The official poll and this one are 2 very different questions. This one asks if non-cosmetics are "critical" but whether they are welcomed as a bonus is skipped over. The official also doesn't cover the full range of answers but that's why in both cases the posts are no doubt read and considered. Both are worthy of discussion. This is not me being pedantic but you realize people have been calling EC P2W for months before the Founders was announced. It really falls on the devs to counter perception where possible and accept where it's not. Most people come around, some don't but they tend to be undesirably stubborn creatures anyway.
This. I kind of like the idea of founders but I feel it would get a little tooooo awkward for the people that didn't buy founders packs if the devs went over the top. Over the top being relative here, I suppose they could have some unique game-play stuff and still keep it pretty minor (I'd still be against it, even if they pulled it off ok-ish).
Would I do a thing like th...hmm, yes, suppose I would. Don't worry, mate. We all make complete howlers from time to time.
i honestly dont care if there included or not, i dont find them p2w if there balanced right, or released later. But if people think its more like to hurt the commuinty, then just don't include them, or make them skins ownly
From the QA portion of the founders posts: EDIT: I'm pasting part of another post in here, it's cleaner. There are three reasons, IMO, that you want to acquire any given item in a game. 1) Increase in power - benefits from being exclusive (but is PtW) 2) Increase in cosmetic appeal - benefits from being exclusive (doesn't affect gameplay) 3) Is fun to use - does not benefit from being exclusive If an item is fun to use, but has no additional cosmetic appeal and no additional power, how does it benefit you to have it exclusively? The reason you're buying it is to increase your enjoyment, but other people having it doesn't impact that! The only people it benefits is the devs, because people feel like they're not getting maximum enjoyment unless they purchase the item, and spend money on it. That's the same conceptual model of a PtW game, just minus the balance impact. And as a commander or squad leader, what kind of restrictions will this bring on? If a founders-only vehicle is best suited to a certain kind of assault, I want everyone else to have access to it. I want them to be able to order it when necessary, I want the extra tactical flexibility I get when doing so, and I gain absolutely nothing by restricting it to founders. I don't think this is even a win-lose situation. I think it might just be lose-lose.
look like the founder will become the child with the ball for a different sport: all the child have the soccer ball, but only the founder child have soccer and basket ball, so when founder child log off they take the ball for basket, and nobody can play basket whitout founder child. founder child don't win more, founder child don't make more point, founder child have more fun! all the child are equal but founder child are more equal than other.
I wil buy the Founders because i have high hopes for the Game and i want to be part of it, from the beginning. The items and skins are nice, but even without them, i would get a Pack.
This isn't about the skins, as stated in both the question and the post - I'm all for cosmetics! It is only for founder only unique vehicles and weaponry that the rest of the playerbase would be locked off from.
