magcolo said in forum #416743:
This brings out something I've been wanting to discuss. There isn't a firm standard on non-playable appearances from story stages for the moment, but most of them use descriptive qualifiers instead of source qualifiers. I don't really mind either way, but I would like there to be a standard.
Counterarguments to source qualifier:
- Multiple non-playable appearances from the same source, such as Kal'tsit's A Walk in the Dust outfits (forum #388836).
- It's unlikely for most people unfamiliar with the material to know the origin, so it might create confusion, especially for characters with a lot of costume tags.
- Certain appearances already have an easy and concise descriptive term, such as the *_(young)_(arknights) tags, the *_(summer)_(arknights) tags and the *(npc)_(arknights) tags.
Counterarguments to descriptive qualifier:
- Harder to think of a descriptive name for certain appearances.
- Certain appearances already have an easy and concise source term, such as the *(act*)_(arknights) tags.
In the specific case of Frostnova I think frostnova (if) (arknights) or frostnova (rhodes island uniform) (arknights) are better qualifiers.
Also, we already have rhodes island uniform, so I don't know if we want to double tag her with a costume tag. I don't oppose the idea, but do note in most cases the decision is no. Does anyone remember if there are exceptions?
I also personally believe that my naming for this outfit of Frostnova is overly complex. The current name was chosen because it felt like the safest option at the time.
However, I think it's necessary to distinguish this outfit from the standard Rhodes Island uniform Firstly, while most uniforms are primarily black, this one is grey. Secondly, this is the official outfit for the if Frostnova survives and joins Rhodes Island, making it different from other fan-made designs of a surviving Frostnova.