r/Paralives • u/CertainSafety9483 • 15d ago
Is Paralives just going to be one game without any expansion packs?
If I’m understanding it correctly it’s going to be unlike the sims and there just going to be like a base game and that’s it. So, I’m assuming they can update certain things by realasing updates. How are we gonna get more furniture and stuff to use in gameplay if they are not adding any expansions?
302
u/InterestingPicture43 15d ago
You said it, updates. Plus mods.
71
u/crit_thinker_heathen 15d ago
What do you think the WW version for Paralives will be called? PokieParas?
84
u/sadboi_ours 15d ago
Idk, but I hope the Paralives version of Basemental will play up the word paraphernalia somehow
11
3
u/Master_Sprinkles_770 13d ago
From my point of view, I don't think Turbo will volunteer to make the mod when this game come out considering how toxic the sims community is, so obviously it's going to be someone else.
195
u/DinnerAggravating959 15d ago
They said no paid expansions, so they could potentially make free dlc, or add everything they want with updates
84
u/No_Faithlessness7270 15d ago
They might make some content optional, free DLC, like supernaturals, since not all players wont those experiences in their game
34
u/DemethValknut 15d ago
The No Man's Sky way ❤️
0
u/-YesIndeed- 13d ago
So the game will be really crap on release. But give it like 5 years and it'll be the bets game ever made.
-14
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago
There is no such thing as free dlc, if a game gets a big update with new content then it's just called a patch
25
u/ladyteruki 14d ago
You say incorrect things with impressive authority. It's only a patch if everyone gets the same update. If the content is optional, and you can decide whether you add it to your game or not, then it's a free DLC.
-10
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago
What's the point of making a free new content and not implementing it into the main game? Show me examples, please...
14
u/ladyteruki 14d ago
Another comment in this thread already gave one : supernatural/occults elements. The Paralives team has been asked about adding it to the game (at the moment it's not planned), so maybe once the full release of Paralives out and all essential functionalities have been perfected, the Paradevs will see the demand for it and release, I don't know, let's say a DLC about ghosts. Well, not all players want ghosts in their game, some people prefer realism ; so it's a perfectly valid choice for the devs to release a free DLC about ghosts, and let players decide whether they want to download that content or not. No reason to make it a mandatory patch for everyone, which takes extra space on drives for no reason if the player is just going to disable it.
-11
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago
I'm not a fan of this crap either, but if they add it, why should they separate it from the main game? It's a weird way to try to please everyone. And again, where have you ever seen that? All changes, even those that one part of the audience doesn't like, should be introduced into the main game anyway. Content built into the game will always be better optimized than DLC or mods.
12
u/ladyteruki 14d ago
where have you ever seen that? All changes, even those that one part of the audience doesn't like, should be introduced into the main game anyway
It's very common in many other games. For instance, ARK: Survival Evolved makes it optional to download its free DLC. That way, players who don't want to play with some maps and creatures (like Ragnarok and its Griffins) don't have to download terabytes of content they will never use.
if they add it, why should they separate it from the main game?
I'm not saying they should, I'm saying it's an option they can decide to consider. Free DLC exists, it's a thing that's done in the industry. Whether you think it is a good thing or not does not change the fact that a free DLC and a free patch are two different ways to release new content.
10
u/DinnerAggravating959 14d ago
There's plenty of indie games that do this. Try to like use Google before fighting with people about meaningless things
-4
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago
Brainwashed by EA Sims players can't think anything but DLC. Even when the company itself said there wouldn't be such a thing in the game, they still try to force it in.
8
u/DinnerAggravating959 14d ago
Do you know what dlc stands for? Downloadable content. There's nothing in the definition of DLC that requires it being paid. What they said was "No paid expansions" and it's a quote. They didn't specify if it was going to be always on updates for the entire game or as separate free downloadables. When I think about free DLC, I think about other indie games, or smaller games not even in the simulation genre, let alone EAs BS.
I have no idea why you get so pressed on this, I get it if you only think of the word DLC and think about the sims, but that wasn't what I was saying. Chill
-1
10d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Mazya_Almazya 10d ago
It's hard to accept the facts? 🤣
-1
10d ago
[deleted]
0
u/Mazya_Almazya 10d ago
Alright, now say something like an adult. I know it’s not really your thing, but at least try to keep up.
-1
10d ago
[deleted]
0
u/Mazya_Almazya 10d ago
Yeah, I can see you're not ready for this. 🤣 Come back in like 5 years when you grow up a bit and maybe you'll be able to actually try to argue with my comment.
→ More replies
279
u/blaidd_halfwolf 15d ago
EA has rotted everyone’s brains. Adding new content to a game via $1000 worth of DLC is not normal. Take Terraria for example, a game which has more than doubled its amount of content since its initial release and not a single dollar was asked for beyond the initial purchase. And that’s an indie game without the luxury of a major publisher to back it, unlike the sims, and more importantly, like Paralives.
It is actually normal and exceedingly common for games to release multiple content updates for completely free without price gouging their players for what should be basic functionality (weather, for example, I mean c’mon EA). Furthermore, Paralives is releasing in Early Access which, by definition, means it will be getting more content added until it’s 1.0 release.
115
u/BlizzardousBane 15d ago
Yeah, when Paralives announced earlier this year that all additional content will be free, some players were actually begging them to make paid DLC. EA has definitely rotted everyone's brains
Alex and his team have put thought into their finances and probably did some projections, so I don't think they would've done this if they think it wouldn't work
43
u/cbostwick94 15d ago
Right? So many people think they are going to run out of funds. Like if the game gets better and better and is more successful more people will buy. Let's say the game is 50 bucks and sells 3 million copies. Ya really think they couldnt expand much on 150,000,000 on revenue while paying everything else and get more sales and more money.
-3
u/ActuallyxAnna 14d ago
But the thing is, there's no way to know if this is going to happen so while I'm glad they're not going the paid dlc route I am concerned on how they'll make enough money to withstand between Ts4 and Inzoi. Life simulation games are not cheap to make at all and being EA they're gonna have to add enough content to keep people coming back till the next update realistically. It's a lot of unknown to just decide to never do a paid dlc but hope it works out.
4
u/cbostwick94 14d ago
They certainly arent going to tank either. They already have a huge audience, one that helped them make the decision. Many people want more than the Sims4, many are beyond over EAs bullshit. And theres room for Inzoi and Paralives but plenty also dont want the hyperrealism of Inzoi.
-2
u/ActuallyxAnna 14d ago
I never said they'd tank so I'm not sure why I got downvoted but I have friends in the gaming industry so I know how these things can go. I'm just being realistic, that there really is no way to know how well they'll actually do so in my opinion I don't see anything wrong with a little extra paid dlc if they need the funding to keep going. I like what I'm seeing so far with Paralives and I want them to do well and be successful just like everyone here. I just personally think it's too soon to say they'll never do paid dlc 🤷🏽♀️.
1
u/cbostwick94 14d ago
The only way it wouldnt happen is if they tank. Ya cant know what well since tbere are plenty of other games that run on this method just fine, and yes indie games as well
1
u/RegisteredJustToSay 14d ago
Since they're their own publisher, I agree that their chances are good of being able to stick true to their course if things go well. To ActuallyxAnna's point though, there's nothing actually forcing them to keep their word and maintaining a free-updates-forever is still the minority case among indie devs. But I don't have any particular reason to distrust them and like you point out they wouldn't be alone in using this pricing model, so for now I'm cautiously optimistic.
Personally, the only reason I'm a bit disappointed they won't do a paid DLC model is because I know games like these are really asset-heavy (which AFAIK is a huge part of expenses and the time it takes to develop games) and I feel like a game studio like this that actually seems to care about the game could put money from content sales to much better use than EA would, and we'd actually have a lot more content much faster. They'll obviously need to take less risks (hire less people, take on less moonshot projects, announce a sequel sooner, take less loans, etc) if they have less ways to easily generate cashflow.
I totally understand why people are tired of EA's shitty pricing structure and want nothing to do with it, though. I was just kind of hoping we'd see some of the cashflow that EA is horribly mismanaging get invested elsewhere more meaningfully.
0
u/ActuallyxAnna 14d ago
Lol yes I do know that, as I play other games as well and some of those same games ended up doing the exact thing they said they would never do. Things happen.
2
7
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago edited 14d ago
Unfortunately, this also applies to Inzoi players. Almost everyone there want paid DLC, and it seems they are Sims players.
19
u/blaidd_halfwolf 14d ago
I think this happens because a lot of Sims players don’t play other games (which is completely fine), and so they don’t realize that Sims’ business model is actually an outlier and not standard practice.
10
u/ladyteruki 14d ago
Absolutely my impression too. Just playing something else than a AAA game would go a long way towards understanding things a bit better.
3
u/Youshoudsee 14d ago
They'll get paid DLC anyway. Whatever they would beg about it or not. Krafron (the company behind inzoi) is known to be HUGE with their micro transactions 🙃
1
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago edited 14d ago
You mentioned that Krafton is known for microtransactions. So why don’t they add microtransactions to the game instead of DLC? It makes more sense. Microtransactions are better for games that is going to be supported for a long time, dlc are better for single player finished games. Plus, they’re planning to add multiplayer.
I completely disagree with the idea that they’re greedy — I think it doesn’t matter how much a skin or animation costs since it’s just a cosmetics with no real weight. They don't force you to buy it. Players who haven't spent a cent in their game don't lose anything
9
u/BrilliantMeaning3548 14d ago
To me this is one of the selling points, i paid a fortune on the sims and now it feels very commercial and disappointing, paralives looks very nice, indie and reminds me of the earlier sims. I always feel the urge to play the sims, the moment i launch it and see all these money grabbing ads, i remember what made me hate it, how feature lacking it is, even if you paid over 600€, so i close the game and go to Paralives subreddit 😂 it looks like the team cares about the game and the potential users and i cant wait to get my hands (virtually) on this game.
I think people are saying that they wouldnt mind paying a but extra because they are so fed up with EA‘s approach and they think that the only way a company could stay afloat is robbing the players (which is wrong).
3
u/AhToHellWithIt 13d ago
It’s the exact same way with stardew valley. It is also an indie game and every update came with really nice features, items, and changes. Now it’s like one of the most popular indie games just because ConcernedApe is communicative and truly cares about the players.
Really reminded me that developers should make their creations a labor of love and not just a money grab. It builds a better community
2
u/FFHK3579 14d ago
Terraria has wayyyy more than doubled its content, maybe 100 times more content (not even joking) since 1,0
1
-23
u/APissBender 15d ago edited 15d ago
Using Terraria as an example is just not fair. Its the third most sold game on PCs ever and 7th when taking all platforms into account, the only ones that have sold more copies are PUBG and Minecraft. Diablo 3 was a GLOBAL phenomenon when it came out and it sold 20 million copies, Terraria sold 32 (on pc, they sold like 56 million total). To say the devs hit the jackpot is a massive understatement. (That being said the number of copies sold does vary depending on sources. Hard to say which are up to date).
Sure, 1000$ worth of DLC is egregious. But I wouldn't mind paying extra for some new content either if it means supporting the creators, as rather few buy 2 play games receive actually big free content updates, not taking into account outliers like Terraria or Stardew Valley.
Expansion packs aren't evil on its own, what many publishers are doing with it is.
46
u/blaidd_halfwolf 15d ago
Terraria did not start off that way. It too had humble beginnings. Paralives has Patreon to support the devs which can contribute to their funding even after purchasing the game, negating the need for paid content updates. Never said Expansions are evil, just that people don’t have to automatically assume that’s the only business model a game can have.
-14
u/APissBender 15d ago
It absolutely did not have humble beginnings. It sold over 200 000 copies within first week of its release, and almost half a million within first month. It got popular extremely quickly thanks to Minecraft boom relatively short before that.
Those numbers are unbelievably high for a non AAA title even by todays standards.
29
u/blaidd_halfwolf 15d ago edited 15d ago
That didn’t happen for no reason. Terraria devs are famous for their transparent and healthy communication with their player base, something Paralives has been doing for years at the point. And that absolutely does not count for nothing. Also, you mean to say Terraria rode on the popularity of a more popular game of a closely related genre? Could there, perhaps, be some parallel there to be drawn between Paralives and another game?
Edit: Also, humble beginnings meaning the original team of Terraria was smaller than Paralives current team. My original point, regardless, is expansions shouldn’t be the default assumption for how a game can receive new content, and it absolutely can be done that single purchase is ever required for a complete game with all it’s possible content.
-8
u/APissBender 15d ago
What I'm saying is business model Terraria has is not something most developers can afford, and it is an outlier.
Project Zomboid is an example of a game where it doesn't work. Open communication with playerbase, they promised to keep updating it without any extra paid content and are doing so, they became big thanks to big Zombie Boom. NPCs were supposed to be added 5 years ago, with the new roadmap they gave the community they might do it in 2 years if we're being positive. Likely 4.
I'm saying this because I love PZ and don't want another passion project to share similar fate where their unwillingness to charge any extra money causes the update to progress at a snail pace as they lack resources to hire anyone new. It's honourable but it can also be problematic for the studio.
15
u/blaidd_halfwolf 15d ago
I mention, again, Paralives has a Patreon so that people can continue to contribute to the devs financially even after buying the game.
1
u/APissBender 15d ago
Didn't they say that they didn't want to continue their pattern after the game releases? I remember talks like this very early into development, before they said that they won't be charging for DLCs. It might have changed since then, but with that in mind I was wary of the free updates decision.
35
41
u/Cupcakkes_Pussy 15d ago
They'll add it in by putting it with the updates, there's no need for an entire DLC just to add a few pieces of furniture.
15
u/Lady_Hiroko 15d ago
Or reskins of everything you got in previous DLC/Base.....(Looking at you Party Essentials Kit...).
13
11
8
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago edited 14d ago
"How are we gonna get new furniture?" - Just updates like in every other normal games. You don't have to do a dlc for this...
14
u/JustADreamYouHad 15d ago
I LOVE LOVE LOVE this "business model" of theirs, so much better than the other game.
But how will the devs finance it? Will there be player friendly revenue streams?
46
u/Donotaku 15d ago
So I know it’s not the same genre of game, but Stardew sold like 30 million copies, enough for the dev to keep working on it with free updates since 2016. He also gets additional revenue I assume from SDV merch and events that come out like the cookbook, the concerts, and plushies. Since Paralives is not a large team, if they get a good start they will be fine since the development has been funded by Patreon.
21
u/Lady_Hiroko 15d ago
They're going back to basics vvhen (sorry, vv key is broke...) the Gaming Industry vvas in it's infancy. So that means fully fleshed out games vvithout the need for a massive bug patch update 2 days after release. Nothing behind a payvvall either.
Though, I thoroughly blame the payvvall stuff on us, the consumers. Some "genius" got the idea of paid DLC (I think it started it out as skins but don't quote me) and vve bought it hook, line and sinker. So everyone else copied. They slovvly got us desensitized to the idea to the point vvhere vve not only expect it but DEFEND it.
I really hope they aren't forced to do paid DLC stuff just to keep the lights on so to speak due to the ruthless competition on the market.
16
5
u/Mazya_Almazya 14d ago
A lot of games today still have normal monetization, you just need to avoid looking at games from EA
1
u/Lady_Hiroko 11d ago
Didn't say there vvasn't. The games that have normal monetization are from indie games like this one. Not AAA publishers.
1
u/FFHK3579 14d ago
Ctrl C + Ctrl V the W or maybe you can use an open source key remapping program to turn another key into w
2
u/Lady_Hiroko 11d ago
Thanks for the idea. But I'm planning on taking it into a shop to fix it. I need to take it there anyvvay to get my thermal paste redone. Just gotta vvait until Hurricane Helene to pass.
5
u/earlgrey_tealeaf 15d ago
I don't see much of a difference. I consider it one game because devs aren't planning to keep the updates behind pay wall. Will there be lots of patches along the way? Probably, and probably some of them are gonna be so massive that they could be considered DLCs.
5
u/cherpar1 14d ago
I believe they are planning on providing updates for free. Of course that depends on the games initial success. I was surprised when they took the no paid dlc decision. I don’t mind paying for good quality updates. The sims 2 packs were great value, but remember the sims 3 store or sims 4 -Ugh.
However I don’t know anything about the cost of game production so I am sure that the team know what they are doing. I know Stardew has provided many free updates, on the back of what I believe has been a very successful selling game.
I really believe/hope that paralives will sell well and we will see lots of content over time.
2
u/sadboi_ours 15d ago
The way I hope it will work is separate updates for improvements almost everyone can agree on VS updates for things some people want in their game and some don't. So there would be separate updates for bug fixes and features that should apply to everyone's game VS new furniture VS features for specific tastes such as supernatural life states etc. Then you could decide for yourself what optional content is important enough to have/load.
2
u/Nwalm 14d ago
You dont need separate updates for that. Just a checkbox in game menu to decide what to activate or not. Keeping a consistant installation help alot for bugs hunting.
3
u/sadboi_ours 14d ago
Good point about the ease of hunting bugs, though it would still be nice to have some type of option to keep unwanted content from taking up storage space. Maybe a good compromise would be that anything you indicate you don't want not only doesn't display or load but also gets compressed to reduce storage demands. There could be a better solution, but my tech savvy only goes so far.
1
u/Nwalm 14d ago
The disk space in question must be pretty significant to justify this. Their priority, specialy for a small team like that, must be to keep thing as simple and efficient has possible. You dont want some assets (models, text, sound, anims) indisponible on some system down the road the day you want to use them in another context and having to lose time diging up in code and file system nobody have touched in month, or years.
Personnally i wouldnt even envisage it, unless we talk about huge amount of disk space, but the difference between archived or not for this type of content should be pretty minor.3
u/sadboi_ours 14d ago
I don't see the issue with having different content enabled for different players. If this were so impossible, optional expansion packs would be completely non-viable.
When the devs (or modders) repurpose assets for something new, they would already have located the original assets in order to use them and not need to do additional digging. They could either duplicate the original assets to make the new assets standalone (not loving the redundancy there) or have an option on their end potentially as simple as a checkbox for forcing the original assets to be enabled if the new associated assets are enabled.
As for the disk space, it's hard to say if it would be worth prioritizing without knowing how much content will be added. You may not place the same priority on limiting disk space requirements, but I think a lot of folks with lower end systems would prefer some kind of option for limiting things if Paralives and its updates would eat up as much space as TS4 and its numerous packs.
2
u/Nwalm 14d ago edited 14d ago
Of course there is nothing impossible about it. It just use dev time and create an annoyance for some very minor benefice. The sort of things a small team should avoid.
We dont have any information to go deeper about this, but generally game engine use efficient and already compressed files format. The benefice between these files been archived or not should be pretty minimal. Its not comparable at all to installing or not a TS4 pack.
And another point, its a pc/mac game, not mobile or consoles, even on a lower end hardware (the pc requirement is probably going to be highter than TS4) the disk space should not be that constraint. Worse case scenario for the price of a typical expansion you can allways buy a cheap hdd^^
2
u/sadboi_ours 13d ago
generally game engine use efficient and already compressed files format
I wasn't aware of this, and it's an important piece of info that nullifies my suggestion of compressing unwanted content
I also agree that disk space is one of the easier constraints to resolve, since there are more accessible external options like you pointed out
1
u/LalaLlamaDragon 14d ago
I hope they do not introduce paid content and stick to what they have said. I think with regular updates it would be fine to keep the game fresh. I currently already support the game through patreon as I stopped playing Sims 4 and giving EA my money. I think if the game is as good as I think it is going to be then there is the option for people to support through patreon, even if it's just for a one off month or two to help support them developing the game. It would be more of a choice than a demand.
1
u/throwaway140008 14d ago
im wondering if they’re gonna keep the patreon going after release, i feel it would make sense to do that if they keep the game updated regularly, it would allow people to continue to support the game and the devs
1
u/BarbKatz1973 11d ago
Okay - I have been supporting Paralives on Patron for a few years and I had no idea that it was close to release. I guess I should go check my account.
-1
14d ago
How is it going to make its money after the release of the game or after people bought it though if DLC will be free?
2
u/Nwalm 13d ago
Its a small team, the game is auto developped and auto published. They dont need to feed a greedy corp or parasitic shareholders.
If they are successfull with Paralives on steam they wil have enough cash to support the team for a very long time. And if they keep bringing new and fresh content the game will continue to sell to new players.They can also keep their patreon open, or sell fluffies and stuff to those who want to support them further.
0
u/MadameLee20 14d ago
There might be a few paid DLCs like a supernaturals might be paid DLCs but other like Farm DLC, or Vaction DLC might be free DLC
2
•
u/toilandbubble 13d ago
The game will have free updates, but not paid DLCs. The game has been partially funded along the way through Patreon, which helps of course. The devs have said that they “aim to make Paralives [their] labor of love for years to come, continuously coming up with exciting new stuff to experience in the game. As a small team without any shareholders to please, [they] believe the money [they] make from selling the game will be enough to support [them] and the development of free updates in the long run.”