I still don't see why you're identifying multiplayer as a factor to Uncharted 3's decrease in quality. There are many other factors which could have affected Uncharted 3's quality like Naughty Dog losing quality, The Last Of Us development, franchise fatigue, your tastes changing, etc.

I think the main problem with your thought process is the fact that Uncharted 2 also had multiplayer, yet you thought it was great. This proves that multiplayer does not hinder the single player's quality. Using your logic, I could just as easily say that Uncharted 3 dropped in quality, in your opinion, because it incorporated stealth mechanics. Neither of these makes sense because Uncharted 2 had these things also.

what's wrong with the multiplayer. I'm all about the multiplayer.

My thinking is that with UC2, the first version of the MP wasn't outstanding, it wasn't half hearted, not outstanding either. That is because a lot of attention was given to the SP.

In U3, after the success of the MP in Uc2, a lot more effort went into the MP. IMO not much new was added to the SP with a lot taken out. therefore, I conclude the SP suffered as a result of the MP.

Fair enough. I personally think the Naughty Dog split for TLoU was way more impactful than the improved multiplayer. If there was no TLoU, I'm confident that UC3 would have been as good as UC2.

The problem here is that you are not talking about opinions, you are talking about actions. If you do something like that over and over again, it means you are 100% sure about it; invalidating the concept of opinion. I mentioned before that if most like something, that makes it "good" according to a certain purpose by consensus; but that does not means they are right (according to them they will obviously be right lol).   I said you were wrong because you are already saying that the game will be bad based on your experience with somes games that most people like, (making them good by consensus).   The concepts of good/bad; and right/wrong are independent.  

You can say that something according to you sucks? yeah.  Could you say that something will universally be crap based on your experience? nope, (you did it with "Now that GoW is gone").   You have concluded on a "universal truth", based on facts that are not right, making you wrong.

Your facts: Those are bad games in contrast to the previous ones.      True facts: By consensus they are great games, better than the previous one.

You have the right to stand your ground, but that does not means you are right.   Your ideas in the answers are mostly right; but when you try to defend your first post which ends with an "absolute conclusion" based on wrong facts, it is......"weird".    You are defending that you can have opinions, but that post stopped being an opinion when you implied that GOW: ASCENSION will be a piece of crap.

Maybe you did not meant it that way, but that is how it is understood.  Maybe it would have been better to write it in a different way.

PS: By writing this, I see myself like this: (lol)

Now imagine if you actually felt UC3 was better than UC2 while ND are working on a new IP.

Crazy aint it? We're out there ya know! ^_^

At no time have I said my opinion is fact.

At no time have I said what I said is gospel. 

So I have no idea where you are getting this from

Jay has a better arguement as well as others on here.

You outright saying because the populous says A therefore A is right is outright irritating.

Yes, thats basically what i meant.

Its better to have fleshed out experiences that are worth your money on each field than half-assed ones on the other.

for real??  Your answer is quite amusing RE LOL.

I have not said that at all, which means you have not understand anything I have written.  I will sumarise some ideas in a simple way.   I am saying that if the populous says A, then as a consensus A is good, but it does not make them right. Got it now?  As I said before right/wrong and good/bad are independent. Do you even read what I wrote??

Just as you said, opinions and true facts are different things, and yet you dont realize that in your first post you have forgotten that.  By saying "GOW is gone now" what did you mean then? Just because the word opinion is in your sentence it does not make it an opinion. The way you express your thoughts is fundamental in order to achieve the goal you are after.

Also since your first answer our conversation began to be all about, definitions about opinions and facts, and we have not discussed a thing about multiplayer in single player games, because you deviated the conversation.  I was expecting some kind of proof of how U3 is so bad or something like that, in order to refute the idead that you were talking about untrue facts, but no, you instead began talking about something else.    I was telling you that your statement since the moment of conception was wrong (the "opinion" and the conclusion), because you were talking about untrue facts.   And I proved it by posting the example of Uncharted 2.     The conclusion you reach at the end was not an opinion by how you expressed it.  

So considering our deviation from the main topic, it is obvious that my arguments are not better or worst than any other argument here, according to the main purpose of the thread.

If you begin talking how/why U3 is a piece of crap (not your words I know), then we can start having a conversion about the main topic.   Proof me that my example of U2 is wrong, that is all I am asking.

It seems Bioshock Infinite will be the next one with added Multiplayer options, will be worth the delay?
http://kotaku.com/5909018/new-job-listing-has-us-wondering-if-bioshock-infinite-is-getting-multiplayer