Why is there a bias against MP only games?

[pokoko]

fatslob-:O said:

pokoko said:
It's kind of funny, really.

10 hour single player game -- "I can play it again if I want! Yay! I might play it three times and get 30 hours total! 30 hours makes it completely worth the money!"

Multiplayer game you can put hundreds of hours into -- "Sure, I played this game for 50 hours but what if it gets shut down a year from now? 50 hours of gameplay is a waste of money!"

Except hardly anyone pours that much time into a game, let alone complete them ... 

Shallow example ...

Most people who buy multi-player games put a bunch of hours into them.  I think it's safe to say that they put far more time into multi-player than single-player when a game has both.  Average play-time for Destiny, as an example, is around 100 hours.  You'd have to be someone who doesn't like multi-player to put less--but then, why would you buy a multi-player game in that case?  

The simple fact of the matter is that multi-player gamers usually get a lot of value out of a game, even with the whole "but it might shut down in a few years" qualification.  That they get that value up front rather than on a replay five years from now doesn't matter.