This question bugs me because nobody gives a straight answer. I did a part-time MBA from a top-10 program (USC Marshall, evening program) while working in hardware. Let me be direct about what I found.
First: the recruiter stigma is real but overblown. Yes, some recruiters at MBB and top-tier PE/VC shops will filter for full-time programs. That's because those programs have dedicated recruiting pipelines, and part-time programs don't. If your goal is consulting or investment banking, part-time is a meaningful disadvantage.
For basically everything else: no one cared. At the tech companies and hardware firms I interviewed at post-degree, nobody asked whether it was full-time or part-time. They looked at the school name and my work experience. That was the signal. The format was irrelevant.
The real tradeoffs are different from what you think.
Part-time: you keep your salary and stay current in your field. That's actually a big deal. By the time full-time grads are out, you've had 2-3 more years of experience stacking. You also self-fund, so no debt. The networking is weaker, though, because you're not in the same cohort intensity as full-time.
Full-time: the immersive cohort network is genuinely hard to replicate. If you're in a career where the alumni network or program brand matters a lot, it's worth it. Also, if you want to switch industries completely, full-time gives you recruiting access that part-time doesn't.
Bottom line: if you're staying in your field and want the credential for internal advancement or salary validation, part-time is a no-brainer. If you want to switch into consulting, banking, or make a major industry pivot, full-time at a named school is probably necessary.