Eurogamer: AC art used for Uncharted 4 trailer (Up: Naughty Dog responds)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure why ND didn't just capture an image of the island from their own game and proceeded to put it through Photoshop filters though.

I said the same thing a bunch of pages back - would have been quick and easy to do, would have guaranteed no repercussions of any sort, and would have worked better cinematically to transition from 'photo' of next scene to 'live action' of next scene.
 
AAA video games contain literally hundreds of thousands of textures. That some of them end up being copied from Google, with or without intent, is unavoidable.
It's probably a case of a texture intended to be temporary never being replaced, and then unforturnately (or forturnately, since it will now likely be changed) ending up in a trailer. Yes, it's wrong, but placeholders and photobashing is part of the standard workflow and missteps like this happens.

Judging by previous incidents it seems the Naughty Dog art team maybe needs a stricter policy on these things, but the notion that this is anything other than a mistake is ridiculous.
 
Why do people expect ND to pay up for this asset theft? It's not like the game is actually on sale yet, or the original artist having his income ruined by having the art used in this trailer.

I don't really know how copyright laws work, but in this case where the error was rectified quickly, I have a very hard time seeing ND having to provide monetary compensation after fessing up and admitting they screwed up.

Art theft like this is bad either way you flip it, but some of the reactions in this topic scream SonyToo(tm) but in a new shape.
 
You should always know exactly where everything came from in a thing you're selling. That's not an excuse. Unless a painting is in the public domain, no one's art is just "random."

He answered question about why did they used art from other game, not excuse.

Or maybe Neil Druckmann himself has ACIV artbook and said let's use this, nobody will notice lol.
 
AAA video games contain literally hundreds of thousands of textures. That some of them end up being copied from Google, with or without intent, is unavoidable.

pro tip when being lazy

lLYXoId.png
 
I didn't say it was an excuse nor that they were right... I just said they probably didn't know it was from another game.

As an artist, you have a responsibility to know where it comes from if you are expecting to use it. They should've at least know they were not allowed to use it because it probably didn't come from a source that allows free use or, obviously, wasn't created by them.
 
Can a level be redesigned this close to launch if it was based on stolen artwork? Or would it not matter?

A level would only be aesthetically based off of concept art. Level design would assure that the level itself would look adequately different, unless particular landmarks are replicated, in which case the similarity would be noticeable, but likely not problematic.
 
I'm not sure what the artists intentions were but I don't think you'll find many professional artists using another persons work for a professional project without at least looking to credit the original artist.

Agree and as said before I totally agree it is a fuck up. But I think it's way too harsh from some people in this thread to call for blood or compensation payments or stuff like that.
 
They're not going to broadcast that. Any settlement between the two is going to be private, and in a case like this, their lawyers have probably already talked. Also financial compensation is a tricky prospect at this stage since the stolen artwork has only appeared in a free trailer. Had it gone unnoticed until the actual release and they made money with this stolen asset, then Sony would definitely have had to pay.
I understand that's not something that would be broadcast, I'm simply saying that going the extra mile to pay is something worthy of praise. Doing what they did is just what should have been done at this point, nothing more or less. In terms of the finer details from behind the scenes, I realize that's not something we'd know. My response in which I stated that was just me saying what I think is deserving of praise.

Yeah, but throw us a figure, to kinda get and idea the damage done to the artist.
I legitimately have no idea what amount it should be. I'm not pretending to be an expert on the value, I'm just saying that achieving an agreed payment between the parties is more deserving of praise than just changing an asset and saying sorry.

Lol, that artwork almost for sure doesn't belong to person who painted it. It's Ubisoft's property, and while I suppose they could have paid Ubisoft to use it, it was clearly used by mistake and it would make no sense to pay to use art from a different game. Right now, they could arrange some kind of damages payout to Ubisoft but that kind of thing would be layers talking to lawyers and it would never be made public.
I've basically explained this already a few times now, but I did mention earlier that the agreement would be made between ND and the artist or more likely ND and Ubisoft. I realize that it was work done on Ubi's dime and is their property.

That said, how do you use someone's art by mistake? Ignorance and negligence aren't excuses for theft.
 
As an artist, you have a responsibility to know where it comes from if you are expecting to use it. They should've at least know they were not allowed to use it because it probably didn't come from a source that allows free use or, obviously, wasn't created by them.

I know.
 
Can a level be redesigned this close to launch if it was based on stolen artwork? Or would it not matter?

i mean lets be real for a moment...plagiarism in a trailer is one thing, basing your game on stolen concept art from another game is something else entirely and even a company as morally bankrupt as naughty dog surely wouldn't go that far??
 
He answered question about why did they used art from other game, not excuse.

Right, but my point was that it doesn't matter whether it was from a game or not - if ND had thought it was just a random image and it was from something besides AC, that'd still be bad. If they didn't realize it was from another game they still should've caught it is what I mean. Which is kinda what the person they were quoting was getting at, but still.

My mistake. Looks like I'm the stupid one.

No worries - didn't mean to jump down your throat either.
 
i mean lets be real for a moment...plagiarism in a trailer is one thing, basing your game on stolen concept art from another game is something else entirely and even a company as morally bankrupt as naughty dog surely wouldn't go that far??

Are they?
 
Can a level be redesigned this close to launch if it was based on stolen artwork? Or would it not matter?

The level wasn't based on that artwork.

i mean lets be real for a moment...plagiarism in a trailer is one thing, basing your game on stolen concept art from another game is something else entirely and even a company as morally bankrupt as naughty dog surely wouldn't go that far??

"Morally bankrupt"? Did ND kill your dog or something? Also see above.
 
As an artist, you have a responsibility to know where it comes from if you are expecting to use it. They should've at least know they were not allowed to use it because it probably didn't come from a source that allows free use or, obviously, wasn't created by them.

You do have the responsibility, absolutely. But it's also very easy to make a mistake in this day and age.
(I'm a graphic designer by day - trust me, from experience it's not as difficult for this to happen as it seems and I've even seen this happen to my own artwork!)
 
Right, but my point was that it doesn't matter whether it was from a game or not - if ND had thought it was just a random image and it was from something besides AC, that'd still be bad. If they didn't realize it was from another game they still should've caught it is what I mean.

If whoever did it was unaware, why did they go to the trouble of removing the pirate, lol? This likely all comes down to one person who did this and fucked up badly, but knew what they were doing.
 
Reposting from the other thread.

Jonathan Cooper is an ex-ubisoft animator. He joined Naughty Dog and said some stuff about his previous employer when the female assassins thingy came to light.

coopertweet1.png


coopertweet.png


Now with this news, an Ubisoft Montreal dev (creative director) tweeted this to him

savageeeer0oog.png


He waited two years... all for revenge.

So what? It's best served ice cold.
 
Right, but my point was that it doesn't matter whether it was from a game or not - if ND had thought it was just a random image and it was from something besides AC, that'd still be bad. If they didn't realize it was from another game they still should've caught it is what I mean.

I agree, I'm not saying it's not bad, just saying he answered question about why did they used art from other game.
 
Right, but my point was that it doesn't matter whether it was from a game or not - if ND had thought it was just a random image and it was from something besides AC, that'd still be bad. If they didn't realize it was from another game they still should've caught it is what I mean.

It'd still be a mistake, I agree with you, but if they knew if it was from another the game they wouldn't have use it.
 
Held their hands up to it and took responsibility for the mistake. Sounds fair enough to me, but I guess the ball's in Ubisoft's court if they want to take further action,but I'd be very surprised if they did.

ND don't look too bad here, it was probably some outsourcing mistake, they admitted they fucked up, rectified it quickly and have put out an official statement apologizing to all parties

the only people who came out looking bad were the fanboys trying to play it down and defend them lol

And the posters using the thread(s) on this story as an excuse for their latest salty agenda vomit receptacle of course. Yet strangely it only ever seems to be the defense forcers getting called out on anything by some of you.

Are they?

godelsmetric post. Don't waste your time mate.
 
Some people going to super embarassing lengths to rationalise this.

"It's an easter egg!"
"It's a coincidence!"
"It's not even the same, there's no pirate!"
"Ubisoft probably licenced it to them!"

It's hardly the crime of the century but, c'mon brehs.

i think they aren't even embarassed, some of them are still here
 
Agree and as said before I totally agree it is a fuck up. But I think it's way too harsh from some people in this thread to call for blood or compensation payments or stuff like that.

I think it's more than just some fuck up. That implies that it's unintentional but I don't know how you just unintentionally take someones work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom