder to see from a distance against the landscape or in a shadow. Almost all of the really good players I've seen have darker outfits... with the occasional exception of someone showing off wearing a hot pink teddy bear or something else really vibrant.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  9. Re:"free" by halofan_sd · · Score: 2

    there's no loot boxes/ trading cards in this game, guess you never played it

  10. Re:Don't bother with it, no text chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you said they actually could care less than they do.. you mean couldn't care less.