Pixel Pals 2 Brings an Interactive Friend to Your Home Screen Widgets

[MacRumors]

Apple in iOS 17 added interactive Home Screen widgets for the first time, and developer Christian Selig is using the new functionality to make his Pixel Pals app better than ever.

With Pixel Pals 2.0, you can adopt a digital pet that lives on your Home Screen, and you can interact with it in all new ways without the need to open up the app.

You can feed and play with your Pixel Pals, and add your friends so their Pixel Pals can visit your Home Screen. Two Pixel Pals together can battle one another, and in StandBy mode, your Pixel Pal can hang out next to you or you can use a new sheep counting feature.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704937324168004016

You can also plant seeds on a farm to grow food for your pet, and there are new animals and morphs to unlock. As your friendship with your Pixel Pal grows, you will unlock more morphs. Selig has also added in full games that can be played on the Home Screen in a widget, including PixelQuest, 2048, and Eternal Scroll.

Christian Selig is the developer behind the now-defunct Apollo app for Reddit, which was removed for sale earlier this year. He is now focusing his attention on Pixel Pals.

Pixel Pals is free to download, but unlocking the app's full feature set requires Pixel Pals Premium, priced at $9.99 per year or $1.49 per month.

Article Link: Pixel Pals 2 Brings an Interactive Friend to Your Home Screen Widgets

 

[tomnavratil]

Great news, Christian is a wonderful developer and one of the developers worth supporting! And yes, I definitely miss Apollo.

 

[DinkThifferent]

Why does everything have to be a subscription? I mean, it looks like a fun app but having to subscribe to it rather than to do a one time purchase (for the full thing) is a major downside.

 

[LogicalApex]

People really liked giga pets so it makes sense there is a sizable niche here.

Giga Pet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not sure why it is a subscription, but it also isn’t my type of app so I won’t complain too much about its monetization strategy.

I am confused on what’s going on with Reddit though. Not sure why Apollo didn’t work, but narwhal still does. I reinstalled it since the stock Reddit app is pretty horrid. Was surprised that it worked when I only paid for it once a decade ago.

 

[mdnz]

Why does everything have to be a subscription? I mean, it looks like a fun app but having to subscribe to it rather than to do a one time purchase (for the full thing) is a major downside.

Proud 0 subscription app user here and will continue to do so forever

 

[zach-coleman]

If this app came out like 5 years ago it probably would have been my favorite thing ever. Now for whatever reason I always put off trying it out. Not a big fan of the mixed pixel art resolutions, but that’s not what’s causing my hesitation…

Edit; Gardening might change my mind. I have fiddled with a virtual pet game that involves gardening several times before in a game engine, but could never figure out a gameplay loop. I’d rather have someone else make it for me than make it myself.

 

[JosephAW]

Where are the dynamic island widgets?

 

[Rockondevil]

Why does everything have to be a subscription? I mean, it looks like a fun app but having to subscribe to it rather than to do a one time purchase (for the full thing) is a major downside.

Completely agree.
For a one time purchase I probably would’ve considered it for the right price.
Subscription though, you’ve lost me immediately.

The App Store is just plagued with apps that should be one time purchases but now are subscription.
Apps for kids like games or learning are some of the worst I’ve seen.

 

[addamas]

Where are the dynamic island widgets?

This! Tamagotchi walking on your dynamic island asking to be pet or feed 🤣 This would be funny and annoying in the same time.

Still we have one to worry about 😂
and does not need stupid subscription…

 

[Saturnine]

There is a lifetime purchase option (not mentioned in the article) but it’s £49.99, so I assume it’s around $49.99 too.

In context, that’s a similar price as a AAA game.

Also a bit disappointing to see that an annual subscription is £14.99 in the UK but $9.99 in the US. That’s nearly twice the price. Or a little over 70% more when UK VAT is taken into account.

 

[erikkfi]

I haven't actively used Reddit since June 13th or so because of the loss of Apollo.

Dear Christian, please make a Kbin/Lemmy app. Sincerely, everyone.

 

[toobravetosave]

Crossover does pricing right.

If you dont want a subscription you get access to that year’s version forever with no updates. A subscription discounts the upgrades.

Subscriptions are unfortunately here to stay because apple wants it that way to make more money off us.

 

[redbeard331]

Let’s just appreciate how one guy got something like this out before anyone else I believe?

 

[alchemistmuffin]

Why does everything have to be a subscription? I mean, it looks like a fun app but having to subscribe to it rather than to do a one time purchase (for the full thing) is a major downside.

Completely agree.
For a one time purchase I probably would’ve considered it for the right price.
Subscription though, you’ve lost me immediately.

The App Store is just plagued with apps that should be one time purchases but now are subscription.
Apps for kids like games or learning are some of the worst I’ve seen.

Because running a server for the app costs lot of money. (Yes, this app requires internet connection meaning it’s connected to a server) Subscription keeps the servers running.

Also Apple really wants developers to move away from one time purchase and then upload a whole new app when they update to major version and charge upgrade. They want to keep App Store clutter free by asking developers to just update their existing app and charge subscription.

 

[Quackington]

Why does everything have to be a subscription? I mean, it looks like a fun app but having to subscribe to it rather than to do a one time purchase (for the full thing) is a major downside.

This. I wouldn’t mind paying more for a one-off cost to get it without a subscription.

 

[subjonas]

Apple: We’ve finally created displays with resolution so fine that the pixels aren’t discernible to the human eye. We call it Retina.

Pixel game developers: Hold my beer.

 

[zach-coleman]

Because running a server for the app costs lot of money. (Yes, this app requires internet connection meaning it’s connected to a server) Subscription keeps the servers running.

Also Apple really wants developers to move away from one time purchase and then upload a whole new app when they update to major version and charge upgrade. They want to keep App Store clutter free by asking developers to just update their existing app and charge subscription.

Making the game require a server was an unforced error. Nobody made him do it.

 

[macduke]

Proud 0 subscription app user here and will continue to do so forever

Curious, you use no streaming services? Don’t pay for iCloud or Dropbox or ChatGPT or anything? No Xbox Live or PSN?

I try to keep my subscriptions to a minimum and constantly review them to remove things that are a bit too superfluous, but zero subscriptions would be very difficult for me to achieve in 2023. Everything is an app!

 

[redheeler]

In the past an app like this would've been a $4.99 one time purchase. Now he's charging a $49.99 one time purchase.

C'mon Christian. What happened to Apollo sucks and I personally liked it a lot, I even bought the Apollo Pro when that was available as a one-time purchase and it was 100% worth it. But trying to recoup by charging 10x what an app is worth just isn't a good look.

 

[Spiffyis5150]

The app actually costs $14.99 a year or a $1.99 a month now. Appears that the price went up with this new release.

 

[svish]

Will be trying this out once my 15 Pro Max is delivered

 

[mdnz]

Curious, you use no streaming services? Don’t pay for iCloud or Dropbox or ChatGPT or anything? No Xbox Live or PSN?

I try to keep my subscriptions to a minimum and constantly review them to remove things that are a bit too superfluous, but zero subscriptions would be very difficult for me to achieve in 2023. Everything is an app!

All nope, don't pay for those. I really dislike the fact that the conditions can be changed on the company's side in the disadvantage of the user, or can remove content, etc. I'll actively search for more permanent one-time-pay solutions. I'm not a big mobile app user anyway, so perhaps that helps.

 

[ddhhddhh2]

Alright, I've genuinely pondered this question before. As both a developer and a user, I've delved deep into this matter. We're all aware that the subscription economy is well-established, and it's hard to imagine a life without any subscriptions. Honestly, if I launched a product that's competitive enough, I'd definitely aim to have users subscribe to it.
But hey, we all know how to shop smart, right? And the same goes for subscriptions. There are a couple of things to consider here:

1. Do we truly benefit enough from our subscriptions?
2. Have our habits merely been redirected?

These are topics worth discussing in depth. Someone mentioned earlier that they regularly review their subscriptions, and I think that's a good habit. Our needs may change over time, and constant review can help minimize unnecessary subscriptions. But sometimes, apps continuously expand, update, and offer more and better features. From a developer's standpoint, this is great because it enhances their competitive edge. And that edge is often recognized through the stickiness of the subscription model. So, is subscribing always a bad thing? It's a double-edged sword. Consumers will evaluate if they truly need to keep subscribing and if the developer's offerings are worth it.

Another aspect to consider is how our habits change. We might not have needed a subscription initially, but as our habits evolve, we find that maybe paying a little makes life easier, or perhaps we've even cultivated new habits. Take iCloud or the classic example, Adobe. For Adobe to secure a subscription from me, they have to put in the work. Their cloud needs to be stable and fast, apps should interact smoothly through the cloud, and they need to frequently roll out compelling features. In some ways, app updates can feel like another push towards subscription. But as the saying goes, you've got to be good. And more importantly, more and more people are getting "used to" Adobe's cloud operations, and that's when the stickiness forms.

That's right, even in 2023, there are alternatives to Adobe Cloud for managing your files. Or you could back up the photos and videos from your phone using a USB. You always have options, but once a habit forms, in the end, you might just shrug and say, "Well, it's just that little extra on my monthly bill."

So, in my view, when it comes to the subscription model, it's best to regularly review and assess your needs. I'm willing to pay for quality, and to say all subscriptions are unnecessary? I've heard of many who pay yearly for gym memberships and always claim they don't have time to work out. (I'm actually talking about myself here 😂)

 

[Sorinut]

Curious, you use no streaming services? Don’t pay for iCloud or Dropbox or ChatGPT or anything? No Xbox Live or PSN?

I try to keep my subscriptions to a minimum and constantly review them to remove things that are a bit too superfluous, but zero subscriptions would be very difficult for me to achieve in 2023. Everything is an app!

I have zero subscriptions too. I do have Netflix, but just because it comes with my cell plan.

I don't do much of anything on my phone, though. No video streaming, no cloud storage. I don't play video games (at all), and chatgpt is free for the once or twice a month I use it. Last subscription I had (paid) was Strava, but I let it lapse after the price increase, and their free tier is works fine.

 

[BatAtPickingUsernames]

Isn't the game 2048 just a bad rip off of Threes?