For £45? No way.

Ive beaten the first level of the campaign and logged like fifteen hours in the multiplayer.

I'd imagine the single player campaign is an afterthought for many people, and there have certainly been multiplayer-only, full-priced games in the past.

I would, because I have a disposable income, but I would regard it as a rip-off.

I won't buy the game as it is now for 60$, but thats just because of Activision.

I would probably  still buy it since the majority of the time I put into the game is going to be online and there are plenty of other games that come out that are around 5-20 hours with no multilayer and most people are probably going to play the multilayer for a lot more then 20 hours.

I didnt even buy it with the SP so taking away more features wouldent make me more interested. Though as purely hypothetical of paying full price for an Multiplayer (or perhaps online only like an MMO..) only game them sure, Ive done that before and probably will again (or at least games that have SP essentially be bot match's).

No.  I always run the campaign first.  Campaigns tell stories that are dictated in ways envisioned by the developers.  Multiplayer often descends in to chaos.  Dont get me wrong, I like multiplayer, but if  video games are to be viewed in the same light as movies and books, then they need to deliver an engaging story not simply a visceral escape. 

paying for a multiplayer that doesn't even work properly is goddamn retarded.

No.  The SP is a small part of the appeal of the game, but not having it at all would drive me away.

No.  I only buy games for their single-player component.

" No.  I only buy games for their single-player component. "

No, i would never buy a multiplayer game.

56 dollars, tops.

No.

I rather pay $60 for a packet of crisps then this. Maybe $5 at most but I really don't care for it.

I'm not really compelled to buy the game as it is now (I'm a PC gamer). So if single player was removed then definitely no.

No way. CoD to me has always been about the single player. CoD4 was the first game in the series that was more about the multi than the single. At least they put in some fun solo/co-op stuff this time around.

" @Jaxboy said:

" No.  I only buy games for their single-player component. "

Really? Wow! You are missing one of the best multiplayer experiences ever. "

No I would not

I would have said no before I bought it, but now that I bought it I'd say yes.

No. I'm not even going to spend money on it as-is; within the foreseeable future, anyway.

I don't think so, but I still haven't played either MW game online. Maybe once I do, I'll change my mind. I would however, pay $60 just for single player...

If the game only included Special Ops and Multiplayer, yes.

Yes, I would.  Then again, I spent $150 on the whole thing, so of course I would.  :)

No way... i really liked the story  from the first one. making me pay $60 and not continue the story would be wrong.

I'm more of a single/Coop player. I didn't get CoD 4 until someone bought it for me. I only play multiplayer with friends & people I want to play with.

Had the game for a few days now.  Like everyone else.  Haven't touched the single player.  4's was shit, so no reason to play it.  My friends have already confirmed it's craptastic attempts at being decent.  But fails even more then 4.
 
I payed over normal price, for just the MP.  As far as the game in concerned.    
 
I, like a lot of gamers, have been playing 4 since 07.  MW 2 is a unneeded, but very much wanted, upgrade to a game I have been playing for 2 years.  
 
The MP is the best ever!  Bar none.  

I like single player games and no I wouldn't buy it if it's only multiplayer. I rarely find multiplayer more fun than single player and it feels like only a component of the game, however that's only my opinion.

Hell no, not for full price. Then again, I won't be picking it up anyway, at least not anytime soon.

I'd pay 20 bucks for it, max, if it was online only.

Yes. I spend a lot of time on the multiplayer of MW2. But I would just see it as slacking off from IW regarding with no singleplayer.

Yes.  There are countless hours of game play to be had with the game online.

" Yes, I would.  Then again, I spent $150 on the whole thing, so of course I would.  :) "

" @CitizenKane said:

" Yes, I would.  Then again, I spent $150 on the whole thing, so of course I would.  :) "

Enjoy those Nightvision goggles! "

No way...I didn't even pay full price for the regular game.
 
I traded in MW1 and Fallout 3 for $40 bucks and only paid $24 something at Gamestop.
 
MW1 is useless, and Fallout 3 is done since new GOTY edition is out with all the DLC added in.
 
I think I made out good.

I would.  Paid $50 for Quake 3 Arena, a multiplayer only game.

No, but of course there are some that do. I imagine it's a minus 20 percentile.

I wouldn't buy it at all if it was multiplayer only...

Yes. I've already logged 7 hours into the multiplayer, and I don't see any end in sight.

Nope.

Id pay $150

No.

Shhhh, you guys, quit giving Bobby Kotick ideas!

I wouldn't buy it at any price if it was multiplayer only.  I got my fix of shooty team MP back when Rainbow Six came out, I don't feel the need to keep re-buying that same experience over and over again.
 
A decent amount of BF2 (That persistent/unlocking idea was pretty compelling. Once.), a little CSS, DoD:S and CoD4 is about the only FPS MP I've spent any time with between then and now.  Granted, BF2 and Day of Defeat were interesting in their own way, but every time I play 'regular' FPS multiplayer I realise that it's still virtually identical to the MP I was playing a decade ago - everybody runs around like headless chickens, sometimes you get the drop on somebody and get a kill, sometimes you don't.
 
I can't get my head around how people enjoy repeating the same process over and over again for hundreds of hours, but they seem to, so whatever works for them.
 
Edit:  When Activision get around to making World of Duty, an MMOFPS based on a single persistent planet, I will totally shell out $60 for it.

Not a chance in hell

I doubt it.