08-03-2016, 05:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-07-2016, 11:55 AM by Dunkelschwamm.)
Hey guys, I hope I'm posting this in the right forum (this seemed like the most natural fit, but I won't take it personally if you move the topic).
Across my ripping "career" of dozens of games, I've noticed an interesting conception of ethics around sprite ripping that seems worth discussing.
The following is an invitation for dialogue and not an invitation for ruthless attacks. I am genuinely interested in hearing what everybody thinks on this topic without lighting some kind of powder keg.
So, I certainly got my start on this site with ripping noncommercial games (mostly mods at first, like Action Doom 2) and moved into more commercial games like Heretic, Lisa: RPG, and so on. Something that I've seen is that people will get fairly sensitive on the subject of my submitting sprites ripped from noncommercial (as in, not sold) games. It seems most sensitive around the area of mods, as I haven't really had any backlash from people when I rip standalone noncommercial games (the original La-Mulana, for example) or RPG Maker games (MortisGhost's Off, Space Funeral, etc). I'll chalk the separation between the mod developers' reactions and the RPG Maker/Standalone developers' reactions up to differences in community.
But what really interests me here is the perceived difference between ripping a noncommercial games and commercial games. Mod developers (or, more often than that, the communities around mods) seem to posit that there is a real difference between the two and that noncommercial games should be given more care and special attention to giving credit to artists.
Now, my attitude toward this has mostly been that if a developer directly requests that I add credit then I will do so (as was the case with Shadow of the Wool Ball) but I consider the attribution of the sprites to the game that they are ripped from to be my crediting the sprites to their rightful origin, which in turn will direct those seeking more accurate information to find the original artists in the credits of the game. I simply don't have time to sort through credits (by default) on games which sometimes don't even specifically list the duties of the names therein to credit somebody, and I would feel even stranger about doing so for commercial games where the credits may be even harder to obtain.
But that is where the interesting split happens: apparently I should care more about crediting modders (according to many of the complaints I've heard) than I should be about crediting professionals. I'll attempt to summarize what I think is the argument here (but it may come out distorted as I can't say I agree wholeheartedly with this assertion):
The second issue I have with this is that, in many of the cases where I have received complaints, they have been for mods which steal resources (without credit) from many commercial games. When I receive complaints in this kind of instance, it is usually from members of the communities around the mods more so than from the developers themselves, so I don't think that many of these developers are being hypocrites as much as members of their communities are. For example, very early on I got complaints from a couple members of the Doom forums who thought that I ought to not rip Action Doom 2 without crediting all of the spriters. Well, I could not find all of the spriters in the credits, they did not provide the information for me to append to the sheets, and Action Doom 2 was a game that used sprites from Metal Slug, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom, Wolfenstein 3D, and many other games with no credit given to the creators here. I'm not likely to respond well to hypocrisy, so these complaints were ignored after it became apparent that these seemed to be people looking for something to be upset about.
Further, if I were to have any more issue with the argument: why would professionals already getting money out of their work suddenly make it less important that they, as artists, as professional developers, have credit "omitted" as those who would complain may suggest? It seems that if it is a slight against the few who do this as a hobby, it would also be a slight against those to whom this is their career.
Now, as I've mentioned, I'm on the side of credit being inherently pointed to in that I have never suggested that I created the sprites and I always attribute the sprites to the games they were originally ripped from. I've also mentioned that if a developer specifically asks that I add credit to the sheets themselves then I will do so no problem, regardless of if they are enacting the perceived hypocrisy I mentioned above or how polite/rude they are in asking. I figure it's my duty as a ripper to grant the wishes of the content developers should they be direct with me.
This has been a semi-issue that pops out rather often for me, and I've stumbled into communities where I've found my name being trashed because of the sprites I've ripped. It might hit me more often then it sometimes hits other people, but if you run into this topic yourself I'd love to hear what your personal philosophy on this is. If you disagree with me, I'd also love to hear you out. I'm certain the discussion is far more complex than I have painted it in this first post. The more perspectives I can see in here, the better. I think that discussion on where credit is more deserved is one worth having within the community.
Cheers
Across my ripping "career" of dozens of games, I've noticed an interesting conception of ethics around sprite ripping that seems worth discussing.
The following is an invitation for dialogue and not an invitation for ruthless attacks. I am genuinely interested in hearing what everybody thinks on this topic without lighting some kind of powder keg.
So, I certainly got my start on this site with ripping noncommercial games (mostly mods at first, like Action Doom 2) and moved into more commercial games like Heretic, Lisa: RPG, and so on. Something that I've seen is that people will get fairly sensitive on the subject of my submitting sprites ripped from noncommercial (as in, not sold) games. It seems most sensitive around the area of mods, as I haven't really had any backlash from people when I rip standalone noncommercial games (the original La-Mulana, for example) or RPG Maker games (MortisGhost's Off, Space Funeral, etc). I'll chalk the separation between the mod developers' reactions and the RPG Maker/Standalone developers' reactions up to differences in community.
But what really interests me here is the perceived difference between ripping a noncommercial games and commercial games. Mod developers (or, more often than that, the communities around mods) seem to posit that there is a real difference between the two and that noncommercial games should be given more care and special attention to giving credit to artists.
Now, my attitude toward this has mostly been that if a developer directly requests that I add credit then I will do so (as was the case with Shadow of the Wool Ball) but I consider the attribution of the sprites to the game that they are ripped from to be my crediting the sprites to their rightful origin, which in turn will direct those seeking more accurate information to find the original artists in the credits of the game. I simply don't have time to sort through credits (by default) on games which sometimes don't even specifically list the duties of the names therein to credit somebody, and I would feel even stranger about doing so for commercial games where the credits may be even harder to obtain.
But that is where the interesting split happens: apparently I should care more about crediting modders (according to many of the complaints I've heard) than I should be about crediting professionals. I'll attempt to summarize what I think is the argument here (but it may come out distorted as I can't say I agree wholeheartedly with this assertion):
- Modders create their games out of passion or recognition more than money.
- When posting their sprites outside of the context of their mod without credit, you remove them from the recognition they deserve.
- Professionals create their games for both recognition and money.
- At least professionals are still getting their money if you post their sprites outside of the context of their product without credit.
- Therefore we owe it much more to modders to give specific, personal credit than we do to professionals.
The second issue I have with this is that, in many of the cases where I have received complaints, they have been for mods which steal resources (without credit) from many commercial games. When I receive complaints in this kind of instance, it is usually from members of the communities around the mods more so than from the developers themselves, so I don't think that many of these developers are being hypocrites as much as members of their communities are. For example, very early on I got complaints from a couple members of the Doom forums who thought that I ought to not rip Action Doom 2 without crediting all of the spriters. Well, I could not find all of the spriters in the credits, they did not provide the information for me to append to the sheets, and Action Doom 2 was a game that used sprites from Metal Slug, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom, Wolfenstein 3D, and many other games with no credit given to the creators here. I'm not likely to respond well to hypocrisy, so these complaints were ignored after it became apparent that these seemed to be people looking for something to be upset about.
Further, if I were to have any more issue with the argument: why would professionals already getting money out of their work suddenly make it less important that they, as artists, as professional developers, have credit "omitted" as those who would complain may suggest? It seems that if it is a slight against the few who do this as a hobby, it would also be a slight against those to whom this is their career.
Now, as I've mentioned, I'm on the side of credit being inherently pointed to in that I have never suggested that I created the sprites and I always attribute the sprites to the games they were originally ripped from. I've also mentioned that if a developer specifically asks that I add credit to the sheets themselves then I will do so no problem, regardless of if they are enacting the perceived hypocrisy I mentioned above or how polite/rude they are in asking. I figure it's my duty as a ripper to grant the wishes of the content developers should they be direct with me.
This has been a semi-issue that pops out rather often for me, and I've stumbled into communities where I've found my name being trashed because of the sprites I've ripped. It might hit me more often then it sometimes hits other people, but if you run into this topic yourself I'd love to hear what your personal philosophy on this is. If you disagree with me, I'd also love to hear you out. I'm certain the discussion is far more complex than I have painted it in this first post. The more perspectives I can see in here, the better. I think that discussion on where credit is more deserved is one worth having within the community.
Cheers