I'll still probably buy the game but damn I was looking forward to single player.

The title is very misleading, and it's not just because it's taken out of context. It's because it blatantly lies.

He has a point, even though I don't fully agree with him.

Looks like i'm turn off....

If I were into this game, lack of single player would definitely be a deal breaker for me. Even if the main draw is MP, I absolutely need that SP experience to unwind on every once in a while. My friends and I played the SP on the first two Battlefronts a TON.

I don't understand. Nobody played BF3 and BF4's campaigns because they were bland as fuck. A Star Wars campaign has a lot more potential than another military shooter campaign. Titanfall would have fared a lot better if it had a campaign. Did they not learn from that? 

What's the point of an online SW game (that isn't an MMO)? So this is just a shooter with SW skin? Lame...

Those games had numerious single player modes. I really liked conquest (I think that's what it is called). 

Oh please, stop being babies. Not having a single player campaign isn't the same as not having single player modes.

People like to conveniently forget that BF1 and 2 didn't have any sort of true SP campaign. They had some pseudo-campaign stuff like Rise of the Empire, which lasted like two hours and was literally just "play the levels exactly how you did in multiplayer," but Galactic Conquest was the meat and potatoes of the series (and it was only in 2). I'd love me some GC in the new game but the Co-op/SP optional mission mode is enough to satiate me for now.

the lack of galactic conquest mode in this game is straight up insane.

I don't think it's a complete lack of people playing SP, but that people play SP for a few hours. Then by the time the sequel rolls around, have put 100s of hours into the MP.