Good argument! I'm gonna try to rebut:

Ummm, hmmmm, what's a good comeback that I can use? This is the hard part..what to say...what to SAY!!

Ok,

There are 2 kinds of players, PROS and NOOBS

NOOBS want multiplayer

PROS want to POWN in singleplayer!!

Its the Competitive (PROS) players that keep the game alive year after year.  This happens in Singleplayer not in skirmish mode...

THERE!! Take that! Also, consider yourself trumped because my argument was worded better than yours and came after yours did. Ha! Don't like it? Complain to my wife. She likes me better than you so I win on all fronts!

actually you're both wrong lol.

in the gaming world there are no such things as true "pros". 

Professionals (for some reason this forum kills FF's spell checker :x) get paid to do what they do.  last time i checked no one ever gets paid to play video games except beta testers.

so the correct way should go:

There are 2 kinds of players, ATTENTION WHORES and REAL RPG <or insert any other genre here> FANS.

  REAL RPG FANS want a story. 

  ATTENTION WHORES want to HAVE A PISSING CONTEST in multiplayer!!

Its the Competitive (90% of which are ATTENTION WHORES) players that keep the game alive for a while.

Its the story mode that keeps the game alive for YEARS because if it sticks out in peoples minds, then it will become legendary, like Star Craft.  It is still around and played after being around for 10 YEARS; because of battlenet?  hell no, battlenet is a joke.  because the story hooked so many people.  this game will never ever make it even half as long on multiplayer and player made "campieng-esque" maps alone.  it has almost nothing to offer to make it stick in peoples minds (and before i get the tell tale mp fanboi flaming that statement i said almost!).

in either case, we know that SD is capable of making a story mode due to their work on Starcraft: Retribution.  so I believe its just a matter of prodding the giant beast in the back of SD offices labled imaginitive creativity untill it wakes up and starts going on a rampage.

The problem with your argument is that the online multiplayer "pros" and many of the online multiplayer players who are merely above average would steamroll over the single player "pros" if they ever played against each other.

I'm not saying this to make anyone feel badly; I'm just telling it like it is.

Geowil makes an excellent point...I still play some very old games because of the nostalgia aspect and the fact that I love the story of the game.

This is true with some newer games...take DoW for example.  Sure I played a lot of games on-line and did that for awhile...but when I play the game now, it's not to get on-line and play; it's too pick up the campaign mode and just reminisce (SP?) about a good game that was fun to play.

And like CenturionJixra has so raptly put it, just because you are a MP on-line "pro" doesn't mean that you would be that good in a long SP map with some that don't necessarily play the on-line games.

A campaign mode would be great for this game at some point in time and I'm sure the guys over at IC have kicked this around for awhile and who knows, they may even have something in mind for it.

To be honest I was a little put off by the lack of campaign mode in Sins.  Then I decided to do each map in turn.  Instant campaign and longer than most single player ones to boot.  Then I got bored and just went on random rampages.  Excellent.  Then I figured that letting devs do a story tends to result in things being a little arse, it's better this way.  Really, it is.

I do wish people would stop calling things 'Zerg' it's spelt Tyranid people

I don't doubt what you're saying there Centurion. The point of my post was to point out the stupidity of posts like L9000's. His argument is the argument of a 10 year old. And I was sarcastically responding in like manner.

My own two cents are that I would love to play through a campaign because I enjoy playing single-player much more than multi for various reasons; mostly time factors. But I also enjoy playing Sins as it is in single-player mode without a campaign. It's just simply a great game.

But I don't think my 'preference' should be the new mandate by which everyone should abide. Which is what people like L9000 are basically saying when they make comments like that.

Jep.  You could also download and add other people's custom maps to your game to extend the campaign or you could perhaps think of them as campaign expansions.

Oh, and Carvel, I agree with folks that the game needs a single player campaign.  Most people do play it only in single player and there has been a huge outcry for it; so I'm all for a single player campaign.  I'd prefer to have a larger online multiplayer community, but I definitely understand the need.  Note that in my previous comment I should have added that just because the online players would beat the single players if they actually faced off doesn't make the single player people bad at the game, just inexperienced at the more aggressive online multiplayer style of the game and that with online experience many would become just as good as the online players.

The absense of a campaign mode is the only thing I was disappointed about with this game. The game play rocks, and this is one of my favorite games of all time. Definitely the best space RTS in my opinion. I was expecting a campaign of some sort but I wasn't expecting a huge production. I knew it was coming from a small developer. When I installed it and saw that awesome intro movie, my expectations went up and I thought I was going to take part in an epic sci-fi while dominating the galaxy.

I know now that the dev team had to sacrifice the entire campaign mode for the sake of even getting most of the core elements they wanted to by their deadline.

I am, and have been, totally fine with that. I enjoy a deep campaign like anyone else, but I only play cmpaigns once anyways. After I finish a campaign (for all races if there were 3) I usually just skirmish or do online anyways. For me SoaSE has rock solid game play, epic space battles, and all that so it more than makes up for something I'd only play once.

Pluse I have confidence they'll release a campaign at some point, have a huge re-release and the game and the community will have a large influx of people that hadn't even heard of it yet.

Maybe the Mistory Behind the Loss of contact with the Third Races Planets as they left them to Join the First two Races.

A story mode would be nice, but how to effectively incorperate it seamlessly with the fantastic Sins Gameplay mechanics is my question.  I wouldn't want one that feels tacked on just for the sake, and with such strong story elements in play between the 3 factions, it, as everyone here already knows, has amazing potential to make every race compelling and sympathetic. 

I've been a longtime player of RTS and 4X and I've never cared much at all about Multiplayer. I have almost never done it. And single player random maps aren't that interesting.I've enjoyed Sins of a Solar Empire a greatly but it ultimatley has only limited milage because with no story, I don't get a clear view of the universe of why I'm doing the things I am.To say tha we should make up our own in the game's story is a little silly because If I wanted to make up a story I could do that without using a game at all.I was greatly disappointed that the storyline can't contiunue especially since the backstory seemed so interesting. I always play games to delve into their stories.

And most of all, to say to people that want a storyline campaign that Real Time Strategy Games are not for you is ridiculous and insulting.

I still would like a good story to go with the game.  But this is one of those games that is top notch and does not even have a campain.

I think the best story for an rts was homeworlds.