Originally Posted by Blayze
What are the chances that "Void Storage" and "Transmogrifier" are simply pointlessly confusing ways of saying "Shard Trader" and "Enchanting Trainer"?
|
Agreed. I still vote for needlessly complex "Banker" for the first. The second being "Alchemy Trainer", "Enchanting Trainer", or even one of the specialized trade good vendors (vials, a couple strange dust and wood, or whatever).
New guys filling old roles (whether or not a playable race) seems a simpler explanation (Occam's razor) than brand new features. When they tease new features they tend to put up screenshots of that feature's UI.
It's somewhat dangerous marketing. Internet is abuzz with rampant speculation (picture's almost viral at this point). When our greatest dreams don't materialize, some folks will get upset, blame Blizzard and quit (these people are idiots, but still exist). If Blizzard has a new feature, advertise it and instead you get some folks thrilled and wanting to re-subscribe or at least stay subscribed (these people may or may not be idiots, and also exist). The screenshot we have could lead to some cancellations, but no additions. Screenies of a new feature could lead to either/both. The second is the better marketing to release.
To Crow - yeah, we really don't need new races at all. Unfortunately Blizzard has somewhat painted themselves into the corner of new X-pac must have new class or new races. Since last we heard they had no good ideas for a new Hero class (and balance issues for DK were/are a nightmare) it leans towards new races. Some segment of the playerbase seems to love leveling a new race - it makes some of the old a bit new again. If X-pacs effectively only carry new dungeon/raid content, what distinguishes them from patches in the eyes of the average player?