I was genuinely curious to see how many people were still playtesting now that the survey period has already come and gone. (The survey I received in e-mail said that the polls were closed as of mid-June.) When I handed my survey in, I felt like my job was done.
This is one of my concerns as well. I'm still playtesting, but any new feedback that I want to give, I don't really have the ability to do it in a fashion that I think will get any real notice.
I was kind of hoping that surveys on the first iteration of the playtest would come out once a month or so to catch any new concerns and to provide any other feedback that didn't come up in the first survey.
It was disappointing to me that the survey closed before my group had chance to participate; to me the whole process is far, far too rapid - as opposed to those who feel that it's far too slow.
So Wizards is in the position where by choosing to respond to one group's demands they are ignoring/hurting another group? I can't help but think that there's a useful comparison somewhere in there...
Here might be part of the problem: we did. Years ago. My group is going through things find, little by little, and might get some new players (as in TOTALLY new to gaming) to try, but ... it's Keep on the Borderlands. Everyone (well, except total newbies) has played it. Once the new mechanics are down, it's easy to see how someone can tire of it.Playing through all of the Caves of Chaos is no small feat. I find it a little hard to believe so many people have already.
But, that aside, the two companies have/had different tasks: Paizo was expanding and developing a core system (D&D 3.5) which had been comprehensively playtested to death over a period of years by tens of thousands of people every week, whereas WotC is attempting to write a new system from the ground up.