File talk:Silverfish JE1 BE1.png

Sorry about the three identical reverts, my cache was confusing me --HexZyle 01:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * You know, what do you think reverting it a third time is going to do? It just adds an extra upload wasting more space. – ultradude25 ( T at 01:58, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you even know what cache is? And why did you revert the image back to a speculative model? --HexZyle 04:06, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * EDIT - oh wait, your revert is correct (looking at file image dimensions) my cache is MOST UPDATED IMAGE = "that 3d speculative model on the sand from the video", that's why i reverted it three times, because every time i reverted it, it still looked the same.


 * Do you? Because the fact that you reverted to exactly the same image 3 times suggests you don't. If you revert two times and notice that it's just the cache, then why revert a third time to exactly the same image as the first two? Thus making the cache take even longer to update... – ultradude25 ( T at 04:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I know i might have noticed it by the second, but I didn't until the third revert (I was a little nervouse because i thought i stuffed the revert up, and rushed it. i rush things when im nervous) --HexZyle 04:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * EDIT - Though 10KB is hardly wasted space :P --HexZyle 04:58, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Isometric
Just want to note that my rendering is isometric (dimetric, to be exact). It's the movement pose as seen in the game, so the parts aren't perfectly aligned in a row. It looks better this way in my opinion. --Barracuda 09:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * --Yurisho 09:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Dimetric isn't isometric, but I like it better too. – Scaler (t) 09:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're right. So the images here are not dimetric, they just have different angles (30°/45°). --Barracuda 12:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe isometric for blocks, and dimetric for mobs would be a good way to go. Dimetric just seems to look better for the mobs some how. – ultradude25 ( T &#124; C ) at 11:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess that's because some images were rendered in a 45° angle instead of the usual 30°, which looks a bit strange. I confused that with dimetric perspective. --Barracuda 12:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I also like this one better, because it shows the silverfish's movement, the other one just shows it as being completely straight, without any movement. ☁ Shockman25 ☂ Talk ☁ 00:53, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, consistency
I agree with THE GMoD here. I don't feel there's a need to deviate from the de facto standard of isometric (or dimetric) view for the silverfish. Sure, doing so helps to illustrate movement, but is that really necessary? If it were necessary, we might as well angle the creeper's legs to show that it walks, or rotate the Enderman's head to point to the camera to show that it tends to stare at the player, or angle the squid to show that it isn't usually upright. What makes the silverfish so special? &mdash; fuchsi a n i a  05:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Then why don't we angle the creepers legs or turn the Endermen's head? Because we haven't gotten around to it. When a change is made on a wiki, it is not necissary for EVERYTHING to be changed at the same time in order to please impatient people. The majority of changes on the website build up over time. Don't squash the chicken before it has had time to develop. (for lack of a better metaphor) --HexZyle 07:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS --HexZyle 07:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sick of these "What about article X?" based arguments, they're so weak. --HexZyle 07:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)