I don't like MP personally, so I was happy SW BF had couch split screen co-op, but no campaign is just lazy and I won't invest in this game. I am playing the beta now. Its awesome what potential they have, and a pity it's not what I want. I hope we get a good single player SW game soon.

I *really* hope that you are being sarcastic.

I beg to differ but BioShock 2 and Black Ops was the only mp I ever put any time into.

@Moldy- Agree. icheerboth- I mean...you don't speak for all gamers either bud, neither of you do.

People want both, as to why BOTH exist. You crying about TF2 not having a single player? Millions don't care bud, that is not what they are their for, that is like watching a horror film then crying to the director that it didn't have enough love sequences...I mean at some point some of you really need get that BOTH exist for 2 DIFFERENT REASONS!

I swear I never though I would have to even say such a thing on here smh.

@Nuka- https://www.youtube.com/wat...

"SW BF had couch split screen co-op, but no campaign is just lazy"

Not sure what you mean bud, it has an offline single player, they are merely calling it missions and NOT campaign as its not what they call such things for Battlefield so they aer not calling it taht for Battlefront, mind you...Battlefront's missions are what they were in BF1 and BF2 merely not called "campaign" actually look up, read exactly what it is before saying it doesn't have one.

Pretty sure I'm playing it RIGHT NOW and it has a story, has voice acting etc JUST LIKE BF1 and BF2 ,stop reading what others are saying and spreading misinformation actually find out for yourself bud (bu...but listen to me though lol)

If your playing the beta, get out of MP and try survival, its merely what BF1 and BF2's campaign was in a different name.

Mission briefing, voice acting, bots, objectives etc, its very much the same.

If single player only games are fine why aren't multiplayer only games??

I love a great single player game, I love co-op and I love great multiplayer, but it's the best when they all come in one package like GRAW2, Rainbow Six Vegas 1&2 and most of the Call of Duty games.

Fully support developers focusing on delivering the game they want to make and play, rather than ticking all the boxes on a checklist.

Of course I also fully support publishers pricing those games according to the value of the content, so where a game feels light on content it should also be lighter on the wallet.

Edmix-: http://i.imgur.com/pBrD4qg.... (I just had to, bud)

In all seriousness I agree, people want different kinds of games and calling it lazy when they're using so much market data to decide if people will buy it without the campaign is just plain ignorant.

Everyone else (except Septic and Volkama): Face it, not every game is for you, they're saving time on a part of the game which a large amount of their customer base barely plays in order to focus on what they do play.

We'll see if it's truly worth it or if it is a big factor for replay value and sales. Personally, I preordered because I wanted a good swat game with team based mechanics, multiplayer and wave defense are good enough for me. I'm not saying you should settle for less, but this isn't really less content when you can get it online for 40 bucks. I think the flip side of this is better story games.

@Just_looken- "Online only games should be cheaper do to lack of content"??? LMFAO! No..just no.

Go look on Steam and take a look at some of your friends games (if you have steam) I can assure you the top hours they've put in their games are MP titles.

BOTH require lots of dev time bud, I don't think you get just how long it takes to balance out and fix MP titles, TF2 is still getting patched today..

Fight games, Racing games, FPS MP titles should not be LESS then single player games as they still have development times, they still have content that the user deems a value as to me, MP maps are a value for what I'm looking for.

Your comment is full of young and lacks lots and lots of sense. I mean...you do get that MOST titles released to day are not single player only right?

The value of a title is based on the team and the consumer.

If you don't like MP titles...thats nice.

Some do and its a value to them to play a quality MP title with quality maps, weapons, balance checks and updates etc They might be playing for hundreds if not thousands of hours, soooo many situations happen in MP that won't happen in SP modes due to SP modes controlled design.

I don't think you fully get the complexity that is in many, many MP only titles bud.

All games are not created equal, there is no set time, number of modes or "data size" LMFAO! that deems a title's worth.

Its worth is up to the user....clearly if MP titles where not worth that, millions would not be playing them as we speak.

My friends and I put well over 3000 hours in Smash Bros Melee...

We where not playing its adventure mode LOL!

Exactly how do you even come to that conclusion that SP games require a lot more dev time?

Online games have to worry about servers, balancing, stress test PLUS all the other development production that comes with developing any huge AAA video game.

And what about SP games that are only 6 or 8 hours long? Should those also be cheaper? How long did a dev spend on those games?

Lack of content? Maps, weapons, skins, MP modes is lack of content compared to a single player game that gives you none of that.

C'mon now....