› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

More Art Thievery

1…34689…14

Comments

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    SpottyGekko said:
    Turrican187 said:
    Distopia said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>>They might want to pay closer attention to what art is being included in the future and that they are actually paid for.<<< I agree with that ... especially when hired freelancers are involved. 

    For all we know (or NOT know) CIG has tried out certain art and has paid for (or will pay for) the art piece that will be used in the final game. 


    Have fun
    That was my thought as well, they are still designing things, so who knows whether they'll buy those images for the final product, could just be a place holder for flair, or as you said testing out different images to use in the background. We won't really know that until release, maybe there will be a twitch stream that hunts down watermarks if and when SC releases. 

    As they say though someone is always looking for that gotcha! moment.
    then it's still theft ... the download of a watermarked image itself is prohibited.
    The watermark does not make it royalty free, it is just for preview purposes.

    My best guess is that a freshman in game design thought it was a cool and quick idea. Ideas which get you fired.

    And if there is a need to hunt down watermarked images then be prepare to pay >$1000 instead of $6 for your stolen image, stock exchange will sue - that's what they do - again I can not see how anyone is OK with this waste of your backer money. This is not human error you have to ignore the price tags on purpose while downloading the watermarked image.
    I'll bet the artist that did this is pretty worried right now !

    Unless they have a good explanation, they could be facing a serious disciplinary hearing. Maybe even be taken off CIG's contractor list.

    CIG may even be reviewing their QA procedures for artwork. They must have hundreds (if not thousands) of images and models to vet. Perhaps they're not as diligent as they could be, seeing as everything is still in development and constantly changing. They're doing a fairly good job if this is the only slip-up that got through.. :lol:


    Isn't that the point though? There are multiple examples of this happening over time? It's not the only slip-up, but one of like 10 slip-ups?
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    edited February 2017
    You could always start a new topic about yesterday's ATV and discuss the Sq42 score, the PG for planets and various foliage instead of being judgemental and moaning about what other people are discussing.
    Nah I can't, if I do they'll accuse me of being a paid shill spreading marketing propaganda.

    Those haters are not worth it, so I prefer poke around the threads now, if nobody else wants to contribute to meaningful discussions about the game, but to controversy and drama, I'm going to do the same.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    CIG, in general, has done some slimy things. This is just another of 1000 examples. I actually enjoy reading the defense squad though. Especially when they repeat over and over again that it's all drama that amounts to nothing. The really sad thing is that they are apparently right. No matter how many times they fail, people keep donating and the project continues to bloat with very little results. It is at least interesting to watch.

    I remember in 2015 when everyone said by the end of 2016, SQ42 would be out. I think back then people were actually already disappointed that it wasn't out yet. Now? 2017 is looking unlikely. Once again, what will we say when 2018 rolls around? 2020? It always amazes me watching the same few people defend a project that is so obviously struggling.
    Most backers will say what they said since 2012 -

    "Take as much time as you need to make it the truely epic space game we look forward to."

    Its done when its done.


    >>>>>>> people keep donating and the project continues >>>>

    An accurate observation.


    Have fun



  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Erillion said:
    CIG, in general, has done some slimy things. This is just another of 1000 examples. I actually enjoy reading the defense squad though. Especially when they repeat over and over again that it's all drama that amounts to nothing. The really sad thing is that they are apparently right. No matter how many times they fail, people keep donating and the project continues to bloat with very little results. It is at least interesting to watch.

    I remember in 2015 when everyone said by the end of 2016, SQ42 would be out. I think back then people were actually already disappointed that it wasn't out yet. Now? 2017 is looking unlikely. Once again, what will we say when 2018 rolls around? 2020? It always amazes me watching the same few people defend a project that is so obviously struggling.
    Most backers will say what they said since 2012 -

    "Take as much time as you need to make it the truely epic space game we look forward to."

    Its done when its done.


    >>>>>>> people keep donating and the project continues >>>>

    An accurate observation.


    Have fun
    That's what makes it interesting to me. There are other parallels that I've noticed recently. People are ok with being kicked in the nuts as long as they are the ones that get to choose the foot.
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 787
    MaxBacon said:
    [...]
    Nah I can't, if I do they'll accuse me of being a paid shill spreading marketing propaganda.
    [...]
    Leave the rabbit alone! And now BTT :D

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    BeansnBread said:
    Isn't that the point though? There are multiple examples of this happening over time? It's not the only slip-up, but one of like 10 slip-ups?
    There's no multiple examples, this has been the first time a game asset was found as that.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    MaxBacon said:
    You could always start a new topic about yesterday's ATV and discuss the Sq42 score, the PG for planets and various foliage instead of being judgemental and moaning about what other people are discussing.
    Nah I can't, if I do they'll accuse me of being a paid shill spreading marketing propaganda.

    Hey ... we cant have two people being accused of being a paid shill here!

    That would stress out CIG's marketing department, when they have to divide Zero $ by 2.


    >>> You could always start a new topic about yesterday's ATV and discuss the Sq42 score, the PG for planets and various foliage  >>>

    I will do that anyway over the weekend when i have time ;-)    As i always do ...


    Have fun
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    MaxBacon said:
    BeansnBread said:
    Isn't that the point though? There are multiple examples of this happening over time? It's not the only slip-up, but one of like 10 slip-ups?
    There's no multiple examples, this has been the first time a game asset was found as that.
    Nope.

    They had a freelancer producing art for CIG ... he was using bits and pieces from the internet and incorporated it into his art.

    CIG pulled the pictures from the website as soon as they became aware of it.


    Have fun
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    Erillion said:
    Hey ... we cant have two people being accused of being a paid shill here!

    That would stress out CIG's marketing department, when they have to divide Zero $ by 2. 
    I KNOW RIGHT, then we'd have to share.
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Well, if there were two people...
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    Turrican187 said:
    MaxBacon said:
    [...]
    Nah I can't, if I do they'll accuse me of being a paid shill spreading marketing propaganda.
    [...]
    Leave the rabbit alone!
    *** pout ***


    Have fun
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    MaxBacon said:
    Nah I can't, if I do they'll accuse me of being a paid shill spreading marketing propaganda.

    Those haters are not worth it, so I prefer poke around the threads now, if nobody else wants to contribute to meaningful discussions about the game, but to controversy and drama, I'm going to do the same.
    I think discussing the topic, regardless of how important it might seem, is far better than just sitting in threads moaning about people discussing topics you don't like though....


    Isn't that the point though? There are multiple examples of this happening over time? It's not the only slip-up, but one of like 10 slip-ups?
    Some previous examples here https://www.reddit.com/r/quityourbullshit/comments/4ncg4v/video_game_company_fails_at_removing_watermark/

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    Erillion said:
    Nope.

    They had a freelancer producing art for CIG ... he was using bits and pieces from the internet and incorporated it into his art.

    CIG pulled the pictures from the website as soon as they became aware of it.


    Have fun
    Within the game's assets?

    The game assets is the actual copy of something that was added towards the game. Side of that there's concept art but that's not the same thing.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    BeansnBread said:
    That's what makes it interesting to me. There are other parallels that I've noticed recently. People are ok with being kicked in the nuts as long as they are the ones that get to choose the foot.
    I have to trust  your experience with unusual sexual preferences of other people here.

    Did you do field work to research those "other parallels"?


    Have fun
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    rpmcmurphy said:
    I think discussing the topic, regardless of how important it might seem, is far better than just sitting in threads moaning about people discussing topics you don't like though....
    I already discussed it, now we're just going on the circular loops repeating the same stuff over and over again as we can already notice.

    Let's keep trying to milk the dried up cow then...
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Really funny stuff Erillion!
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,306
    BeansnBread said:
    Really funny stuff Erillion!
    *** bows left ***

    *** bows right ***

    THANK YOU !

    THANK YOU !

    I LOVE YOU ALL !


    *** exit stage left - moonwalking out ***


    Have fun
  • ArawulfArawulf Guest WriterMember UncommonPosts: 597
    edited February 2017
    While there is ample room to criticize CIG all day, this is hardly one of those reasons. Critics spend all day criticizing them for wasting money and then skewer them for lowering costs by licensing some clip art. 

    Edit: It was pointed out that you can see the watermark in CIG's version which means they likely didn't pay for it. That's a no-no. Not a huge deal as long as they get it rectified, but still shouldn't be done.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited February 2017
    MaxBacon said:
    Within the game's assets?

    The game assets is the actual copy of something that was added towards the game. Side of that there's concept art but that's not the same thing.

    I don't think it's right to declare either way.
    To my way of looking at things I would say it is the same thing because a lot of this stuff was only shown on pages representing the ship they were trying to sell, that would probably be seen as a direct attempt to benefit from artwork that didn't belong to them.
    If it was a scenic generalised shot depicting the style they were aiming for then it would probably be classed differently.

    The "intent" is the important bit.
  • ArawulfArawulf Guest WriterMember UncommonPosts: 597
    Wait, I got it. CIG actually designed the art and has a side business selling clip art to raise more money. #Solved
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Arawulf said:
    While there is ample room to criticize CIG all day, this is hardly one of those reasons. Critics spend all day criticizing them for wasting money and then skewer them for lowering costs by licensing some clip art. 
    It would be great if they licensed it. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be the case. And there are other cases where that is also the case.

    But I agree with you that it's not the worst offense.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    edited February 2017
    I don't think it's right to declare either way.
    To my way of looking at things I would say it is the same thing because a lot of this stuff was only shown on pages representing the ship they were trying to sell, that would probably be seen as a direct attempt to benefit from artwork that didn't belong to them.
    If it was a scenic generalised shot depicting the style they were aiming for then it would probably be classed differently.

    I do not agree. Concept art is concept art, game assets are game assets.

    Within the reality of concept artwork, photobashing is a common practice and is not any crime; It easily falls upon fair usage, especially when it's partial stuff where the copied part is a small or a non-highlight (like a background) of the art.
  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko Member EpicPosts: 6,916
    A casual google search reveals that this situation is not unprecedented with graphic artists working in the games industry.

    I pity the team who's responsible for checking all the artwork...
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    edited February 2017
    A casual google search reveals that this situation is not unprecedented with graphic artists working in the games industry.

    I pity the team who's responsible for checking all the artwork...
    Not only is it not unprecedented, it's something that has happened many times and many lawsuits have been filed over it. 
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,801
    edited February 2017
    Not only is it not unprecedented, it's something that has happened many times and many lawsuits have been filed over it. 
    Bah, it's fine. As long you don't touch Bethesda, otherwise, you'll be sued for 500M :proud:  
This discussion has been closed.