Wishlist:
0) rewrite the netcode
1) remove the singeplayer campaign completely
2) add all the neat realistic features that have been mentioned here
3) concentrate on multiplayer maps and gameplay
I had no fun playing the campaign with bots, being forced to control them and kill other bots - it's just boring. IMHO 99% of ARMA players are playing online most of the time. IMHO instead of feeding us with new campaigns you should concentrate on multiplayer and it's capabilities.
First of all it is YOU guys who must invent new multiplayer scenarios and carefully design gameplay and balance. YOU have a lot more power and skills to make it feel polished and entertaining. Mil.sim doesn't have to be boring!
Understand this - well designed multiplayer in a mil.sim will help you to gain gamers and popularity. Because it's all about multiplayer now, and not just one game session with random folks. Please learn from other games. Your game is not something different from any game on the market. It is still a game and can take benefits from new ideas.
Ok i'll try to pick on some stuff that might be helpfull. ARMA2 players are really different by the skills and knowledges. Don't skip that! Let there be a single server with each gamer stats. Let them grow in ranks on a global level. This stats could be used in a tons of different ways! But most of the time for the proper player placement. What do i mean by that? ARMA2 have a real problem with teamplay. Due to bad gamedesign in multiplayer scenarios. Proper player position in a team will lead to much more interesting and realistic fights. Think how easier it will be for the players to understand if the certain guy is capable of leading the squad if there will be a global ranks and skills for every player. That's just the first step.
Second problem is the lack of servers and lack of fun scenarios to play. You must support your fans guys. You must do it, because the higher quality the servers will be, the more guys will play. It's simple isn't it? Multiplayer quality control is the key to get to the top 10 of most awesome games (and raise some good money, because i want you to have as much money as you need to make the ultimate mil.sim). Ok even with a lot of servers there is a problem to find good team mates. There must be an option to find and invite your mates or just the right people, included in the global ranking system. That system also allows you to understand if you will be able to play well in the teams that are now on server. For example if you are a stupid noob that can't even fly a chopper - you don't want to mess with professional pilots. There must be servers for newbies with instructors (some guys just love to teach somebody). Probably some guys from your development team could have some fun training the newbies - why not?
Ok now about scenarios and gamedesign. There must be at least 10 different global scenarios with different rules and different gameplay. For example - ranked team based warfare with armored vehicles crews, pilots, snipers/arty, support teams, intel and assault, that actually places players in teams by they global ranks and skills, AND with team leaders that will give orders. Gamedesign of such scenario is based on points taken from following orders and teamplay. Going away from your squad will lead to points loss. I'm not going to describe the gamedesign completely because it's your job to polish the gameplay and understand what is better to have fun in your game. All i need to say is that you must concentrate real hard on multiplayer scenarios and make them as awesome as possible. Try to make as much PvP scenarios as possible, because they are the core of your success. Actually in PvP games you maybe will start to realize that you don't need a whole island for a tight intense battles.
4) Make that island 4-8 times smaller.
It may increase network stability and most of the time we don't really need the whole island... How about making a lot of small islands? Each island will be surrounded by some non walking area, but will be available for jets and choppers. I think you need that awfully big island only for campaign - am i wrong? In multiplayer however long distances are good for long walks only. It's not that thing that adds realism. It may be 100 times more real with a small island but a proper wounds, destroyable environment, neat physics and all the stuff guys wants now.
I know it may look like battlefields or call of duties, but it's not. Awesome multiplayer will make this title shine and i'm sure will easily get 10 to 50% of arcade shooters auditory. Because in ARMA you always have a different experience, due to endless count of situations you can get in. But every situation must be fun in order to keep new auditory. It is not fun to run 2km because you have no other option. It is not fun to organize a proper support if no one actually cares (just fragging), or there is no benefits from it, or you risking to not be evacuated, and then run 2km again. The game can still be a mil.sim without those sandbox elements. Can't there be a AI support for you to take you away from the last point, or take you to the next point in auto mode? You know it's always hard to organize a proper assault with only 32 players. 32 players is a SWAT vs Terrorists/Gangs operation, but not a global warfare. That's why you have to add some automated things to the gameplay in order to cut unnecessary boring stuff and add options for such automations. For example - i want a tank at the given point as quickly as possible. In real combat if i have a right to call for such support then that tank will be delivered, but in a game with 32 players those guys just don't have time to help me. And it is not a balance, because you always can limit support resources (bots) and keep the balance, it's just a lack of helpful ideas but with a lot of possibilities on the other hand. Players don't have time to work in support team - they want to participate in a fight. It's a mil.sim not a support pilot sim right? That's why imho those functions must be taken by AI. Ofcourse you will still have an option to deliver that tank by yourself, but it's actually a boring thing to do - leave it to AI. A lot of things could be AI based, including the intel and air-strikes/arty. That's just my ideas for your multiplayer scenarios. I've seen some scenarios with such things and they was a lot more fun then standard "do it all by yourself dude". Again - AI support it's a must have to represent a global warfare with 32 players on the server. Fights will be more tight and less predictable (when you know there will be no support because you can see all the 16 enemies, but your team just obtained couple of tanks). And again - i'm talking about YOUR multiplayer scenarios. Very polished well designed scenarios, that you will sell later to us.
Yeah that's number five.
5) Sell additional multiplayer content with additional scenarios/small islands.
I have only ARMA2 and ARMA2 OA. All other stuff i don't want to buy, because i don't need singleplayer campaigns, if in multiplayer the things are the same again and again. But i will buy multiplayer stuff, just because i'm tired of EVO/Warfare/Domi, and only if YOU will swear for it's quality. Think about it in that way: war conflicts around the world with different goals and rules. Not just conquer the island, but up to 10 different multiplayer missions, including the conquer. On each new territory. Each three months for example. I'll buy them all if they will be really different and properly designed.
A word about modders/map makers. I know some of them are really cool, but they can't and should'nt represent the quality of YOUR product. It's not an indie game to let people influence your reputation. Modders and map makers are good guys, but i'd say move they content away from the main game content. Mods/player maps - to the different section of the global server search window. Please understand that it is YOU who must control and maintan the multiplayer quality of your game. Do you know how many people turned their backs on you just because of some multiplayer scenario that was really boring/with ingorant fraggers only/where no one was in mood to answer newbies question? A lot of guys. A lot of YOUR potentional auditory. And a lot of our future teammates, that would never be them. It is the situation.
Ok i hope you will understand me even if my engrish is awfull. I love ARMA and if there were some bad words in that text, that's just because i want that game to be perfect and gain populatiry. I'm 100% sure that modern arcade shooters represents nothing but old design, incapable of handling a real firefight. Call of duties will change with time, first it's ironsight, then it'll be a realistic ballistics. But it will never be as satisfying as ARMA, when ARMA can already represent any of CoD mp scenario, so what is stopping CoD fans from joining our community? Multiplayer. And multiplayer again. Graphics and physics can't replace gamedesign and even if BF3 will look better then ARMA3 it won't be able to represent a real firefight as good as ARMA. I believe that awesome multiplayer must be YOUR main goal now. Please think about it before you will make another singleplayer campaign.
