Quote Originally Posted by Adire View Post
I don't think anyone is denying that Au Ra as they are now will be popular, only voicing disappointment that diversity is losing out and a race that should be fiercer than some of the present ones given its history is being made the smallest, arguably "cutesyiest" race besides Lalafells. I think you're overestimating the impact that an appearance like in the concept art would have on their profits though.

I'm pretty sure the Charr didn't cost GW any losses in profits for example. I don't imagine many people would see mostly human races, then one mostly bestial race and go "welp, not playing this game". Creating a richer game world is going to help a game in the long run, not be a waste of resources. People aren't going to avoid a game where one race is bestial and the others are mostly human.
My point wasn't that beastial races will drive people away but such a race is a high risk to resources. I don't expect SE to be taking risks at the moment. 1.0 isn't that long ago. They are going to play it safe until they feel comfortable that

what they have is secure enough to play with risk. Making a new race that in the end aren't played by many people isn't going to be a good investment and in the end games are products for businesses. They need to produce products people actually are going to use.

So they are going to play it safe at least for now. To be honest the other reason is probably that creating a new race that matches what we see in the concept art probably would have taken a lot more work than the Au Ra did. Those clawed hands, for example, would take a lot more customisation of current armour designs to accommodate for.