Multiplayer gaming

Not a deal breaker at all, most of the time I don't care about tacked on MP, I mean look at Max Payne 3, it so didn't need MP.

Nope. MP isn't a deal breaker. Max Payne 3 is the best example, would've done fine without it too.

sorry i have to say this, I don't know about you, but don't you remember there is a age where game dont' have the thing call multiplayer. Multiplayer is ..like a desert after the main course. Unless it a pure multiplayer game, delicated to multiplayer only

mp is almost never a deal breaker for me

Ask yourself would you like a more polished and complete experience or something rushed and half-assed, but its ok as long as it has mp?
Answer might just surprise you

Multiplayer is just a bonus for me.

I dont have any friends.. so multiplayer is sorta dead to me.

Depends on the game. FPS? Need multiplayer.

Sports games? Nah. Strategy? Hit and miss. Fighting games? YES.

I prefer SP games over MP games tbh.

FPS Games = GIMME MULTIPLAYER

For me Multiplayer is definitely a deal breaker! especially for FPS-es, Strategy games and definitely for Zombie Survival game! without it, gameplay become too dull, unless the bot is advanced enough to adapt to your gameplay like sometime chose to be arrogant or bossy at time.. (which i'm not aware of any bot that do so)

I am very pro Multiplayer, I can't really justify paying such a high amount of money (Im in AU, and most AAA cost $80-110) on something that doesn't have multiplayer.

Some titles are excluded though, such as Grand Theft Auto (I think it has MP, but it sucks ;P), and pretty much any good game where you can 'Free Roam' the map or gives you the option to do what you want, so you can play and do whatever when you want, but even that gets boring sometimes, like you said, not every game should have it, but more should be implemented, given good percentage of games do offer it, and is what most people are basing the purchase of such title on, more often than none.

Without multiplayer I wouldn't be a gamer. I grew up playing multiplayer with friends and family and I will pick a mediocre MP game over a critically-acclaimed SP game 9 times out of 10. Why? Because sitting in my room with the lights off and taking games seriously and beating a game's story in a few hours and then having very little replayability is just a waste of money and then I have the game for no reason. I'd rather play a single game for MANY hours, laughing with friends and goofing around in multiplayer. Where there's no goal and it's all about joking around and communicating.

As a good example:

Assassin's Creed II - The time it took me to get every single achievement and beat the story: Less than 50 hours.

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (AKA first installment to include multiplayer): 150+ hours.

My deal breaker are no Steam, and no achievements. About MP, that depends if many of my friends are playing it or not.

No multiplayer = no sale for me...
I feel like it has to be in a game to enjoy it more than a few hours.. Unless we're talking about Don't Starve or games who have a non-campaign style of SP...

Coop campaign? I want.

Multiplayer added to a game designed as single player? Almost never played... I can't recall of a single time that I had a MP round in a game that was not designed ground-up for multiplayer...

I enjoy MP as much as SP. It simply depends on my mood. I sometimes spend weeks on a MP game, and then get bored and start playing a singleplayer one.

Some games can't have a multiplayer mode because it would be awful, but i'd like to see more co-op.

Never. Some games simply aren't built with multiplayer in mind. I mean, if a lack of multiplayer was a deal-breaker, I'd never have played Super Mario, Final Fantasy, Braid, The Walking Dead, The Elder Scrolls, KOTOR, Deus Ex and COUNTLESS other games, which are some of the best gaming experiences I've ever had. There's absolutely nothing wrong with multiplayer games, but by restricting yourself solely to them you're missing out on some wonderful stuff.

Edit: Perhaps 'never' is to strong; if the next Battlefield or Warcraft had no multiplayer I'd be a little hesitant, considering I spend the majority of my time in those games being killed by other real people.

Personally, I didn't like multiplayer game too much. I'm not say I hate multiplayer, I just prefer single player.

Some game aren't meant for multiplayer, yeah. I agree with Sixsmiths' opinion. About MP's availability is a "plus" or "minus" points depends on the player.

As someone who has no friends and doesn't like playing with rage-prone randoms, I prefer my games to be single player focused and the presence of multiplayer is just something that will likely have taken time away from developing that well.

Yup, a lot of the time, I just can't get into single-player games. Most of the time, the only single-player games I can bear playing are 8bit/indie games

I care very little for multiplayer. Give me a good single player storyline and I'm sold. Multiplayer is a nice bonus for some games, as long as I can easily set up a game with friends in the same room and not have to play with strangers over the Internet.

I mostly buy games with mp. I don't have much time to play, so the remaining time is spent better with friends

I'm buying the new Splinter Cell since they're bringing back the Chaos Theory MP, otherwise MP never acts as a selling point for me. I got Dead Space 2 because I liked the Single Player in one, the MP was just a nice addition that sucked maybe a dozen hours of my life at most.

games shouldn't be defined by their multiplayer, it should be seen as an additional to the main campaign.