Unfortunently for you guys(as in, ones who prefer multiplayer and want to expand it), DirtySanchezz hit the nail on the head with his previous post - Many people, including myself, simply have no desire to go online. Not because of assholes, smurfers, technical issues, or anything like that, we simply have no desire to play multiplayer. To me, single player works great, I don't care for the extra challange, and if I do join I have to worry that if something comes up then I cant just save my game and pick it back up later. And from the posts you all have made, it seems like a vast majority of sins players feel the same way.

For further facilitate my idea, I think there should be a separate (optional) ICO that would be default for accounts that have played fewer than 20 games online.  So games advertised to single players really would be for new players only.  One problem is that if 1000 people click to join the game, they'll be disappointed when they don't get the one of the 2 open spots, so the game would need to pair those other 998 players up somehow.

This could be an innovation in online multiplayer gaming--a system that politely invites people who are playing it in single player to do a one-click join to an online game.  (The act of clicking could also automatically save whatever game they are currently playing.)

Holy cow, I had figured that the number of people who ever came to ICO was more like 7500.  I'm pretty surprised that out of 75,000  people making accounts, so many were turned off.  Most determined online gamers aren't deterred by stuff like that.

I wonder if they could just send out a couple mass emails to the 75,000 people who registered with ICO, promoting the game and reassuring them that most of the problems have been fixed and that it's very balanced now.

I've always felt some strange fear of playing online. Personally, I just feel more relaxed when I play offline. It's a lot more tense and competitive when you play anothe person, and I play my video games for fun.

There is one other possible explanation:  People really didn't like the game all that much or at least it didn't have much long-term staying power.  Sins sold decently, but is it possible that it just didn't get its hooks into people?  Those 200 of us who play it regularly in online multiplayer love the game, obviously, but are we the exception?

I first became interested in Sins when a group of friends from another game pirated it and played it over Hamachi virtual private LAN.  I actually purchased it becuase I'm not a pirate.  However, that group of friends quickly lost interest in it.  They played it for about two weekends and that was it.  Two of them bought the game and played it online some back in early 2008 and then they completely lost interest in it as well.  So, of about 10 people who tried it out, I'm the only one who still plays it and who has any interest at all in it.

Well the issue is everyone seems to be experienced. I come on a game that just says "2v2 join up" or w/e and turns out I am the one person who isn't excellent at the game. I don't know all the little tricks like bomber/fighter micro... Well I know that now but I didn't at the time and I was getting flamed for it.

Whats the point, despite bieng fail... At least the AI doesn't make you feel like a mentally challenged idiot.

I think this might be a good time for new people to get into the game simply because I have seen and played with an increased number of newer players lately.  I don't know why, but it seems like there are more new people around now than there were a month ago.

Honestly, what turns me off from engaging in multiplayer outside of my own little circle of friends is not a fear of pro players... it's a fear of having to deal with pricks. The ego's of many of the multiplayer crowd are just off the freaking hook (I mean this in a general sense, not in a particular to SINS sense, and I am not pointing any fingers).

While I'm sure there are plenty of decent people out there trying to play SINS online, I just don't feel like taking the risk. I'd just rather not have my time wasted by some ultra competitive antagonist little smack talking moron - or worse, by some tool that quits the game after their first cap ship gets destroyed (I hate quitters)... I mean, if you're going to quit, do it when you're actually beaten - and then be sure it's the surrender button you click.

Although in retrospect, getting my ass handed to me constantly by really good players (be they open about it or pretending they are noobs) would get old pretty quick.

-Itharus

I made sure I hit the surrender button. I actually liked the guys I was playing against.

We played one game, 3 v 3. Where i had two teammates, the first quit at three planets as I was backing him up and trying to fight off the other players. My third teammate was afk for 30 minutes after taking a roid. We agreed that I had no chance, and started another game.

Second game, 3 v3, my first teammate is getting smashed, so I am trying to send the small-ish fleet I have to help him, but I am clear across the map. My other teammate (the one that was afk before) has taken three planets and is spamming lrfs. but doing it at a speed that is ludicrously slow. he doesnt have trade, has doesnt have defenses, he isnt delling to the market for more money/metal/crystal. he isnt repsonding to pings to questions or to requests. Finally he does... he moves to an undefended roid, kills the exctrators.... and goes back to his planet to keep building. meanwhile that roid was ONE jumpfrom the enemy homeworld... which was ALSO undefended. So I am trying to to enough damage to get one of the guys attacking my other teammate to back off.

That teammate quits, claiming he was dead. except that he had full planetary defense and they were microing terribly. (his gauss cannons killed 4 enemy capital ships)

he was fine, but no one ever play with "awakener" worst effing player ever.

Click the <Ironclad Online> button and come check it out.

Welcome to ICO, the land of smurfs and inner circle groups.

And that's what's really killing SOASE multiplayer, not the game, not the game balance.

But to be honest, I'm part of that inner circle group, so I have no room to talk. The reason? The people I know are willing to play long epic games across multiple sessions (the save feature is awesome... even if it doesn't actually save at exactly the spot you tell it to every time), and there's not ultra-competitive little dumbass kiddies involved who throw the flavor of the month single unit spam at you.

SOASE is more like playing a long game of chess with a good opponent.

What makes 'successful' multiplayer are quick games of checkers where everything is rock paper scissors and fast, with clear demarcations of victory and loss to be gloated over.

Both of them are fun; I enjoy SOASE for what it is, and I can't wait for StarCraft 2 for the other option.

-Itharus