I agree with the people who say that Highlands aren't just the peaks of the mountains.
Yeah I don't think that is what people meant. Like, of course mountains have forests nobody disagrees with that, but that's not the first thing you think about when you think of when you picture a mountain. Same goes with highlands, yes those can be forested, but is that really what you think of first when you picture highlands?
Personally I think that's the thing that made me doubt mountain/highlands most. If I look at all the other biome based animal packs, you can take away the animals and I'll still instantly know what it is. Wetlands has an obvious wetland, Arid has an obvious desert, Grasslands has grasslands. Sure, you'd get different nuances with people calling it Prairie Pack or Desert Pack; but there wouldn't be much more than that. I just can't say that for this artwork. Take away the animals, and all I see is a forest.
And if we're talking about good marketing, I do think that a good marketing image should make it instantly clear, even if you don't know the animal on the key-art. You shouldn't have to know that it's a mountain animal to know it's a mountain pack. Heck, Grasslands still is instantly recognizable as grassland/steppe/prairie even despite the fact that the featured animal wasn't an animal people would instantly list if you say "give me a bunch of grassland animals."
Same goes for the colour. Colour should double down on the theme, but not be essential to understand the theme. This might just be me, as accessibility is important in my field of work and people who are colour blind should also be able to guess the theme instantly. I'm not saying that it's something that Frontier takes into account, but I at least hope they do.
That being said, I really do also see the arguments for Highlands. Mountains not so much, then the artwork would really not be good at conveying it; but highlands I could understand what they went for. Even though I still wouldn't give it a price for the best key-art for that
