Fortnite To Return To iPhones via Nvidia Cloud Gaming Service

Owners of iPhones and iPads will soon be able to play Fortnite again, via a cloud service, the BBC has discovered. From a report: Nvidia has developed a version of its GeForce cloud gaming service that runs in the mobile web browser Safari. Apple will not get a cut of virtual items sold within the battle royale fighting title when played this way. Apple is embroiled in a legal fight with Fortnite's developer Epic, which led the iPhone-maker to remove the game from its iOS App Store. Epic has claimed that the 30% commission Apple charges on in-app gaming purchases is anti-competitive. But Apple has accused Epic of wanting a "free ride". The case is due to go to trial in May and could take years to be resolved. Papers filed in the case indicate that Fortnite had 116 million users on iOS, 73 million of whom only played it via Apple's operating system. Unlike Android, Apple does not allow games or other apps to be loaded on to its phones or tablets via app stores other than its own. But it does not restrict which third-party services can run within Safari or other web browsers available via its store.

Re:

[Anon42Answer]

I'm ignorant of playing on iPhone, but why is the type of data used different between in web browser/safari and downloaded app?
Can't both use either cell data or wifi?

on iPad it can use either no problem.

OK who is giving Apple their

[oldgraybeard]

30% cut off the top.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

In this case Nvidia is getting their cut. Obviously streaming games running on their servers and using their bandwidth is not free.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple breaks Safari to make sure this service doesn't work anyway.

Re:

[DontBeAMoran]

If Apple breaks it for NVidia but not Microsoft/Xbox and Sony/Playstation, it will look suspicious to say the least.

Re:

[ljw1004]

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple breaks Safari to make sure this service doesn't work anyway.

Apple specifically cooperated with Amazon to make sure Safari *is* able to stream games well for a cloud gaming service. It's hard to see them enthusiastically supporting it for Amazon and then breaking the exact same technology for Fortnite.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

Did Amazon pay them?

Extreme Surprise

[SuperKendall]

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple breaks Safari to make sure this service doesn't work anyway.

I would, as all software engineers know that attempting to purposefully break one thing means you break a lot of other things you didn't mean to.

Apple doesn't care about game streaming. They only care if you use Apple resources to get access to APple's paying customer base, that Apple gets a cut. What you do in browser Apple could care less about, and they work hard to try and keep the browser performing well.

and add to anit-trust. MS was not able to lock IE

[Joe_Dragon]

and add to anit-trust. MS was not able to lock IE in so doing this may force them to stop the Safari / web-kit lock in.

Re:

[Ostracus]

Sounds about what Steam offers it's developers and publishers.

Anyway I think it's funny that a game streaming service is coming to Epic's rescue.

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

From what I know 30% seems to be the standard for many stores including MS (Xbox and Windows), Sony, Nintendo, Android, and Steam. This is something the judge pointed out in refusing to order Apple to reinstate Fortnite to the Apple App Store: Epic is complaining regarding Apple something which appears to be the industry standard and a rate which Epic could charge in their own store.

Re: OK who is giving Apple their

[SleepingEye]

Except the difference here is that the 30% is often returned to the customer. Consoles are underpriced for what they offer, and they're considered only entertainment only. (I.e. you won't find Amazon selling things). They're often only getting the purchase price and not the in game items

No they're overpriced.. do the maths!

[martynhare]

With consoles. customers have to pay for online play every single month. With PSN you pay £50/year, that's £350 extra cost throughout the console lifetime with the console itself being £449. That means, the PS5 itself would cost me ~£800 based on a 7 year lifecycle. If a customer wants to have online play when it goes EOL, that's an extra £300 for the remaining 6 years, bringing my costs to approximately ~£1100. Now this all assumes I remain loyal to one vendor. If I were

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

How is that collusion? If Epic starts charging 30% then your logic is that Epic is colluding with Apple against Epic. This is the ridiculousness of Epic’s claim.

Steam does this

[josefresco]

Pretty sure I can use Steam to stream Fortnite to my iPhone. Haven't tried it, and I'm sure it's terrible but ... possible.

Re:

[spire3661]

You can do that from YOUR computer to YOUR phone, thats it. Apple doesnt allow services to offer connections to hardware they dont own. Apple will let you connect to your home Steam box, but not a third-party's hardware in the cloud.

Yea NVidia!!!! But I hope this helps Apple too

[HappySeafood]

Cheers to NVidia for this marvel. Streaming games to portable electronics is awesome.

However, I do want Apple to win against Epic. If Apple needs its 30% cut to pay for infrastructure, R&D, services, etc without ads like Google/Facebook, then why should Epic get a free ride while all the other apps pay the 30%. I hope by allowing this NVidia cloud gaming service that Epic's case is hurt more than Apple's.

Re:

[spire3661]

You are crazy if you are against multiple stores being on iOS. Its not about the 30%, its that Apple has to allow competing stores.

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

In what way is Apple forcing a 3rd party to accept their payment site? If you use Apple’s site, there is a 30% charge. That is the fatal flaw in your logic. Apple isn’t forcing Steam, MS, Sony, Nintendo, Google, etc. 30%. They each charge that on their own. That is the 2nd flaw in your logic.

Re:

[Dusanyu]

No matter who wins in this case costumers loose on one side you have apple a compony that abuses it's customers by locking the into there walled garden and on the other side you have epic a compony ironically abuses it's customers by buying other game studios and ending support on platforms they may have be playing that studio's games on https://www.rocketleague.com/n... [rocketleague.com] so yeah F both of these companies

Re:

[Spifmeister]

Microsoft was far, far worse, but that is not the issue at hand.

It is not illegal to be a monopoly in the United States. It is illegal to abuse your monopoly position. Epic would have to prove that Apple is a monopoly and that Apple is abusing their Monopoly position through the Apple store, Apples walled garden.

Epic will have to prove that Apples locked down hardware and walled garden is an abuse of that monopoly. The thing is walled gardens are not uncommon in computer software or computer hardware indust

How can cloud gaming be a serious idea?

[GameboyRMH]

How are the same gamers who are worried that using a wireless controller instead of a wired one could introduce input lag supposed to be OK with playing a game over the Internet on a server that might be in the same city if they're lucky?

Different people want different things

[XXongo]

How are the same gamers who are worried that using a wireless controller instead of a wired one could introduce input lag supposed to be OK with playing a game over the Internet on a server that might be in the same city if they're lucky?

Why do you think that they are the same gamers?

It is probably different gamers.

Some gamers want wired controllers to give them a millisecond or two edge in response time. Other gamers want to play games on their phone when they're out of the house and have a few minutes when they'd otherwise be bored. Different people want different things.

Re: Different people want different things

[GameboyRMH]

Honestly, I've only met 2 types of gamers in terms of their likely opinions on the topic: The type that really doesn't like lag and will eliminate any noticeable causes of it, and the type that is so pathologically paranoid about lag that they're practically superstitious about it.

Re:

[thegarbz]

How are the same gamers

Let me stop you there. The same gamers are *not* trying to play Fortnite on a phone.

7 degrees of Fortnite

[sound+vision]

Playing a shooter...

On a remote computer...

Using a phone.

Might as well just open up YouTube and watch someone else play it at that point. I mean, that's what a lot of them are doing anyway.

this is good

[jm007]

to me, this is what competition looks like

it has the effect of re-focusing a company's decisions to put more weight on the client/customer; this only happens when they know that if they don't, then somebody else will

in short, it doesn't matter so much which company 'wins' because the customer wins either way

Couldnt Apple just issue a patch to block it again

[Cito]

Perhaps a Safari patch to block it or would it break too many things if they did so? Im not exactly sure how it'd work and I'm mainly asking a hypothetical question if Apple really wanted to be more of an asshole with Fortnite and such. Or perhaps Apple could even hypothetically penalize Nvidia by blocking their app and web service in safari under the auspices that Apple "banned" Fortnite and Nvidia is helping Fortnite evade the ban thus Apple block Nvidia or something.

This would all be incredibly petty, in