I wish they would have included a campgine mode that would of really added some depth to the playable races in the game. I mean they tell this story of TEC being attacked on two fonts and then left you hanging why even have an intro that started telling a story and then leave us with our wang in hands thats like watching a porn and the power goes off and your left wounding if Debie ever did Dallas or did Ryan ever get his privet shaved thank you Ironclad for giving us blue balls but i love the game though. Best game ive played in like 3 years.

Now there's an idea! Perhaps, after giving us the tools for it, a competition could be held by IC to see who's got the best set-up or something... it could then be downloaded as an IC-endorsed mod. I don't know too much about software development, but it sounds as if it could take time off the IC crew in campaign construction, leaving time for other things, and let us (or the avid campaign-wanters) create the story. Assuming, of course, that all this fits in with IC's plan, which it may not
What do you think?

In order to get a good campaign editor with all the event handling and tiggers nessesary (preferably with ingame 'cut scenecs') a dev team usualy has to try making a good campaign themselves (so they know what they need). If well done (I like to point to FRED2 as an example of the perfect space mission editor with amazing sexpression capabilitys (for late 90s at least), just ignore the genre diffrence) the mod community will be able to do far more with the tools.

A offical campiagn also servers as a good tutorial for building our own.

If you want a "campaign":

Just play all of the standard maps that come included with the game one-by-one. There's about 30 of them or so. After that, download the good-looking Galaxy Forge-made custom maps and play those.

Just what exactly are you looking for in a "campaign"? Is the game play supposed to change in some sort of way or are you hoping not merely for a variety of maps to play but maps with some sort of special theme or property? Many people say they want a single player campaign but I'm not sure exactly what they really want. What's wrong with all of the standard maps that came with the game?

If you get bored playing all of the standard maps in single player, then come online and play the game in online multiplayer against real human opponents. You'll get a greater challenge, more variability in opposing player tactics, and you'll get to socialize with folks over the Internet and perhaps make some new friends.

1) Story.

2) Yes the gameplay DOES change actualy. Usualy gives you special goals, even secondary objectives to work. You can 'do it yourself' but that isn't very fun. Doing the things in the context of the setting and story gives 'meaning' to the acomplishments other than just winning. Its unfortunate that some people do not know this.

3) There are many ways to play a stratergy game, some of them do not translate well to multiplayer where the specter of the old Red Alert tank rush still haunts. Some people don't like and avoid that kind of gameplay.

I have built a map that is campaignesque using DEADLY FORGE and playable with 7 DEADLY SINS by Danman (yes, I am Danman's Fanboi -love their work). Player starts as a Rogue (gotta read the readme for what to do to play it properly) with their home planet being an asteroid and a nearby AI empire -one of the empires that dispossessed you.

For the map to be proper campaign, I need to at least be able to designate player start points, which player is player0/1/2/3/4 so they start with lower resources than the AI, and what resources the AI starts with (can be done in galaxy forge, but is a pita).

The first player (human) needs to be able to be set as Player0 or 1/2/3/4/ect... with AI being set as the other players so they start at specific points in the map. If there is a reliable way to do this, PM me please and share the secret; if not, DEVS, make it so! -please.

The strength of SINS comes from players starting more or less on equal footing and deciding their strategy from the vast complexity of the game itself.

No one needs a game where you are led like a sheep through lame objectives, (or was that "Lamb" objectives)...

...anyway, campaigns can only be played once with real surprise, and thereafter the locations of the enemies are known (that's why I don't play HALO)

If Halo had the diverse random complexity of SINS, it would be a MUCH better game! After defeating all the Halo baddies and driving the ATV off all the cliffs (and landing safely to boot!), I discovered that there wasn't anything else to do in the game that was new...

uhh, duh! if this game had a campaign, it would ROCK even more than it does now. however, we all know, unless there is a huge surprise coming with 1.1, i doubt any of the campaign wishes will be answered.

actually no, it does. sins is good and all, but its boring as **** after the first month or so. multiplay only can get you so far.

the 'single player' is a laughable attempt at best.



bah lets face the facts. there is no campaign mode already because iron clad lacks the mental and physical resources for it.

that being said, im glad i did not waste my money on this game, though the friend i bummed it from was pretty p'oed lol.

but just in case, ill sign on the dotted line with a big hell yes, we need a campaign mode

hell, eventually ironclad will have to make one what with all the b!tching that we're doing, and if they dont, then maybe the dont deserve to make it lol.

i am rather partial to the ida of letting us tell the story (refering to a post up there somewhere).

but for god sake we need something better then galaxy forge for something like that, and im sure that ironclad wont be making a complete easy to use and fully tricked out editor any time soon, if ever. it might fall upon someone in the community to make it themselves (hopefully thats legal lol).

They have already stated they are doing a campaign in the expansion (and why they didn't for the release of the game).

The game needs to support triggers and event handling before we can make good single player maps so a user made editor would be kinda impossible. Fortunatly I think we only have to wait for the goodies...

THIS

Gives us the options for campaignesque maps until the DEV's include triggers and events and timers, etc... for true campaigning.

IF they can make campaigns that are different every time, and not like the old arcade game "Heavy Barrel" than campaigns could be a good idea, but if you play it twice and it's exactly the same, then there's no point in that.

I fully support any addition that adds to the game, but in my experience:

Campaigns equal same every time play

which is not play at all, but monkey-work...

IF they can make campaigns that are different every time, and not like the old arcade game "Heavy Barrel" than campaigns could be a good idea, but if you play it twice and it's exactly the same, then there's no point in that.

Because as everyone knows, the Starcraft, etc campaigns played completely differently each time through and that's the only reason they didn't suck.

Of course, Starcraft, like Command and Conquer and the original Dune 2 had the enemy base already built, along with enemy units to fight, but this is preferable to Halo where the enemies stay in place until you happen upon them (then they follow you relentlessly)...

I hope SINS makes it better than both...

If you are given the Halo mission:

Destroy Enemy Refinery

Lets see a completely new refinery each time, with that pipes style screen saver engine to build all the catwalks!!!

Lets have it with different sizes, numbers, and locations for all those useful exploding fuel tanks that you use to blow up the bad guys with.

Lets see intelligent bad guys that aren't just "Triggered" into action, but have them working together to stop the infiltration from the point at which they would realistically find out about it...

GTA 4 comes close with the "Circle of Doom" or "APB Radius", and is good for that game...

********

I hope everyone who wants missions cares enough to ask for the perfect mission engine, because if you don't, you might as well just play the four tutorials that come with SINS, and modify the string file so that button says "MISSIONS"...

I think the campaign option is going to be marked "expansion". Quite clever from a marketing standpoint.

I try to make one. I had a large custome map and was recording them to make my own campaign. I much named the difrent save points as chapters of my campaign.

Reaching for the stars. The Federal Trade Comission finally makes the first jump to another star systems but the Li Remants have some demands for the Explorers.

Tale of Two Star Systems. The FTC decides to colonize an unclaimed star system while the other major powers fight over the central worlds. Meantime Li Remants still tries to colonize other planets claimed by the FTC. Sooner or later the FTC cannot stay out of conflict for long.

Remants Fade. War has finally broke out between the FTC and Li Remants as the expansion of the FTC moves to the entire star system. However other TEC empires have came to the Vasari's aid.

Crumbeling Alliance. The Li Remants is gone and the FTC has managed to form a peace treaty with the 3 other TEC empires. However struggles between the TEC has often caused the to be enemies and each empire is petitioning the FTC to join their side in attacking a fellow TEC empire. It dosn't look like the common enemy of the aliens is enough to keep this Alliance together.

War in the Outer Star Systems. Nearly every reachible star system has been explored and all the remaning powers have set out to stake a claim. The FTC thrives on a series of brokered cease fires and Trade Agrements make FTC traders one of hte most prosperous merchants in the galatic arm. However as the empires race to out do each other in colonizing the outer star systmes it will only be a matter of time before futher expansion results in more conflect and not even the FTC peace agreaments can keep for getting involved in armed conflict.

And the story would go on if I didn't have to update which result in all my saved games as invalid. Go figure. It was just going to get interesting. Soon.

I agree entirely. The game has an efficient back story to provide an excellent single player campaign. Factions could each have their own tasks and missions. The idea worked splendidly with the very popular Dawn of War series for PC and I recon that the functions cannot be too far apart. What about renaming the current single player as 'skirmish' aswell? It may be more appropriate. The game developers thought too deeply about game play here. The game needs substance for a wider audience. Why provide any back story at all if the computer game is based purely around the more interactive side of the computer game spectrum?

Providing that they did provide a venerable story line;what would be achieved? It would purely be a simultaneous chain of single player missions with the occasional useage of tasks and objectives kicking you in the blasted chin every time you try to rebuild a fleet after a heavy masacre on your unprotected asteroid and it's squad of three banged up scouts with an ice machine.

Campaigns are designed to be stedafast and repetitive, otherwise you might as well replace the blasted storyboard each time around yet replace sardonic octapus men on the run from god and a bunch of flash light-eyed extremist gimps in giant flying mirrors for the inhabitants of Bikini Bottom and the squad of Catholic priests who deal with washing the Popemobil with holy water each morning.

Campaigns are the pinicle of drawing in the crowd, get them to roll their sleeves up and take the reigns as the leading role in the plot, whatever it may be and to give hard core gamers another chance to prove themselves at being told what to do instead of sit for hours waiting for the black market to be finnished with it's latest economic depression due to the thousands of kilogrammes donated to the warehouses in an attempt to earn some cash plus give the merchants something to sell.

It's true that the campaigns never last as long as otherwise more spiced online matches(even with multiple factions to choose from), but once it's done it's done. The whole purpose is like a disposable razor; use it and bin it or otherwise forget about it and leave it the back of your bathroom cupboard until you retrieve it and cut yourself by forgetting it got old and rusty. Rant concluded.

Yes it does need a campaign. It would *GREATLY* add to the immersive experience and get a lot more sales if there was a campaign. I really hope they add one.

A campaign with a good story is one that always has me liking a game. I actually have the opposite opinion of Helioforge - but then, everyone is perfectly capable of thinking for themselves.
1. I never actually owned the original C&C on PC (I got the PS1 version of it, and the awkwardness of the controls meant I could never really play the game and like it at the same time), but my first experience with RTS was indeed with Red Alert. Though I was suggestible at that age, I remember wondering how they managed to get a camera into Stalin's office and seem to record every major briefing of a war that I had not yet realised never happened. I still play Red Alert - and only for its campaign. The skirmishes aren't bad, it's just that the campaign is just so much better.

2. C&C Generals ZH is pretty much the opposite. I thought the campaigns were pretty rubbish, but the skirmishes are nothing short of awesome, in my opinion. There's actually a motivation for me to go out there and become an expert at each and every one of the generals, just because I think the game is so good; I know some hated it, though

3. Nexus TJI I think is very good, but I rarely play it because of its awkward control interface (IMO). I think the reason I like it so much is because of its tremendous campaign. This is one of the few games I have where I think the game is excellent solely because of its campaign (of course, graphics, sound, and the Master & Commander feel in the game help, but would be pretty pathetic if one could only use a skirmish function).

4. Homeworld! Nuff said. The reason I think HW1 is a better game than HW2 is because it has a better campaign, though I think the gameplay in HW2 is more conducive to skirmish/online play. The same goes for the Ground Control series.

5. I haven't played Halo 3, and I thought the second one fell into the same sort of trap that Matrix 2 fell into. I thought the first one functioned very well as a standalone game, but I agree with Helioforge that there's just no real reason to play it. I don't understand why some game developers don't include AI function in skirmish (non-existent in Halo), LAN, and internet games, though there's probably a good reason. The reason I think it's such a good game is just because of its story - I think it's pretty pathetic as an FPS on its own. Still, I don't regret having bought Halo (I shouldn't actually be comparing it with the others, given that they're RTS's and RTT's).

6. Emperor: Battle for Dune was one of the last Westwood games, and it was good enough for me to play through both the campaign and the skirmish multiple times. It combined, IMO, the sheer awesomeness that Generals has and the compelling story that RA has.

I think the point I'm trying to make in all the above points (especially contrasting 1, 2, and 5) is that a game without a campaign can be very good, and a campaigned game without a skirmish function can be very good, but if a game can do both well, then it reaches into the space of the Homeworld series. Sins has made a fantastic game (and on my "awesome scale" it measures just about better than Generals and WiC). But the expansion with a good campaign could make it so much better! The immersive experience in a game gives it so much respectability. This game is so good already - why not improve on it further with a campaign? Of course, it has to be a good one (observe Generals with its weak campaign), but good campaigns aren't defined by how repetitive they are.
IMO, one plays a campaign for a story, for an atmosphere, for immersion. One could also play it as an extended tutorial (considering how in most cases the difficulty moves from low to high), but it's the story!

Oops. It's a diatribe! My bad!

One's personal preference for NOT having a campaign should not be your reason for putting the idea down.

Successful games offer more options to players rather than less. If this was an option you wouldn't be forced to use it.

I, for one, love campaigns / stories and actually had forgotten about the review I read where it pointed out the lack thereof in SINS before I bought it. heh.

Cheers.

Same here, after seeing the intro (and forgetting about the reviews mentioning no campaign, since I read them months ago) I spent a few minutes looking for a campaign option.

I really don't see the utility the detractors of a campaign derive from comments regarding the possible linearity or limitations inherent in most implementations. It would be possible to make a campaign that doesn't limit the player's options, has branching paths, and serves to expand the experience through storytelling and background. And, most importantly, it would be optional for the people that can somehow pretend that names of the enemies in the game actually mean something.

honestly id rather have more races, ships, research, diplomacy, planets and more depth in general than a campaign which you play once and never again.
Make the ai easily moddable and other things making modding easyer and get rid of all the hard codes...i think those are more important than a campaign. Also minor things such as being to pick starting locations, artifact placement, etc, etc...

...

I am happy that you're all standing up for the features you want in SINS...

If you could have everything you want in a Perfect Campaign, then what are all those things??? (not simply that you want them)

That way, when the developers read this part, they will make better campaigns...

I really don't think forums on the internet have got any relation to development quality - most devs don't even care to read forums that I've heard of. The quality (good or bad) will come from who they are.

If we want a good campaign then there simply needs to be as many well designed features as possible so modders can make more specific campaigns. The campign from the devs will have to be generilised to appeal to as many people as possible.

Other than that, I want the devs to surpirse me and create something indepth with in game story telling rather than lumping it into annoying movies at the beginning and end of missions (like C&C) or having it so open that there is no coherant story (like civ or total war).

I.e. if you can make a space based version of Company of Heros (emphasising the in game cinimatics!) then it'll be the win. lol