I have heard rumors about a multiplayer mode, but I don’t know if they have any weight to them. But I think multiplayer would send Inzoi to the top. I used to play GTA RP via Five M a lot and Inzoi kind of scratches an itch that was missing from GTA RP. I am not sure if this game is capable of that type of gameplay but I definitely think it should be considered in the future. 
10 Likes
Apparently there was a “The Sims Online” once. Also The Sims 4 has a multiplayer mod. If they can allow multiplayer, I’d play this every day!
1 Like
Sims Online mostly failed, the majority of the playerbase was disinterested. It had a playerbase, but it was nowhere near the level of people interested in a solo player lifesim. The Sims “father” series (SimCity) died when it implimented multiplayer in 2013, multiplayer wasn’t the only thing that killed SimCity 2013, but it was a contributing factor to player disinterest. The Sims 4 Multiplayer mod was popular enough for a mod, but mostly used as a lark and not as popular as most mods, let alone very popular in the community.
And Vivaland, the life sim that was completely building itself around Multiplayer, didn’t gain enough traction to survive. It even pulled its demo from steam it did so bad. I also don’t think Bricklife (the Lego meets Fortnight take on lifesims) took off much as hoped. I hardly hear anyone talk about it, but also not deep into Fortnight.
8 Likes
Would love a multiplayer feature. Could use LAN connection like some strategy games do. Might require that any mods or DLC that are not shared by both are disabled or something during the multiplayer game, but I don’t mind that.
2 Likes
To me multiplayer would only work well if it was with friends only , Other games in this genre playing with others it soon became a case of constant having to block griefers . The thing is if you play it with others do you only play that save when you know they will all be online or you come back to find the friend you started a family with has played since , restyled your home totally or their character has aged up and died
4 Likes
Online Multiplayer is not feasable and a completely different scope.
Co-op maybe…? They’ll have to a permanent assigned Lot in the city. Only they can edit it. But we should be free visit it so see what changes they’re making to their home. If not, they can lock their home when their offline to prevent things bieng stolen or messed with.
The only Multiplayer feature i want to see is something akin to Dark Souls or Death Stranding, people can leave messages or signs in the world. In the phone, you could add a social media element to it where people can post their selfies and other players can react and comment and “follow” a Zoi.
Another possibility is “Public” spaces (Parks, Mall, etc.) where mutiple people can gather and meet. But that is already pushing it. I want the Inzoi devs to focus. Multiplayer is very low priority for me.
4 Likes
multiplayer will kill the game. Better to make a co-op up to 7 people
3 Likes
Vivaland still claims they are continuing to work on the game. Also, the Sims 4 Multiplayer Mod lacks popularity because both people have to have the exact same mods and all the same game packs and version, and with most Sims players have thousands of mods, most don’t bother, and you can’t exactly buy all your friends new expansions or expect them to get them for you, or yourself and theirself, just to play together… in addition, many found the set-up confusing, and are having to tell their computer to allow and give permission to something that SOUNDS fishy the way it is asked, and I have read many people who chose not to do it for that reason, but it’s just setting up the LAN connection and allowing the other player to access your computer network and IP address and all, but that scared some people. They don’t even see that stuff in other LAN-based multiplayer games, so don’t know that is normal.
Sims Online failed because of the very high mix of children, adults, and adults who just wanted to use the game as a p04n game, and this mix was toxic, and wound up attracting many prvrts who were trying to get info to abduct kids and otherwise being irresponsible with players they knew were children. This caused many players to be scared of the game and they were bothered, whether child or adult, by the incessant s3+^vl players who would bug other people really badly. This caused the Sims franchise to become scared of multiplayer and the fanbase to likewise be scared of multiplayer. I played the game and was involved in threads and forums at that time, I knew what was happening.
I personally haven’t encountered anyone (yet) who DIDN’T say they wished the Sims could be multiplayer. Many of those same people turned down the multiplayer mod for Sims 4 for the reasons I described above.
I’m sure there are many who like it singleplayer though. Just saying I am not sure about what you have said, as my experiences are very different as to why multiplayer hasnt been popular and whether people would play it that way if it wasn’t a hassle and was invite-only (only with friends, not mmo) and automatically disabled any mods or DLC that are not shared by all players.
That is the same thing as multiplayer and what many are meaning by “multiplayer”. A co-op is a form of multiplayer.
But yeah I think it would be terrible to make it an MMO, I doubt anyone is wanting that… But either a co-op or LAN type of things to play with your friends, that’s what I have heard discussed, and, well, what I’m hoping they might add.
1 Like
That is what traditionally “multiplayer” means, if it is more than just a few friends, that is called “massively multiplayer” (the “mm” in “mmo”). I doubt anyone is wanting it to be an MMO. All anyone is talking about is a LAN connection, the type of multiplayer that was the most common for games in the early 2000’s and 90’s, and like how Minecraft works. And yes, those types of multiplayer games you cannot even load the save file if not all the players are present. This issue you are describing never happened in the days when multiplayer functionality was common in most games.
“multiplayer” means “more than one player”. What you seem to be against is called “massively multplayer”, it is the “mm” in “mmo”. Unless you are playing a console game that is built for multiple players in the same game on the same console on the same screen, then ALL multiplayer is online. But we add “online” to mmo because back in the 90’s, online-formed multiplayer was less common and multiplayer with zero internet on consoles was normal. Using internet to play multiplayer was unusual but still done, and most games back then had a multiplayer functionality. Yes, it is and was called “multiplayer”, but were co-ops and using LAN and things like that to connect and allow the multiplayer functionality. I sincerely doubt anyone who is asking for multiplayer functions in the game are meaning to make it an mmo. I am sure they are all talking about co-ops and things of that nature.
Co-op IS multiplayer. multi = “multiple” player. It has never meant mmo (massively multiplayer). So if you would like a co-op feature, then you would like a multiplayer feature. I would suggest editing your post to change “The only Multiplayer feature i want to see” to “The only Massively Multiplayer feature i want to see”.
As for your suggestions, I wouldn’t mind the social media type thing like that in it, but I feel like if people left messages or signs, it would become too much very quickly.
The public spaces idea is interesting, I hadn’t thought of that, I think I feel neutral about it. I would rather see regular multiplayer functionality included, than anything massively multiplayer.
Do you mean that co-op and LAN multiplayer is also very low priority for you, or are you reiterating that you don’t want to see it be massively multiplayer? I am asking for clarity, I have never seen anyone use the term “multiplayer” to mean “massively multiplayer” until reading this thread. I’m sure there are many others like me, and I am pretty sure no one is asking for it to be massively multiplayer, I think all anyone is wanting is co-op style multiplayer. I hope what I’m saying doesn’t come across as knit-picking, I am just trying to explain to get some clarity in these forums as to what people are even requesting lol
1 Like
I have seen mostly a lack of desire for multi-player. Everywhere I go, including in the official sims forums. Vivalands whole thing was consensual shared world and even in their comments people would ask for a single player version of what they were doing and people didn’t feel confident a game designed around multiplayer could sastisfy life-simmers in the same way. Especially when it came to builds
Also a multiplayer Sims competitor is what Second Life was originally shooting for and we see where that is now. Not a failure, but niche to its community and having experienced some of the same issues as Sims Online
There’s always one person who says “multiplayer” in generic sims circles and multiple people who say “please no” with a few here and there saying they want multiplayer.
I do think there has always been a lack of clarity on what a Sims or Sims-like multiplayer would look like.
-Co-op where an invited player could jump in a game already in process and take over spare Sims/Zoi in the person’s game.
-An MMO and if so, are there locked “rules” in some shared space that’s no one’s specific save.
-An “invite only” third space where you pick a single avatar and that avatar gets to visit that “invite only” third space while the rest of your Zoi family stays behind?
Even Vivaland dealt with it. These things work far better with an “Avatar” frozen in time, like Animal Crossing’s island visits, I am either visiting that person’s game or there avatar is visiting mine. In that game your Avator doesn’t age, doesn’t date, doesn’t produce children, doesn’t die. How does one handle dating/childbirth when one person wants aging off and plays their game like there Avatar living there dream life and another is a Legacy player who doesn’t have a sim/zoi self but plays them as a character outside themselves, enjoys playing families through generations and embraces aging and death. It’s the same as the DLC problem the multiplayer sims 4 mod faced- just at a far more foundation level. What are the rules or who’s rules do you play by? Even if it’s co-op? Part of Sims and InZoi is kind of being a universe god, including if Zoi/Sims age or not, if you like playing one character or several, and editing/changing the city at will without having to ask anyone.
And even among people who say they “want” multi-player you get multiple answers on what they even mean by that. Some people do want some sort of system where they could play with other people in a shared space and for that to be open to anyone, others just want to play with their friends online with a dropin/drop out type of system, and others just want their family member in their home to be able to jump in and play other characters in the same save.
2 Likes
Okay… I mean no disrespect at all and I am not meaning to say you are wrong or lying, but my experience has been the total opposite; I’ve been reading sims forums on a regular basis for around twenty years. And while I have seen a few people here and there say they don’t want multiplayer, they get many people commenting back to them why the game needs it. And while I have seen a few people talking about wanting it massively and online, most who ever defined what they wanted said they wanted to just play with friends and family.
I personally think it’s wrong to say that all of the people who want to play with their friends and family should not have the option to because some people don’t want that. The people who don’t want it don’t have to choose “multiplayer” when starting the game. They can continue gaming single-player. But are for weird reasons denying the people who want it from having that option available. This seems weird and kinda mean imo.
You seem to be imagining long-term playing as being multiplayer. Maybe that is what people are wanting…I’m not sure, I haven’t seen people specify that well enough often enough to say. For myself, all those issues you brought up mean nothing and wouldn’t have to be decided. For people to play a single multiplayer game for a few hours with friends or family, and then never play that again or not for another month, and even if they did play all the time, family and friends don’t argue about that stuff, they cooperate with each other and no one cares, they wouldnt be playing multiplayer for a legacy theme, they would compromise to enjoy some time with their child or their sibling or their friend or their aunt or whatever. Seeing how people play life-sims can really help you get to know each other, so great for dating too and spouces. In these situations, no one is going to be going for the way they play when they play by themselves. If you go to a park or a nightclub, you aren’t expecting to be doing what you do at home in your freetime. That doesn’t mean you can’t do that when you’re home most of the time, but just because you are home most of the time doesn’t mean you won’t enjoy getting out sometimes. Likewise, people won’t be doing what they usually do when they occasionally game with their loved ones.
Anyway I’m honestly not meaning to argue but realize this probably sounds like I am. I’m just trying to explain better and I honestly respect your opinion, but am confused since I’ve experienced the opposite of you on sims forums. I can’t speak for everyone who wants multiplayer, but I hope I explained okay some of my own reasons why those issues you mentioned wouldn’t matter or even need to be decided.
I do want to say, with no rancor or anything, that I personally can’t stand the comparison of these games to being like a god, I know it’s personal but gods don’t decide that type of stuff, and if life simulations are like being a god, then you must think that every novelist and screenwriter etc feels like a god. They are story-telling games, mainly, thought can be made to be something else too. The tools like being able to stop their aging or create storms is just to help tell the story. Authors also sometimes decide a storm happens or certain people are immortal…in addition, maybe the game’s longest lifespan pacing is too short to be able to capture all the parts and elements of the story that you want to include before they age up, or something. I am an author, and can honestly say making stories in my head feels only a little different from playing the sims or inzoi. in my head it’s less limited. i dont feel like a god though. so this is why it annoys me when people act like making stories in a game that makes stories (because after all, every life born irl is a story), is about feeling like a god… does anyone feel like that when playing these games? maybe, i just never thought it could be very many, but maybe I’m wrong. I recommend though to anyone who feels that way, that they try out story-telling, it may help them to understand reality and likely be fun. Many say story-telling (in any form) helps them understand reality and the world better by experiencing and thinking about things from different perspectives, etc.
Anyway at this point I’m saying too much that I know is just me, and I’m sorry and don’’t mean any offense, I hope you and anyone reading understand that. I’d like to know if my perceptions are viewed differently or less universal among life-sim player than im thinking. Your original post shows me there must be more people against multiplayer than I thought, but it seems like we have been viewing each side of a half by chance. Haha.
I know not every person’s desire for multiplayer functionality can be fulfilled. I just hope SOME type is released, as I’ve been dreaming about playing with my family for a long time. Sometimes we try to play on one computer and just tell each other whose character is whose, but they usually have desolved into maniacal (and a little diabolical) humorous gameplay haha, because that’s easier to do when we can’t both use controls at the same time.
I think a multiplayer option would be fun but would be kind of niche. Unless it blew up the same way GTA RP did on streaming websites it would probably die off the same was the Sims Online did,
1 Like
But players could still play single player, and the ones who wanted multiplayer could still play multiplayer. I think many families would enjoy that. Imagine if you have a kid who sees you play and really wants to play but you don’t want them to play without supervision as these games aren’t for children. A multiplayer option would allow parents to help their child feel included and able to play the game with them sometimes, without having to either always argue with them about not allowing them to play or give in and let them play by themselves. Spouces also would likely enjoy playing together. When your aunt plays the sims and you do too and youre visiting each other or she’s staying for the weekend and you both wish you could play together, people would be able to.
1 Like
Yes that is a good point. I think if they do do multiplayer and either focus on the fair family friendly side or an animal crossing style of multiplayer where you and your friends are together just to do fun activities together it would thrive.
2 Likes
I am 100% not upset. Reasonable Debates are good and help us see each other’s point of view. I’ve never dated someone who played the same games as me anyway. Unless it’s something like Mario Kart or Smash. Something inherently “party game” like, I am not bothered about playing… especially life sims, with anyone. The most I’ll play with a partner is us on our separate machines right next to each other. 
As a writer actually, I do think I am kind of a god to those characters. I can make them millionaires with a cushy life or make them poor and suffer. Now usually stories are more layered than that and not that simple. But being a writer is 100% a god mode as much as and the same as overseeing characters in a lifesim, like the Sims. I actually use Sims and InZoi as writing tools. I can create a character, put them in some situations, and add layers to it, maybe have the game throw some stuff at me I wouldn’t have thought of myself. It’s like the game’s AI is co-writing with me and helping me flesh out an idea. And I’ve talked to other writers who use the Sims especially in same/similiar ways and have since Sims 2 (because that’s when you got the generational system, so great for playing characters through time).
I was 20 years old when the first Sims game came out and maybe it’s online circle bias, but yes, I have had the exact opposite experience to you when it comes to multiplayer, as in mostly seeing people against it. And the very much single player crowd is just thinking “I don’t want anyone having access or control over my builds/Sims/etc.”
I think most I-prefer-single player folks only fear:
-
Multiplayer being a distraction from core game development
-
Being forced into a multiplayer situation where other people can mess up there game/plans/builds.
If I want to play a social game, I just see that as not a life-sim (to me, other perspectives welcome). Because now its about the social game element.
Another reason “pro single player” people don’t want other players around because there little worlds are a space where they can do whatever they want and not be judged. As a queer person who came out in the late 90s, Sims was the first game where I could play queer characters and have them be happily married with children without judgement. This was after getting lambasted in a writing class simply because my superhero existed in the story as Queer and shared a chaste kiss with her love interest.
I also don’t think it’s a harmless add-on, it changes the focus of resources. There are certain “versions” of a multiplayer game that don’t completely overhaul the single player experience, but there is a reason in early game development to know if you are designing for multiplayer or not and in what way. It changes game balance as far as features depending on what the person means by multiplayer and how the game ends up handling it. For example if we are talking couch co-op (in the same room) usually for a single player the screen is filled with and primarily focuses on the navigation and actions of a single character and defaults all other characters to some sort of AI self-navigation. If it’s essentially your game as you would normally play it, but with the option of a person simply joining “your universe” how does the UI adapt to that? If it’s an online or some sort of separate machines situation, maybe that’s fine, separate machines and all - minimal change needed, UI for your active character is active for you and same for them. But it still comes back to are they joining as a character in your game or are you joining as a character in there game?
I just think there are a lot more complicated questions at the core coding level then activating another character for a buddy to make it “work” and not be destructive to the single player experience. I think the peaceful co-existence of both modes haven’t existed in the past for a reason, but if InZoi finds a way to do it and the Single Player experience doesn’t suffer for it, they could possibly co-exist. But its a question of how many resources that could be focused on the core gameplay would be diverted to this “elective mode”. When the game is multi-player anyway from the earliest stages of development and always intended to be, its what everyone is coming to the game looking for anyway so its obviously not a distraction to work on multi-player.
Also would multiplayer saves have to be completely separate saves from Single Player ones? (This does exist in some games that implement multiplayer later, thinking of Coral Island at the moment, like a single player save is a different type of save then a multiplayer one and likely has to be). But Coral Island has a relatively complete single player experience, so adding the multiplayer as an elective mode at this point isn’t distracting from that core development for single player.
For me it does always come down to “Multiplayer” can mean a lot of things and personally, I just don’t want it at the destruction of the core single player experience and single player development, which can happen. That’s usually the worry of folks on the single player side of the line. Designing for any sort of co-play and designing for Single Player is inherently different in so many ways and can conflict with feature design for a single player experience.
4 Likes
To be fair, I see both sides of this argument as having merit. If TSO had that crap going on way back then (I never got the chance to play, not that I’d heard good things) I would say that’s a very good reason that multiplayer should, at the very least, be off by default, and at most never implement true MMO-style gameplay. I’d be fine playing it with my Steam friends, though!
I am against multiplayer too for this reason as well, games like this should strictly stay single player
2 Likes
I’m against anything that contradicts the developers’ roadmap during early access, because when I purchased the game, I was aligning with their stated plans – and this feature was never announced. What I want first is everything that was officially promised within the life simulation genre: all the unique and challenging aspects that define it + a living open-world action layer in the main cities, with points of interest and situational dynamics (ok, lifesim + GTA/WD controls and 12+ features). That kind of depth requires years of carefully calibrated, meticulous work, and I don’t want to interfere with that process 
3 Likes