No, I don't feel the need to justify IP standards: most are described in the articles How to Pick a Good Image
and Just a Face and a Caption
. I don't think you'd feel compelled to explain why natter is bad, unless someone asks. If you have any questions about any of those points, I am sure anyone would be happy to discuss it.
Duck's observations seem legitimate to me, especially "calm, focused". Those other examples don't seem like they are actually part of the image, or otherwise don't make sense. (Intense, maybe, but not frightened. Cleanliness is irrelevant; he also looks male, and lots of other things that are similarly irrelevant. And his attire suggests that regardless of his age, he lived way before Woodstock.)
The fact that it's a video game unit type only barely matters. If it was a picture of Legolas, the identity of the subject would barely matter. Both are relevant, but what it looks like it is is more important than what it actually is. That picture might also be of just "a guy with a bow". Look at it from a functional viewpoint of what a person thinks when they see it for the first time, and assume they are unfamiliar with the source.
make the mistake of basing that judgement ("a unit type is okay") on the title Archer Archetype
rather than its description; sorry.
Don't understand what you want different, or what's up with the tone. Whether you agree with their reasoning or not, everyone
here is genuinely trying to help. Please don't assume or imply otherwise. Nobody is "fine with leaving it", exactly, unless you mean leaving it in preference to having no image at all, in which case that's true: it's fine. There is no suggested alternative in this thread, though. Any
image (except a few, by admin fiat) can be replaced by an improvement. You are underestimating the importance of making an actual suggestion.
edited 30th Sep '12 2:49:38 PM by rodneyAnonymous