I think RO2 has failed to gain a huge following due to its precarious place in a market that is completely different than 2006. It does something (realism) that is either deeper in other games (namely ArmA 2) or done half-assed in more arcadey games ("hardcore" mode) but is good enough for some people.
There's something inherent in the design of the game that isn't striking a chord with potential customers. I've seen worse games become several times more popular by word of mouth. Sadly I feel like if RO2 was gonna "make it" it would have by now. The Steam news isn't going to pop up after someone finishes playing TF2 with a thing that says "Red Orchestra 2: GOTY. Now with a StuG III!" and suddenly thousands of people are going to go "NO WAAAAAIIIIII!!! Now I GOTTA buy it!"
It's not the end of the world, the game can survive and be enjoyable with a small community for a long time. I just think people should give up the dream of this suddenly becoming a hit years after it's been released.
In terms of popularity, I see it in two ways: the game can become popular and praised by the fans or it can become popular and praised by the mainstream audience, or both - even though I have never seen that.
The story with RO2 is nothing new.
I can draw direct similarities to games like ''Operation Flashpoint'' Dragon Rising, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six, Brothers in Arms: Furious Four, Hitman...
First off it is
incredibly hard to re-lit the magic found in a bottle... e.i to be as good as the original game. No matter if we're talking about RO OST or ArmA Cold War Crisis.
Second; Appealing to the core fans of any niche game and
at the same time trying to appeal to the mainstream is very difficult and I have never seen
any game succeed in this goal. The game have either become an instant fail (Operation Flashpoint: Red River, Brothers in Arms: Furious Four), or only managed to appeal to the mainstream (current Splinter Cell games), or have failed to appeal to both its core fans and the mainstream.
Brothers in Arms: Furious four failed not after it's release, but
before it's release. The first trailer caused extreme amount of negative response. So much that Gearbox and Ubi decided to change the IP of the game.
Hitman Absolution is somewhat in the same situation as RO2. User reviews, and fans complaints, is quite similar: streamlined levels, lack of freeroaming, lack of specific features such as a rifle suitcase, certain animations, and by far the most popular line: Blood money is better, this is not like blood money blabla'' then someone reply how the game must evolve and not just become Blood Money in HD.
The reason to why games like Splinter Cell succeeded by making it more accessible was simply because they never did appeal to their fans. They abandoned their fans and focused 100% on developing a simple game, easy for all, and that's precicely why they succeeded with their formula.
There is people who play all kinds of games and never care about changes. Those who jump from game to game. Then there is people who may also play all kinds of games, but are religiously stuck for certain games. If BIS dumbed down ARMA III by even making slight changes such as less commands, simplified weaponhandling, and some sort of progression system, the game would lose huge amount of players. If taken further the game would be abandoned by the fans. In a situation like that, one can only hope that the game is dumbed down enough to draw casual players to it, but this is rarely the case, which means that the game ends up aiming at an audience that doesn't exist.
Now,
What about Rising Storm?
I believe that it will follow the same way as RO2. And this will most likely just make history repeat itself. I really hope that Rising Storm will feel like a more solid experience.
But I don't know. What decision should be taken? What are the consequenses?
The Zoom systems in fact need all sorts of improvements..
