I think we can allow good subjective questions without becoming "openly accepting of subjective questions" or removing the "Subjective and Argumentative" close reason.
If we exclude game recommendations, which I've mentioned are a bit of a special case, then our "Closed as Subjective and Argumentative" list looks something like the following.
We're not like Programmers - we are striving to be an authoritative source of Q&A for Gaming. To that end, it is important to not turn a focus away from objectivity, so closing questions that are too subjective, or which are subjective and argumentative, should remain a task we continue to do.
This does not prohibit us from allowing subjective content period. Strategy questions tend to be pretty subjective in some senses of the word, but usually qualify for 5, if not all 6, of those guidelines. Indeed, if you follow those guidelines, you'll probably end up with a question that's acceptable. badp links a pretty good example, which qualifies for all 6 in my eyes.
We shouldn't look at the guidelines as a measure of "allowing subjective content". Instead, it's more of a better way for us to moderate what is acceptable without changing any of our existing policy; a supporting element, if you will. We've been doing pretty good about this even before the guidelines were introduced.