Gaming World Forums
General Category => Entertainment and Media => Topic started by: Cyberg-Ares on June 10, 2008, 05:14:55 pm
-
I don't get it. It's not their graphics. They don't own the screenshots, as they are often distributed by the publishers. So why Gamespot, IGN, Teamxbox and whatever, feel the insane need to put their logo on everything, so we can't use public screenshots without their smeary fingerprints on them?
-
So people know where the images came from. Get your own damn screenshots.
I guess.
-
Hey TBS didn't make that movie I resent that they let us know what channel we're watching
Actually there was a commercial for Bill Engvall Show where he literally STOPS the tv and walks in front of it nice use of breaking the fourth wall but dear god that was the most violating thing ever
-
I don't get it. It's not their graphics. They don't own the screenshots, as they are often distributed by the publishers. So why Gamespot, IGN, Teamxbox and whatever, feel the insane need to put their logo on everything, so we can't use public screenshots without their smeary fingerprints on them?
Several reasons:
1: Advertisement.
2: Exclusive screenshots are specifically given by the developers so it makes sense to watermark these.
3: Some news sources take their own screenshots which are technically owned by them.
-
My favorite is when an image has gone through several different firms and ends up with overlapping watermarks:
(http://www.1up.com/media?id=3556118&type=lg)
-
I liked the Okami fiasco where the American box art for the Wii edition had the IGN logo embossed on it.
Capcom then offered a mail in for three new covers; all three of them being 10x better than the original.
-
Yeah I was gonna mention the Okami thing. Watermarking screenshots is fine, but using a watermarked image on the game cover, hahaha.
-
I don't get it. It's not their graphics. They don't own the screenshots, as they are often distributed by the publishers. So why Gamespot, IGN, Teamxbox and whatever, feel the insane need to put their logo on everything, so we can't use public screenshots without their smeary fingerprints on them?
Public screenshots? How you do you know they didn't pay for a media package/ rights?
-
Public screenshots? How you do you know they didn't pay for a media package/ rights?
Yeah, this. Also as mentioned above (they might be their own screenshots or they might be exclusives).
It's annoying when you're finding screenshots for a review, but it's not at all hard to find some good ones if you look around. If it's just for a topic or something who cares? If you're running a site you should have the facilities to get your own.
So yeah, what inspired this topic? It's totally reasonable they'd put them on there so their screenshots (whether one of the above reasons or not) can get them exposure. If they're hosting them then it's to be expected.
-
Also, it's good for tracing image leechers, although I'd say for the websites we're talking about here they block leeching anyway. Still, if they don't, it's pretty obvious you're leeching if the website's name is RIGHT THERE.
-
I liked the Okami fiasco where the American box art for the Wii edition had the IGN logo embossed on it.
Capcom then offered a mail in for three new covers; all three of them being 10x better than the original.
You serious? Geez, gotta wonder what was going through the box art designer's head...
Also, when someone links to the actual images somewhere, like in this thread, their site is being marketed as well. Those of you looking for non-marked screenshots for reviews can google the official sites and find the press/media section, there's usually links to provided images. :)
-
I liked the Okami fiasco where the American box art for the Wii edition had the IGN logo embossed on it.
Capcom then offered a mail in for three new covers; all three of them being 10x better than the original.
man
if i had a copy of that i would never trade it in!
-
man
if i had a copy of that i would never trade it in!
It's actually the standard box art so if you ran out to the store right now you'd find it. It's not like they recalled the thing.