I'm not too fussed either way. But I think that given bE will be making a lot of game decisions based off Founder forum feedback, its just the beginning of things to come. So the question is where do we draw the line? - Founders will shape the gameplay based off play test feedback - Founders will be instrumental to testing and overall game quality by raising bugs - Founders will be decision makers when new mechanics are introduced - Founders will make important balance decisions - Founders will participate in exclusive surveys Picking a 5th faction is actually a drop in the ocean when you factor in how much feedback will be given from Founders. If you care about the game that much, then you should probably consider being a founder. I respect that not everyone is willing to drop 40 bucks on a game they have no idea that will succeed. In that same vein you shouldn't expect to be a decision maker then. Be content following the game and accept the decisions the developers have made. You will still be able to give feedback and developers will still listen to you to some degree. Think of it as a company with stakeholders. You don't see the company making vital decisions based off what the public thinks, but off what the leadership and stakeholders decide.
Keeping it a community vote is winning, must be those poll bots rigging the vote. Thread is null and void get a job peasants.
Soooo ... Playing Devil's Advocate: Should anyone who cares to vote on post-release content get their say or should that be reserved for the game's purchasers and subbers ? 6 months from release they want to add a 6th sub-faction and a brand new Faction. Should anyone with an internet connection and a link to the poll on IGN get to vote on that or the people who've payed for the service and registered accounts ? I don't see that great a distinction from that and this from a business perspective. I feel like everyone invested should get a say but I'd prefer some Founder love.
I'm actually okay with both alternatives. I voted I would like everybody to vote, but I can see good arguments for both sides. I guess I'll sit this one out and see how it goes =P.
If it were possible I'd rather see the vote restricted to accounts with a certain number of posts so everyone who really cares could have a say. People who can't afford founders packs now or are on the fence might end up being some of the games biggest supporters after launch and it's unfortunate that they might not be able to have their voices heard. 40k has a very dedicated fan base that can unfortunately get a little fanatical at times. I know a few people who wouldn't be above stacking the odds in favor of their sub-faction with some throw away accounts. Even a handful of players doing this could be enough to swing a close vote so I have to side with the founders-only option for now.
I like that it was switched to founders only. Putting your money where your mouth is means a lot. Also, take a look at what places like 4chan do to open voting sites. I doubt anyone here really wants "Hitler did nothing wrong" to be a 5th subfaction.
