Honestly, it would be way to expensive and would be something that we as consumers would end up paying monthly for. Look at TSO (the Sims Online), even a company as large as EA couldn't make that profitable in the long run. Really VV doesn't lend itself to interacting like The Sims did anyhow, so even if it wasn't so expensive to maintain a multi-player game, changing VV to work as one would totally change VV and the end result wouldn't be what we want (and are hopelessly addicted to) anyways.

If you really want to talk to other players while you play VV - download Skype or Yahoo with Voice and get a mic. It's free.

Something that would be along the lines of shared gaming would be maybe being able to package up individual villagers and share them with friends. There wouldn't be any real player interaction, but it could still be cool.

I think she means multiplayer on one screen, with multiple controllers. Which would drive me bonkers.

There are some ways of making a serverless network; they usually use high-bandwidth users as servers, or link users directly, if inefficiently, to each other through independently maintained websites that can coordinate groups of players.

Needless to say, such things may be suited to file sharing, but are unsuitable for games, and often annoying to gamers. (The former method is used by applications such as Kazaa and Limewire, the latter by the protocol Bittorrent.)

You will miss the fun, like you cannot do all the puzzles. I don't like this idea

I think what Lailai means, is that each player would have less to do in the raising of each village. Which I guess is also a consideration.

Are you angling for the lofty title of Official Forum Paraphraser?

Hey, if I can't understand, I don't want to post "I don't understand" and wait. I'll do my best with what I have, and add a disclaimer.

how about

"Virtual Villagers A villagers life"
on nintendo ds you can become a villager and build, rersearch,and forage and you have puzzles like PC virtual villagers except you play a game to get percentage done on a building site, gain tech points, and gain food

research could have a maze game

building- has a game like below
B=broken wood W= good wood

BBBWB
BBBBB
BBBBB
play five rounds to get 1 percent of the hut done

farming like above except with food and only 2 rounds

you can customize the village the way you want it

it can have wi-fi so you can help other people or just check out there village

like the idea?

You know what might work as a kind of multiplayer? I think I saw this on at least one other site. Playing clubs. Instead of a global leaderboard, you (the player) can create one for just the people you want to play "against." It still requires a server, but isn't as draining on resources, since people only connect to update their stats. Might be a way to both fix and bring back the leaderboards.

I'd really love multiplayer, but, as Tuna Puzzler mentioned, LDW doesn't have the money or resources to fully run it for a while. What I am thinking though, is that if you could only connect to the server through a game, etc, VV4, the profits that come out of the game could be used to help fund the server. Giving it very sercure protection against "game pirates" could stop people accessing the server if they own a pirated copy. That way, the only people who are playing are people who have payed for their copy. Taking it further, LDW could charge a seperate cost for the multiplayer game itself, meaning that it would be easier to afford, but with a few less players. An update could be installed every once in a while to make sure that there are no patches, serials or "key generators" that will continue to work.

nonononnono i think it would be to much like there would be servers and a lot of people will be on one and it will make ur computer lagg and be all slow and wat not