Support NeoGAF

[Draugoth]

Square Enix's new RPG remake Crisis Core - Final Fantasy VII - Reunion seems to contain artwork ripped from the Getty Images website​

Crisis Core - Final Fantasy VII - Reunion was released today and is a solid remastering/remake of a beloved PSP title. But at least one painting in the new game contains a li’l something extra: a Getty Images watermark, implying that the in-game painting was created using an image preview taken directly from that service’s website. During chapter eight of the game, you’ll enter a Shinra mansion. In this very nice-looking and opulent home you’ll find many fancy paintings hanging on the walls. Look closely and you’ll discover these are real paintings. Look a little closer and you’ll clearly see where Square Enix grabbed the art from. Yup, that’s a big old Getty Images watermark right in the middle of it. I was able to track down the exact painting that Square Enix grabbed using our own Getty account. It’s a piece by artist John Crowther depicting Ludgate Circus in London in 1881.

Kotaku has reached out to Square Enix but didn’t hear back before publication.

It appears that whoever grabbed this image from Getty—and possibly didn’t pay to license it, as the watermark is still there—stretched it out and cropped most of its top to make it fit in the frame. And this isn’t a one-off error. The resulting painting appears at least three times in this area of the game complete with the Getty watermark. Whoops!
This isn’t the first time a big Square Enix RPG has shipped with a mistaken watermark included. Kingdom Hearts III also included a watermark during one cutscene. However, that was a “blink and you’ll miss it moment” and not an easy-to-find painting that appears multiple times and can be seen clearly by anyone paying attention. If you want to see this mistake yourself, I’d go to the mansion sooner than later, as I imagine Square Enix will be patching it out shortly.

 

[Abriael_GN]

Imagine caring about this.

Oh wait, it's Kotaku.

 

[March Climber]

Imagine caring about this.

Oh wait, it's Kotaku.

On one hand, I appreciate someone taking their time to take in the environment, art, and lore of a game’s world.

On the other hand it is Kotaku.

 

[kiphalfton]

Imagine caring about this.

Oh wait, it's Kotaku.

I stop looking into all the little details a game has like 1 minute into playing any given game. After that it all blends into the background.

 

[The Stig]

Lock 'em up!

 

[Kokoloko85]

Or maybe Getty exists in the FF7 universe…..

 

[Koenigssee]

Getty is real ruthless about its "property".
I'm kinda curious about what comes out of this but i doubt we'll ever know what's behind the curtain.

 

[DragoonWalker]

Get over it. it's standard practice for concept artists take stock photos and photo bash/paint over them. That's why this shit happens (and it's far from the first time).

 

[Swift_Star]

Imagine caring about this.

Oh wait, it's Kotaku.

It might seem petty but it's actually ridiculous they couldn't bother to pay for the damn stock image to put on the game.

 

[SkeletonQuays]

It might seem petty but it's actually ridiculous they couldn't bother to pay for the damn stock image to put on the game.

It was probably just a placeholder that was overlooked.

 

[RavageX]

Is this stopping someone from enjoying the game? WHO THE FREAK takes time out of their day to fool with making an article about this???

 

[GamesDontSuck]

It might seem petty but it's actually ridiculous they couldn't bother to pay for the damn stock image to put on the game.

Not a case of not wanting to pay. Just a case of it being used as a placeholder then someone forgets to create a similar asset or pay for the license.

 

[Swift_Star]

It was probably just a placeholder that was overlooked.

Not a case of not wanting to pay. Just a case of it being used as a placeholder then someone forgets to create a similar asset or pay for the license.

It's good that someone pointed it out, then.

 

[AmuroChan]

Doesn't Getty offer a library of images that are public domain and free to use?

 

[Captain Toad]

 

[Bartski]

no way a chance to stir some shit for clicks goes to waste at Kotaku

 

[Captain Toad]

no way a chance to stir some shit for clicks goes to waste at Kotaku

They know their audience. A group of blue-haired genderless nerds looking for the next thing to get outraged over.

 

[Myths]

Not unheard of. I’ve seen a rock texture used in GTA 5 that I saw on google images. Not watermarked or anything but those stock photos aren’t out of reach.

 

[kiphalfton]

They know their audience. A group of blue-haired genderless nerds looking for the next thing to get outraged over.

The world sucks enough as it is, but then you see loser sites like kotaku, that despite having some sort of influence (unfortunately) and could positively influence people, would rather see the world burn.

 

[Miles708]

A big company releases an AAA hand and forgetting to pay an image that shipped with a watermark is a very funny thing.

As others said, it's likely just someone overlooking things, but still funny nonetheless.

 

[cash_longfellow]

Kotaku writers can’t even figure out the difference between remake and remaster so they just put them together like “solid remastering/remake”. What the fuck does that even mean?

 

[K2D]

I'll just go ahead and pretend I didn't see this. If Square rectifies it - great! ..otherwise I'd prefer to not know about this.

 

[TGO]

Maybe it's the person who owns the mansion that used the watermark imagine from Getty and this just attention to detail from SE.

 

[justiceiro]

Imagine Premium for a game only to discover the devs didn't really care about paying.

 

[Dick Jones]

I'm just glad it's not Tim Gettys in the game. Refunds would be demanded. I've no interest in paying to see a male cunt.

 

[itsjustJEFF]

honestly... this is way more common than ppl think! I nearly done it a few times, I've caught a few of them as well. This is just images, don't even get me started on spelling errors lol

My guess is they tried to download the "comp" version, which is a very low-res version of the image, realized it was too small then screen capped it instead. They created that scene and used it for the "comp"... and they just forgot to update it. That's likely 1 of 10's of thousands of tasks that had to happen for that game. It's embarrassing, but not likely to be malicious in any way.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

Square better watch out. This feels like the first moves in a targeted woke attack because of butthurt that FFXVI doesn't have a quadriplegic lesbian as a main character. Expect lots of little bitch eating crackers articles in the future.

 

[Portugeezer]

Give the man his 50% cut of each game sale. It's what he deserves!

 

[ANDS]

Imagine caring about this.

A gaming news site reporting on a funny gaming "error?" Shocking indeed.

 

[consoul]

Somebody forGetty-ed.

 

[Abriael_GN]

It might seem petty but it's actually ridiculous they couldn't bother to pay for the damn stock image to put on the game.

Companies like Square Enix likely have unlimited licenses. What happened here (and happens rather often) is that while developing games a ton of placeholder images are used during all stages of development and they get replaced afterward. At times, one is forgotten and left in the game.

A gaming news site reporting on a funny gaming "error?" Shocking indeed.

"gaming news site"? Ok, that is funny.

 

[Brock2621]

I don’t get the big hubbub about this. It’s merely a mistake. It’s incredibly common for employees and subcontractors to use stock photos (that aren’t purchased yet) to present in meetings and to superiors to ensure the tonality and feel matches the desired goals. Usually they are approved and then the appropriate licenses are purchased and no one notices. But out of the thousands probably purchased for this particular product (and especially ones distressed and run through layers of texturing) it happened every once in a while.

End result will be they purchased the license and package it up in the next update. No need for anyone to be accusatory or project intent on their behalf.

This is of course, my 1 cents worth opinion…

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

This is what happens when you outsource content to the cheapest artists around.

 

[AJUMP23]

At least they are giving credit. It would be worse to display great art and not give credit. Good on them for sourcing nice art.

 

[Scotty W]

It appears that whoever grabbed this image from Getty—and possibly didn’t pay to license it, as the watermark is still there—stretched it out and cropped most of its top to make it fit in the frame. And this isn’t a one-off error. The resulting painting appears at least three times in this area of the game complete with the Getty watermark. Whoops!
This isn’t the first time a big Square Enix RPG has shipped with a mistaken watermark included. Kingdom Hearts III also included a watermark during one cutscene. However, that was a “blink and you’ll miss it moment” and not an easy-to-find painting that appears multiple times and can be seen clearly by anyone paying attention. If you want to see this mistake yourself, I’d go to the mansion sooner than later, as I imagine Square Enix will be patching it out shortly.

They should have just got an artist to make an image in house. Oh, but the artists are overworked.

Well, then they should have used ai art. Oh, but that is wicked.

Well then we should have communism.

Rick And Morty Creator Used Controversial AI Art, Voice Acting In New Shooter

High on Life co-creator Justin Roiland explained AI art makes the game feel like a 'strange alternate dimension'

kotaku.com

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

It appears that whoever grabbed this image from Getty—and possibly didn’t pay to license it, as the watermark is still there—stretched it out and cropped most of its top to make it fit in the frame. And this isn’t a one-off error. The resulting painting appears at least three times in this area of the game complete with the Getty watermark. Whoops!
This isn’t the first time a big Square Enix RPG has shipped with a mistaken watermark included. Kingdom Hearts III also included a watermark during one cutscene. However, that was a “blink and you’ll miss it moment” and not an easy-to-find painting that appears multiple times and can be seen clearly by anyone paying attention. If you want to see this mistake yourself, I’d go to the mansion sooner than later, as I imagine Square Enix will be patching it out shortly.

Like Okami case?

 

[Abriael_GN]

I don’t get the big hubbub about this.

Kotaku needed a nontroversy for hits.

That's literally the only reason for the hubbub.

 

[Beer Baelly]

 

[TheInfamousKira]

Gettyimages in a Square game? That's almost as insane as animated child porn on Kotaku! Oh wait