I think this is smart. The people who aren't interested in the single player campaign don't have to wait as long, and most of us who are aren't going to mind, since we'll be able to play the campaign after the multiplayer frenzy dies out anyways.
I'll just be annoyed if it goes from smart business sense to greedy business sense if the DLCs are overpriced.
Careful, you just said overpriced meaning you'd actually pay for them. They said FREE. I really don't know why they can't wait a month if that is all it takes to make a FULL game complete. Seems stupid to me but whatever.
I don't play multiplayer (rarely - too many idiots, kids, cheaters etc). I'd rather just have a 20-100hr game alone thanks Now lan party, that's different. I'm not playing with idiots then and nobody in the room is cheating.
I wish more companies will do this with certain games.
Multiplayer being released first is a chance to test the game/game engine while it's "out in the wild" thereby giving the developers a chance to see what is wrong with the game when it is most stressed... thereby, hopefully, giving us a more polished product...
Arma 3 is the game that's least filled with idiot kids. Especially so if you join a clan like many do. Also, if you aren't going to buy this game because it has no campaign you're doing it wrong. The Arma games are all about multiplayer teamplay, the amazing mission editor, and the included epic scenarios (which it still will have). So I honestly think very few people will mind.
i think 99% of arma players couldnt care less. the arma community is somewhat of a smart one when it comes to campaigns and missions. people join groups and create their own missions and goals with other groups. well, thats my experience with it anyways. its quite fun.