The only bad thing with the game is that it's horrible when it comes to playing online and the fact that it freezes alot when you go from screen to screen and since it's meant to be a multiplayer game it should really be better multiplayer functions.

yet you are content with verbally jousting with 'snotty tools' on game forums?  if you want to avoid people like this, then dont go to internet forums, not at all and if you must, certainly dont antagonize them by calling them tools.  I usually only encounter trolls and tools when on forums, not in actual games.

Now to the op's comment, yes it was clear to me from about 10 mins of research that this would be a multiplayer based game by virtue of the fact there was a persistant campaign type multiplayer experience.  I thought there MIGHT be a campaign, but that wasnt what I was looking for.  Also paragraphs would not do it for anyone who likes a story, and dont get me wrong I love a good story in a game, like the baulder's gate series but in an rts, you really need something like full voice acting and cinematics to get the story across, a few paragraphs would be to soul caliburish and not immersive.  All that would dramatically increase production cost.

Yep, great story, great intro but that's all. Too bad.
But i love the multi and i love Stardock and Frogboy too. We can't have everything

lokideath

The problem lies in resources (Time & Money).

Making a multiplayer game AND a single player game when boiled down to the basic level are two seperate games and it's hard for a developer to do both -- unless they have a very large wallet (which nether Stardock or GPG have).

Look at Unreal Tournament as an example, it's 80% multiplayer and only 20% bare bone single player.  Same with Demigod.

Look at Mass Effect or Fallout3, both examples of pure single player games that do not offer multiplayer at all.

For developers who time and money are no object ,aka Blizzard are able to do both, but this is not the norm. 

Most developers are _not_ in that position and instead have to make tough choices.  Doing both when on a limited budget risks having both aspects failing or just being mediocre.  It's bette to specialize in one aspect or the other.

-Jara

PS: That said, for my friends who like to take things slow and for people who have never played DotA it would have been really really nice to have a bare bones tutorial so that you can ease into learning how to play. 

In the long run, I think they made the correct choice of focusing on multiplayer. Multiplayer games usually have a longer following due to the compitive nature and provide great replay value for the consumer while at the same time allow for a longer time for copies to sell. They also usually require more copies (everyone needs one) so again are better of sales.

I love campains; I love SP, and I love MP.  DG only gives me 2/3rds it's potential, and since I can't get MP to work, 1/3rd at the time.  And campains are not just SP; they create a story, a "world".  That's what made Warcraft so longlived and brought it to the World of Warcraft point.  Dawn of War, omg, it's got TONS of stories and world background that's kept it going strong for 2 decades.  It's like an interactive book or movie.  It really brings longevity to games and helps insure a sqequal.  There is a huge demographic of people that love the campain, so it's sad (and sales lost) if it's not included.