I think part of the issue is that while what you're saying is true, there's undeniably a market for people like me who focus on SP and often won't touch MP until SP is done. I also think that Moore's thinking is somewhat inaccurate because it's not that the majority of people in these scenarios don't play SP, I think that he's just looking at Battlefield data. And the reason that most people don't play BF SP is because BF SP hasn't been good in God knows how long. I can only go by 3 and 4 and I can say that neither held my attention for more than the length of a standard movie, while the CoD games have been at least decent (I can't speak for Ghosts but I don't see myself picking that up.) A single player campaign basically makes a game timeless. I can theoretically play any CoD game until the end of time, but eventually games like Titanfall and Evolve are going to "go away" and be shut off. And let's not act like Star Wars can't have a good SP campaign, even in a setting like Battlefront.
I'm also willing to bet that a lot of this has to do with EA shooting to hit that release window to correspond with the upcoming movie. They likely had to make sacrifices to hit that window, and a SP campaign would EASILY add another full year to production. BF is running on a relatively short production schedule. EA got the rights in May of 2013 and production likely didn't start before that, so they've had to come up with a full AAA game in 2.5 years, which is a lot to ask of a developer, especially on newly released hardware that they were not accustomed to (PS4/One.) Had they not had this restriction, I'm willing to bet some sort of campaign would have been fleshed out, because not having one hurts sales, which no company wants to do in any way especially in today's market.
