Define “New”

800, really? 800 new monsters, you say? How many of those are the same guy with a slightly different name and color pallete, plus or minus a few hit points or abilities? Heck, how many of those are new models, rather than declaring this green-ish orc the “orc mauler”? Would 40 be a fair guess? It feels optimistic; the 158 types of undead must have at least 10 models amongst them, but I don’t know that the 321 types of orcs have 20.

This from the game that advertised how many characters had been made.

: Zubon

12 thoughts on “Define “New””

  1. Turbine is a great developer, but sometimes, yeah, there is a bit of a disconnect between the developers/designers and marketing. At least they (the devs) are very active on their forums to smooth out the marketing misteps.

  2. “800 new monsters”

    Wait, did they just hire 800 new people for their marketing department?

    @Ravious – good to know the devs smooth it out on the boards, thing is a lot of us don’t read the boards so the entire company still looks really, really stupid =)

  3. lolololololol I’m sure the 80 models with 10 times that in color and flaming/slimy/silly texture variations is probably more accurate yes. There ARE going to be some new monsters though. They have a picture of one of them on the loading screen. :P And there’s a new 12 man raid with new boss monsters. Almost all the bosses in the Rift had new models, along with the fire giants and the Overseer and most of the normal monsters too except for trolls. They need to lower, not increase, the number of things you need to kill for those traits though, its out of control.

  4. Ya, you can’t really fault the devs for this stuff; it’s pure marketing cheese. It reminds me of those “12 Albums for a penny” deals that Columbia House used to put in the middle of the TV Guide. Only in this case, I’m not really sure what the logic behind it all is. Ultimately, this will convince very few “non-believers”, to buy into a xpac. And everyone who takes this message at face value is probably going to be wildly disappointed. I think these marketeers need to realize that they are encouraging long-term investors and not simply flipping a product.

  5. Fore sure. Some would argue that a lifetime is the longest-term there is. All knee-slapping aside, I think we can agree that this is short-sighted marketing schmaltz, which is equal parts ineffectual and disingenuous — not the best marketing angle for a subscription-based game.

Comments are closed.