Avatar requirements needlessly strict?

[Daginni]

As the title says. I believe that Avatar requirements are WAY to strict. The requirement of 10kb or less requires you to hack and slash Avatars into pieces in order to simply be able to have one, and with that said the quality of it is rubbish. Lets not even talk about how mutated a .gif is when we somehow manage to get it onto the forum.

This rule might've held ground 5 years ago. But as of now, we got to realize that Dial-up doesn't exist anymore, and if it does then that lone minority needs to stop being cheap when it comes to buying internet.

If anything, double the requirement to 20kb, but anything more would be a god send.

What are your thoughts? I personally just want to see more interesting Avatars on the forum.

[lazymangaka]

While it's entirely possible to work with the 10kb limit without hacking and slashing an avatar down to size, I will agree that it's a little over-restrictive. Too often I find myself with a perfect avatar that clocks in at 11.3kb or something similar.

[Lolman]

As the title says. I believe that Avatar requirements are WAY to strict. The requirement of 10kb or less requires you to hack and slash Avatars into pieces in order to simply be able to have one, and with that said the quality of it is rubbish. Lets not even talk about how mutated a .gif is when we somehow manage to get it onto the forum.

This rule might've held ground 5 years ago. But as of now, we got to realize that Dial-up doesn't exist anymore, and if it does then that lone minority needs to stop being cheap when it comes to buying internet.

If anything, double the requirement to 20kb, but anything more would be a god send.

What are your thoughts? I personally just want to see more interesting Avatars on the forum.

I am surprised that my avatar is not taken down. My signature were (and it was within the limit too.

Yes, it is kinda way too strict, other sites allows up to 100kb.

[Snakez]

Then we would get annoying flashy avatars

[Daginni]

I am surprised that my avatar is not taken down. My signature were (and it was within the limit too.

Yes, it is kinda way too strict, other sites allows up to 100kb.

Avatars that are uploaded are automatically chopped down to 10kb. Quality and Size are the victims of that. Another thing I very much hate, even if I understand the reason. But in other words, its impossible to upload a Avatar that is over-sized.

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 11:16 PM ----------

Then we would get annoying flashy avatars

Glad you look at the glass half empty.

Yes, there probably will be obnoxious Avatars uploaded. But most Avatars on forums are actually really cool.

[Fuzzzie]

Part of the restrictions placed upon avatars and signature images is that large image files drastically slow down the site, especially for users using a mobile device. Consider loading 20x10Kb Avatars + 20x50Kb signatures per page, you're looking at 1.2Mb per page assuming everyone uses one. That can add up pretty quick.

[Doylez]

Part of the restrictions placed upon avatars and signature images is that large image files drastically slow down the site, especially for users using a mobile device. Consider loading 20x10Kb Avatars + 20x50Kb signatures per page, you're looking at 1.2Mb per page assuming everyone uses one. That can add up pretty quick.

Maybe they could add an option
- hide all Avatars
and/or
- hide all BIG (>10Kb) Avatars
for mobile users?

[Fuzzzie]

Maybe they could add an option
- hide all Avatars
and/or
- hide all BIG (>10Kb) Avatars
for mobile users?

The option exists. You can change it under your general settings, under the Thread Display options.

You can turn off Avatars, Signatures and even images displayed in threads.

[Doylez]

The option exists. You can change it under your general settings, under the Thread Display options.

You can turn off Avatars, Signatures and even images displayed in threads.

Oh so the site slowing down shouldn't really be an issue then if you can just turn the Avatars off?

[openair]

The option exists. You can change it under your general settings, under the Thread Display options.

You can turn off Avatars, Signatures and even images displayed in threads.

Thanks much. I was about to say increasing these limits would just eat up more of peoples monthly caps just so some can look a little prettier. But now i know how to save even more of my monthly cap AND not have to look at all the current/future 'pretty.'

[Arlee]

Oh so the site slowing down shouldn't really be an issue then if you can just turn the Avatars off?

However some people like see'ing the avatars and identify people with their avatars. Also, honestly there isn't a real need to increase the allowances as there are tons and tons of possible avatars a person can possibly have. Sure it might mean someone can use a particularly fancy one, but the is also not really a need for those to be allowed.

[Daginni]

However some people like see'ing the avatars and identify people with their avatars. Also, honestly there isn't a real need to increase the allowances as there are tons and tons of possible avatars a person can possibly have. Sure it might mean someone can use a particularly fancy one, but the is also not really a need for those to be allowed.

Yeah, but ONLY 10kb's? Compared to other Forums, that is insanely small. You guys also said that people can turn off Avatars. So what's the problem with increasing it, even if only by 20 or 30 kb if a person using a mobile device can simple turn off Avatars, Images, and Signatures?

[Boubouille]

Mostly prevents people with animated avatars. 10kb is slightly restrictive and I'll think about bumping it up a little, maybe 20kb.

[Rozelynne]

10kb is absolutely fine and all these pony avatars are obnoxious enough without seeing them flashing at us too.

[halmotors]

10kb is absolutely fine and all these pony avatars are obnoxious enough without seeing them flashing at us too.

If I could have her winking at you right now, I totally would.

OT: I don't want obnoxious animated avatars all over the place. I think the 10kb is more than generous; who needs a .png avatar at 600dpi, honestly? There's plenty of people who have done just fine with the 10kb limit; you look like you've done fine yourself.

[Gawwad]

10kb is absolutely fine and all these pony avatars are obnoxious enough without seeing them flashing at us too.

Ad Blocking works pretty well, though it's a bit of a pain with the sheer amount of them on the forums.

[peggleftw]

Mostly prevents people with animated avatars. 10kb is slightly restrictive and I'll think about bumping it up a little, maybe 20kb.

that would be nice, just dont allow flashy avatars i had to cut my giraffe down and reduce the quality a but to fit it within the requirements

[Sy]

to be honest, the only 100x100 pics that got a visible quality loss when proberly tuned down to 10kb are animated ones. you just need to do it the right way. just uploading a 20kb pic to mmoc and let the site to it's forced quality loss thing is not a good idea.
photoshop (and probably other programs too) have an option exactly for that. it's called "save-for-web" and allows tiny file-size without visible quality loss for pictures of that scale.

if you don't have/don't want to get a program for that or are unsure how to do it, just ask a nice person (like me!) to do it for you. so if you've got any non animated pics in mind that you want as avatar, just pm them to me or something
some animated ones might work too ofc, but full-color pictures usually just get blurry, even with save-for-web. but then again, that seems to be the main reason for the 10kb-rule in the first place^^

hope that helps.

[Robinhoodexe]

Yeah, I find it a bit too strict. Enlarge the requirement to 20kb or something. But yes, that'd be a bit bad for mobile users (such as myself). I'm aware of the option to disable avatars/signatures, but I like them when I'm on my laptop.

Another good reason for a mobile version of mmo-champion!!

[inux94]

20kb would be good, what really slows down my phone browsing here are the ads, not to mention the 2-4 times of going back just to get out of the topic.