I lack any drawing skills, yet I wanted to make an AGS game. So I took rips from old video games for background and object graphics. The result is a mixed bag graphically, but I'm giving plenty of love to the story and scripting. I've seen a few games get criticized for using ripped graphics.
Exactly how frowned upon is that here?
I'd rather say own graphics are much more appreciated. Say, even abad game with good selfmade graphics is better than a good game with ripped off graphics imo. We see a lot of MI games with ripped graphics also, which here is something that doesn't have much new to give, so they're most often not played. However, using photographs as bgs could work mighty well. I don't think anyone will hate you for using ripped graphics, but they won't salute to it since it's always like the easy way out. As long as they fit each other and don't look like a mess, I don't really see a problem doing it one this or the other way. I would recommend you to ask around if someone was willing to help you with the graphics. I mean, with a story and a game already done, it'd be easy to find someone who wanted to help you make it better :)
Your graphics don't need to be any realistic. If you're unable to draw (like me), pick something rather simplistic, stick with it and call it a "style".
There are a few packs of free graphics available on the resources page. That might help.
Quote from: Radiant on Fri 12/10/2007 14:43:20
There are a few packs of free graphics available on the resources page. That might help.
I looked at those, but they weren't what I needed.
Besides, what's the difference between taking the backgrounds from the resources page and yanking them out of King of Fighters?
I'm slightly less than 1/5 of the way finished with the game. Maybe when I get done I'll ask if anyone wants to do art for it, but I can't imagine anyone would want to invest that much time in someone else's baby.
Unless the baby was 25 and a gorgeous blonde. Also, we have stepdads for that purpose. You never know ;)
QuoteBesides, what's the difference between taking the backgrounds from the resources page and yanking them out of King of Fighters?
Take a look at both and ask again.
If that's what you intended to do, I seriously suggest not to.
Quote from: InCreator on Fri 12/10/2007 15:58:55
QuoteBesides, what's the difference between taking the backgrounds from the resources page and yanking them out of King of Fighters?
Take a look at both and ask again.
If that's what you intended to do, I seriously suggest not to.
Please don't be cryptic. If there is something I need to know, please tell me what it is.
Ripping from KOF means you steal material that is copyrighted. Taking graphics from the resource page means you take material that has been released for free use.
I'm all for making your own graphics, too. It's always okay to use other people's art as a reference, but you will get the most satisfaction if you do that stuff yourself, even if it means simpler graphics. It's yours then, and that feeling can't be beaten.
Not even by KOF. Not even by Chuck Norris!
QuotePlease don't be cryptic. If there is something I need to know, please tell me what it is.
Okay. While free resources are mostly amateurish, nameless, simple and functional bits of graphic you can use, made by amateur artists... KOF is a whole universe with set story, huge fanbase and of course - world's best animators from Japan behind the graphics.
There's a huge difference whether you use some free GFX or rip a piece of other world apart. Plus, as said, it's
illegal. And you can make as good game you could, people who know KOF will probably hate it.
Hmm. As far as the legality, my understanding is that under US law this would fall under a fair use exception as:
1. The substance of the use is transformative, not derivative.
2. Only an insubstantial part of any given work is being used.
3. No effect on the potential market of the original work
4. No commercial intent.
I realize ags is based out of the UK, laws may be different over there.
Do you really think I'd get KoF fans angry about the use of a background from the 2003 Kof? It seems like an rather extreme prediction.
eta: Actually I checked what I had and I don't actually have any KoF rips. some Street Fighter 2 and Monster Rancher 2, but no KoF backgrounds. I wonder how I got that mixed up.
Quote from: quixotecoyote on Fri 12/10/2007 16:57:19
1. The substance of the use is transformative, not derivative.
2. Only an insubstantial part of any given work is being used.
3. No effect on the potential market of the original work
4. No commercial intent.
Thin ice that should be avoided. Because you could, on your fact, say that it is okay for me to use the character Lara Croft in an adventure game of my own if I use only a few of her walkcycle frames (or, indeed, only her name) and release said game for free. Sounds pretty unlikely that nobody would object if I did, though.
Quote from: Ghost on Fri 12/10/2007 18:40:28
Quote from: quixotecoyote on Fri 12/10/2007 16:57:19
1. The substance of the use is transformative, not derivative.
2. Only an insubstantial part of any given work is being used.
3. No effect on the potential market of the original work
4. No commercial intent.
Thin ice that should be avoided. Because you could, on your fact, say that it is okay for me to use the character Lara Croft in an adventure game of my own if I use only a few of her walkcycle frames (or, indeed, only her name) and release said game for free. Sounds pretty unlikely that nobody would object if I did, though.
I disagree that they are equivalent. It seems that using the name Lara Croft would could theorhetically divert money from licensed Tomb Raider games, something my situation avoids.
I'm going ahead and making this regardless, as it's intended as a present for a specific person, but I wanted to get a feel for the sensitivities on this forum before I posted any of it in AGS Games in Production or Critics Lounge. I know some people here have strong opinions about this and I'd rather not bother with creating flamewar threads.
Hey, you can be politically correct on all aspects, why not. And if you're looking for hard, cold proof that you shouldn't use KOF graphics, you won't find it.
It isn't about written rules or copyrights. Yeah, go ahead and rip these magnificent backgrounds. You might do well and make a popular game.
But more likely, you won't.
It's just something that no-one does, and even if somebody does, it usually fails.
Otherwise, why couldn't every AGSer get an emulator and rip all these nice pixel games dry?
Every member could have few games at their account, wouldn't this be easy?
But people don't do that.
They draw by themselves, as good or bad it isn't, post images at critics lounge, learn-learn-improve.
It's difficult to explain. But by going the easy way, you will be lower than the very beginners at art.
That's why effort counts over quality.
And that's why even incredibly beginner, MSPainted - if there's
effort visible in it - background beats all the nice scenery KOF could offer.
To be a bit more positive, I'll tell you this: Adventure games need
functional, not incredibly pretty graphics. You don't have to draw super-realistic scenes or have a degree in fine arts. What's important is that the things you draw WORK together, and is recognizable by human eye (i.e. door looks like door, hehe).
If you're going for ripping, better make sure that you can either rip all you need from same place/style or edit various things so they'd match. If you get all bg-s and characters from KOF, but are unable to draw or rip - for example gui buttons or inventory icons to match the style, you're pretty much failed. Think about it before jumping onto this "thin ice" as said.
We cannot argue about this, because logic says that there's nothing that can stop you. But eh, you're free to try.
I just wouldn't and stay at this point.
If you are unsure about your art skills, show something in Critics lounge and see what people suggest. It's more likely that you like your art less than everybody else.
Anyway, to spare you from further discussion, I'd get onto topic:
QuoteQ: Exactly how frowned upon is that here?
A: More than enough to reconsider
Thanks.
I've got a sketchbook filled cover to cover of attempts to improve and it's just not happening, so I'll do what I have to to produce the best I can. I've got the bearing of what the values are here, so I may not be reading the thread to respond to further replies. Feel free to post at me if you want though.
As long as you don't plan to charge for you game, using ripped graphics is only a problem if somebody decides to make it one. Most individuals really couldn't care less if your uses ripped graphics, and as long as you're not explictly claiming a game is officially linked to, say, King of Fighters , or is connected to SNK Playmore in any way, then, this being the real world, I wouldn't worry about it.
The Digital Spell (http://www.joserafaelperez.com/index.php?option=com_contentask=view&id=12&Itemid=1) uses ripped character graphics, and some people really liked it. As far as I know it's creator was never presented with a Cease and Desist, or threatened with legal action.
A common mistake with using ripped graphics is telling people beforehand that you are going to use ripped graphics. Just do it.
Quote from: quixotecoyote on Fri 12/10/2007 19:03:50
I disagree that they are equivalent. It seems that using the name Lara Croft would could theorhetically divert money from licensed Tomb Raider games, something my situation avoids.
Without wanting to sound stubborn, I think that each situation where copyrighted material is included in an indie game is "thin ice". There have been many attempts at fan games, for example, that were stomped down because some company really found the idea of re-using a decade-old character/name/brand pretty offensive. And Monster Rancher alone is a large brand, and one that's still used. But well.
On a totally lighter note, I really suggest you do your own artwork. You say you have trouble making progress. So what? Troubled progress is still progress. Have a good look at the games page; you will see that the people here are pretty forgiving about bad graphics. But ripping is not only a strange, uncomfortable situation, it's a problem. Let's say you find some nice background art, or a sprite. It's pretty unlikely you will find all the material to make one game out of it. So you'll have to mix it- with your own artwork or ripped stuff from other sources, and that'll never be satisfying.
Quote from: quixotecoyote on Fri 12/10/2007 16:57:19
Hmm. As far as the legality, my understanding is that under US law this would fall under a fair use exception as:
You are most probably incorrect, as any game using KOF sprites would plausibly be considered a derivative work, and using the characters
is very much substantial, and the marketing division will claim that you are diluting their marketing potential.
More to the point, in what passes for a legal system in America, an indie developer does not have the resources to have any hope of winning a court battle from a corporation, should they decide to cease-and-desist and/or sue him.
I agree about fan games, but infringing on an IP goes way beyond ripping sprites.
In many cases these games were using trademarked brand names, thus making an association, however tenuous, with established IPs. You are therefore far more likely to incur the wrath of Vivendi's or LucasArt's lawyers, and the like, that way.
The only downside to ripping sprites is that you get no artistic or creative satisfaction. Other than that...
Quote from: LimpingFish on Fri 12/10/2007 23:06:18
Other than that...
..they could make a game for Blind people. ;)
We're sort of missing the point here. The original poster asked if this was a faux pas. To answer that question - yes. Yes it is. KOF is a popular game, and the players will instantly know that you stole the graphics. Ripping graphics from commercial products is generally looked down upon in adventure game circles (as evident by the responses here), so take that as you will.
It has become a "faux pas" because it has always indicated of a lack of effort. The few people that rip artwork usually aren't putting the work into the rest of the game either, so it's a big turn off. I don't think it would be difficult to atone for this though, and people have pointed to some games that rip and don't suck. It's not a mortal sin.
Combining things from very different games to good effect isn't easy. Most of the time I feel that the greater technical quality of ripped artwork isn't worth the bother because the characters don't match the game or the backgrounds don't evoke the right mood and dictate the puzzles. Someone with some good design sense can overcome that too. If you rip I would recommend some heavy editing of the originals to suit your purposes.
As for the legal issues, who cares? Certainly not the artists that work in the game developers, nor the money men until you cause a visible problem for them.
Yeah, I agree with scotch to a point. Ripping typically indicates a lack of interest and effort on the part of the author, which makes the player wonder why he/she should invest interest or effort in the game. On the other hand, you could use pre-existing artwork as a basis for your own by painting over it or editing it. Many people have done this and it is a less-criticized activity compared to simply taking the artwork and slapping it in the game without any changes. Also, if you're not an artist then you should still release a few games with simple graphics to establish your talents. This will allow other people to see your strengths and then if you have a project that demands higher quality art you have a better chance of attracting team members.
Here's an idea. Write to the people who made KOF and ask them if you can use their graphics in your game. This is the only legitimate way to do it (copyright notices usually say something along the lines of "no copying ... without the owner's permission").
You can probably guess already what they are likely to say, and that should answer your question. It's not so much that it is a faux pas as that it is a criminal offence, as has already been pointed out. You could end up in deep doo-doo, to put it mildly.
But you never know - they might say yes, with a string of provisos (such as not using more than a certain amount, not charging for the game, ensuring that the game makes it clear that the copyright belongs to them and the backgrounds have been used with their full permission). If they do say yes, then you are free to go ahead in the knowledge that you are acting within the law, but my view is that they are pretty likely to say no.
By the way, I agree with the people who say "draw your own and your game will be better for it". Either draw your own or, if you are crap at drawing, collaborate (as I do) with someone who is good at it. The effort will shine through and make for a much better game in the long run.
I think there are some peculiarities in some of these arguments.
'It's about effort'
so
'it's not ok to use someone else's art'
but
'if you don't feel like making the effort, have someone else do it for you'
-
The 'make some adjustments to it, and it's ok' argument actually bugs me much more than rips, which I don't have a problem with as long as they're properly credited.
There's hardly a popular movie these days that doesn't contain a clear rip from a music album. The only difference here is that some executive said 'fine'.
Thing is, nobody attributes those tracks to the screenplay writer or director; they've simply used someone else's effort to add a little something to their own. We don't applaud the movie makers for the amazing track, just their taste to include it.
What bugs me is when someone 'rips' the effort of someone else, change it slightly, and call it their own. A rip is a quote, with the quotation marks often visible. Altered rips are disguised quotes aimed to make the utterer appear smarter.
I think what annoys people most is when newcomers start their AGS careers by asking where and how they can rip stuff. It just feels a bit nonchalant and effortless.
As people here have pointed out; making a game good isn't easier just because you borrow graphics. That's like saying matte painting isn't hard to do because you use pre-existing material.
If someone ever puts together an entire functional entertaining game with ripped graphics I don't think people will have any gripes with that, as long as the original creators are properly credited. Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of games like that. Most games using borrowed material are short and bad, their rips blatant and misplaced and they don't have anything original added.
I'm quite sure 99% of those wanting to rip graphics do it out of laziness and not in pursuit of an interesting artistic touch.
I tried (and maybe still am := ) making an absurdist parody game using QfG/KQ style Sierra backgrounds. The problem is that it is very hard to get exactly what you want, you have to remove certain elements from the background that you don't wish to include, add a few more that you want, and if you can't find what you want, you'd have to recreate it in that style, and seamlessly connect them together so that the differences are not jarring.
Unless you are very, very, very lucky to get exactly what you want, I'd say it is pretty foolish to think that 'ripping' would take less effort than creating your own graphics.
For the whole legal aspect, I don't see any problem with ripping. 8Bit Theater use sprites from FF1, there's kids who use Mario, Luigi or Mega Man sprites to create flash movies on Newgrounds, there's people who make flash video clip out of real songs without asking for permission, AGDI used Graham's sprites from KQ5 for their remakes, Ready Starring Ready Eddie was pure genius, ProgZ used actual songs for Dance 'Til You Drop... We don't make such a big fuzz about it when games use existing songs and musics instead of having an original soundtrack, I don't see why it should be a problem on the legality side to use ripped graphics for an AGS game. As long you don't rip another AGSer's work, you don't make profit off your game and you don't expect an AGS award for best graphics and best soundtrack with your ripped stuff, I say you can do it.
That being said, my personal opinion regarding ripped graphics, graphics in general and my appreciation of the effort put into them can be shortened to this:
Good original graphics > Average original graphics > Bad original graphics > Graphics made of copy/pasted ripped graphics > Ripped graphics > Inconsistant graphics
And generally ripped graphics fall in the inconsistant graphic category with 2D, 3D and clip arts overlapping, characters from different graphical styles meeting each others, walking in the SCUMM bar in one screen and a bad original background in the next screen... things to give my eyes headaches.
The sole exception I make to this rule is with fangames and remakes using a few sprites and background from the original game, as long the ripped graphic is consistant with the fanmade graphics, I won't mind.
If one has troubles drawing animations, like Atakosh said, one just have to keep the animations cartoony and as simple as possible and call it a style, not unlike the Wink series on Newgrounds (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/103970). For the backgrounds, there's always the Pleurghburg Dark Ages' graphical style which in my opinion has the best ratio between Difficulty To Draw and Good Look.
Quote from: paolo on Sun 14/10/2007 12:11:55
Here's an idea. Write to the people who made KOF and ask them if you can use their graphics in your game. This is the only legitimate way to do it (copyright notices usually say something along the lines of "no copying ... without the owner's permission").
Here's a better idea - ask the copyright owner. Usually, the hard-working programmers and artists don't own the copyright to their own work, but the publishing company (and their lawyers) do.
That is the only legitimate way to do it. Yes, there are several authors that are not allowed to make a sequel to their own work.
And indeed, companies will tend to say "no". Although e.g. Vivendi has been known to greenlight certain games such as KQ9 (The Silver Lining).
Quote from: loominous on Sun 14/10/2007 13:40:05
There's hardly a popular movie these days that doesn't contain a clear rip from a music album. The only difference here is that some executive said 'fine'.
Yes, but in nearly all those cases, the movie producers paid for that privilege. And you're wrong in that they don't get accredited, because they usually do (that's why movie credit sequences can last up to ten minutes).
Quote from: Blueskirt on Sun 14/10/2007 19:43:52
For the whole legal aspect, I don't see any problem with ripping.
Well, I'd hate to say this, but you should read this thread again, because you're just plain entirely wrong. From the legal aspect, there are many problems with ripping, as pointed out again and again. Yes, legally speaking, ripping is illegal.
To point out a few things you've missed - 8-Bit Theater is a legitimate work of parody; AGDI actually has permission from Vivendi to use their material in their remakes, and actually got rewards for best graphics in spite of that; and so forth.
Just because people can get away with it, and because it is "okay with you" doesn't mean that it is legal.
Quote from: Radiant on Sun 14/10/2007 23:27:41
Quote from: loominous on Sun 14/10/2007 13:40:05
There's hardly a popular movie these days that doesn't contain a clear rip from a music album. The only difference here is that some executive said 'fine'.
Yes, but in nearly all those cases, the movie producers paid for that privilege. And you're wrong in that they don't get accredited, because they usually do (that's why movie credit sequences can last up to ten minutes).
The executives say 'fine' because it's followed by their monetary demand. Course they're not giving it away for free. And where the devil did I say they don't give credit? Course they do.
Edit: some corrupt sentence
Quote from: Radiant on Sun 14/10/2007 23:27:41Well, I'd hate to say this, but you should read this thread again, because you're just plain entirely wrong. From the legal aspect, there are many problems with ripping, as pointed out again and again. Yes, legally speaking, ripping is illegal.
My bad. I should have wrote "For the whole
legal moral aspect, I don't see any problem with ripping." So to clarify:
Is it illegal? Yes.
Is it morally wrong? It's debatable. It's a matter of case by case for me, for KOF sprites, as long credits are given where due and as long no profits are made, I don't think it's wrong.
Can they take legal actions? Yes.
Will they? Unless if you try to make money from it, unless if they feel your work threaten their reputation, profits, or their their work in term of quality, that's pretty unlikely.
QuoteAGDI actually has permission from Vivendi to use their material in their remakes
As far as I know, KQ1VGA was released with KQ5 sprites before the whole contract and legal deal happened with Vivendi.
Quoteand actually got rewards for best graphics in spite of that; and so forth.
And we can both agree that if they won for best graphic it was because there was a real effort put in them. As for the best animation award, it wasn't the KQ5 Graham walking animations that won that award but the dozens of other original animations the game featured.
If you're doing a fan game or a parody then I feel that using ripped sprites is okay, Though I'm not sure how others feel.
There are some fan made Monkey Island games out there using ripped sprites I believe. If however you are making an original game then I'd advise against using ripped sprites. Then there's always the issue of copyright and I'd imagine that using ripped sprites would increase the likelyhood of being issued a "cease and desist" order.
Folowing on from what seems to be the general consensus, I'd agree that unless it's a fan game of something else, it would be a much better idea to make one's own graphics. It's not that hard, and even an MSPaint drawing, if appropriate, can make a decent backdrop!
Since this has come to the top again, I'll make a couple points.
1. There are no KoF graphics in my game. Not a biggie, but I wanted to clear that up. I had mixed up which games I used as source material and had since gone back and straightened it out. I think I said that right before I disappeared for a bit.
2. This is not a game intended primarily for mass distribution. If anyone is curious about it I could maybe send them a copy and I was curious if putting a thread up here with it would be appreciated. So really, as far as this game goes I'm doing whatever I want with it.
3. It's about 1/5 done already and I'm not going to redo that much design now, considering the amount of time it took to edit and animate the graphics I used.
4. If I've still got the desire to do another game after this one, I'll probably do my own graphics, because I agree that the options are limited and the disjunct of styles, while manageable, is still suboptimal.
5. People who think this is illegal really need to look up US Fair Use Doctrine as eerything else aside, this is transformative.
6. Everything used is credited.
Nothing too important, just popped in for a tech question and saw this had floated back up.
Quote from: Blueskirt on Sun 14/10/2007 19:43:52
We don't make such a big fuzz about it when games use existing songs and musics instead of having an original soundtrack, I don't see why it should be a problem on the legality side to use ripped graphics for an AGS game.
Two wrongs don't make a right. I think we
should make just a big a fuzz about music as we would about graphics, because it's really the same thing (illegal and lazy), but for some reason we don't. I could speculate about why, but I won't.