User blog comment:Lancer1289/BioWare gets on the Multiplayer bandwagon/@comment-1341687-20111010210950/@comment-737801-20111010214522

Perhaps I will, but Brotherhood's multiplayer seems more tacked on than a full feature, and the later campaign suffered because they put in multiplayer. Maybe they will fix that in Revelations, but when you put the late campaign of Brotherhood against the late campaign of Assassin's Creed and ASII, then there is a clear lacking of a single player element.

As to reserving judgement, past experience, along with what I know about how these things work, I know that the single player campaign will suffer and we are the ones paying the price for that. While my final opinon may change later, it's been known to happen, but it's rare with something like this. For now I cannot say anything good about this and my judgement stands. BioWare already made one mistake with the stupid decision to include Kinect, and I think this is just another step down a very dark road.

If it is done right, and the only way they could do that is they planned to incorperate multiplayer from the beginning. Which if that is the case, then they lied to the fans and everyone about ME3 not having any multiplayer in multiple statments from E3 and beyond. That is something that I cannot tolerate from one of the few studios that I still had a lot of respect for. You lie and then you expect us to trust you that you did it right? Anyone smell the irony/hiprocracy of that statment?

If the multiplayer was added as an after thought, then in order to make it work, they had to push back release, (possible, but unlikely), the multiplayer will feel tacked on rather than a full feature, or the single player campaign will suffer because they had to incorperate it. Again making multiplayer is much harder than people think.