tl;dr: sorry for being too verbose. what I wanted to say is just "let the storm pass = deciding current players are disposable", and THAT is not "smart" at all
I totally agree with the idea that this is probably their current way of thinking. Not at all with the idea that this is the "smart" thing to do.
If, like I believe, they decided to stop communication because we're too negative for them, then "let the storm pass" concretely means nothing more than "wait until the current angry playerbase vanishes into oblivion out of weariness, then rebuild a fresh hype with new players on the long term".
In other words, that's nothing more than (intentional?) scam. Especially if that goes without them fixing core gameplay and perf issues.
Calling that strategy "smart" is okay only if you're after a hit-and-run short-term profit. But if you really plan to "support this game for the next 10 years", then it's just dumb.
This is the internet, so bad press doesn't just disappear. Low usage stats and bad Steam reviews from neglected players will stay, and most likely get worse. So time passing it will become harder and harder to seduce new people.
Sure, this strategy will likely trap a bunch of naive console players (if CO ever manage to get that bloated game to work on these limited architectures)... But then it will be over.
Extrapolating just a bit: if they really have decided stop to communicate with us until we disappear instead of admitting what's wrong and start the consistent work needed to fix it, it means they decided for a pure cash grab, consciously or unconsciously assuming it's okay for them if we (early players) are all fooled.
Their intention is probably not that evil though. They probably really think that a couple of small bugfixes with each DLC will be enough to build a fresh, spending, not disappointed playerbase in like a year or so. But that probably won't.
In conclusion, I hope I'm wrong. But I've come to a point where that hope now feels just like a fantasy.