What the? Did IGN sneak onto my Okami boxart?
"No, I didn't just see that," I told myself, as I placed the game back into the plastic bag the cashier put it in. Then, when I got back to the office, I checked a second time. And there it was again, sitting right where it was when I first spotted it. I quickly got online to see if anyone else caught this and lo and behold, our cruel overlords had reported on a thread at NeoGAF all about this.
So yeah, now I feel like I want to return it. I know the watermark shouldn't bother me (it's pretty lultastic), but ... but it just does.
Gallery: Okami
[Via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sonic_13 @ Apr 20th 2008 6:13PM
Wow. I found the culprit image...from the PS2 image gallery on IGN...
http://ps2.ign.com/dor/objects/678618/okami/images/okami-20070130074341824.html?page=mediaFull
Sonic_13 @ Apr 20th 2008 6:14PM
It amazes me that they went to IGN to get a copy of their own artwork....
Orion @ Apr 20th 2008 6:22PM
um.. they didn't.
You're not a graphic designer, so I can understand you wouldn't get it, but in order to print an image like that for a game cover, you need it to be a lot higher resolution than anything you could find on the web.
What is most likely the case, is that the guys who ported the game appreciated the support from IGN, so they put the watermark in there as sort of an easter egg in "thanks".
But no... if they got ANY image from IGN's site, it would have been too poor to print. All images on the web are 72 dpi, you need around 300 for a decent print.
Sonic_13 @ Apr 20th 2008 6:43PM
The image isn't just some screenshot..,it's a high-res artwork that is quality enough for printing in the small (approx.) 3x5 area that it is used on the box art.
Not to mention the fact that the logo is in the exact, pixel-for-pixel location in both the image on IGN and the boxart. If they were just throwing an easter egg in for IGN as you claim, why did they decide to put IGN's logo in the very exact spot?
samfish @ Apr 20th 2008 9:14PM
Yeah, that's not an 'easter egg' by any means. It's just a screw up.
It's also quite easy to get a web resolution image up to a usable 300dpi if you know what you're doing and have the right software. You could easily blow one of those IGN screen shots up to a good 7x7 before any major image degradation occurs.
Orion @ Apr 21st 2008 12:06AM
samfish.. you don't just "accidently" put IGN's logo in your cover box art... and you sure as heck don't copy your image from a website for your box art. this is capcom we're talking about, not D3 or some other idiodic company... they wouldn't need the file from IGN, it was obviously put in on purpose.
And yea, I'm sure you could make the file look decent, but again.. if a Capcom has even the most mildly reputable graphic design artists, which im sure they do.. theyre freakin capcom, im sure they wouldnt copy a dang image from a website for a game cover. common people. If I did this, or anyone in my team did this, there would be hell to pay where I work. This isn't something professional graphic designers would do... more like some high school student who thinks MS Paint and MS Word is the perfect way to compile and manipulate photos.
Again, this was on purpose. Period. I'm sure you'll hear more from IGN in a bit when they laugh about how they asked it to be put in there to make idiots like us on message boards go ape crazy.
Sonic_13 @ Apr 21st 2008 2:03AM
This was not intentionally placed, not at all. You're acting like the image was made by some random person at IGN with Microsoft Paint. It wasn't, it's Capcom's own high-res imagery so there is no reason why IGN isn't an acceptable place to copy their own image from. It's obvious though, that in doing so, they forgot to edit out IGN's logo.
Capcom isn't just going to place IGN's logo on their boxart, especially not just for laughs as you firmly believe. Graphical oversights like this happen all the time. Just last week Circuit City and Radio Shack ran ads featuring an iPod Touch that was jailbroken and featured icons for unauthorized programs. It was quite obvious that they simply took the image from some website other than Apples. These are mistakes, not intentional acts and you're very naive to think that IGN's logo was intentionally placed there.
Sonic_13 @ Apr 21st 2008 2:10AM
Plus you fail to provide a reason why, under your belief that it was placed there at the request of IGN, that Capcom decided to place their logo in the very *exact same* place that the logo of IGN appears in the image of IGN's website. It's also the same size...
If it had been placed there separately, the size and location of the logo wouldn't match up exactly.
vidGuy @ Apr 20th 2008 6:29PM
Not to dump on your story or anything, but are you sure that your anecdote wasn't just a lead-in to a story your sister site Joystiq posted seven hours ago? ;)
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/20/uh-ohkami-capcom-botches-okami-wii-box-art-inadvertently-adver/
Anyway, I agree with Orion, there's no way this was an accident.
mian @ Apr 20th 2008 6:54PM
Who did you think "our cruel overlords" were?
iMeh @ Apr 20th 2008 6:40PM
I ordered my Okami from Amazon.com and I have this big ugly white circle on the front with "IGN 9.0" I DON'T LIKE IT! Ads ruined my work of cover art! Boo....the game looks beautiful on my brand new 37" HDTV however! Bought the TV especially for Okami.
Mr Khan @ Apr 20th 2008 6:41PM
No one ever told me Ameratsu was female, and now that i know, i can't get it out of my head that she looks exactly like Nailah from Radiant Dawn
Even though Okami came first, even in Japan, but the whole female white wolf thing's drivin' me crazy
SoshiKitai @ Apr 20th 2008 6:54PM
:P Didn't know Amaterasu was female?
Yeah, I suppose if you put it that way -- she does kinda'.
Well, I suppose if you think about it... "Amaterasu" doesn't sound like a guy's name.
And if you knew some Japanese mythological history... you would've already known that she was a goddess. But that's not like an information they throw in fliers ... :D
Oh well, female white wolves look nice -- but when ZeldaTP got out, there was sooo many WolfLink+Amaterasu pictures spreading around, it was kinda' disturbing. :P
beaus27 @ Apr 20th 2008 6:52PM
Does this "watermark scandal" affect the $$$ value of my Okami
"Buddha Board" that I recieved as a bonus for reserving Okami(PS2)?
Ritz @ Apr 20th 2008 6:53PM
Orion... there is a number of images that IGN receives from game companies that are high resolution. Its very very very easy to take that high resolution image, go from 72 to 300 DPI and place it onto a box in InDesign or QuarkXpress. This is pretty much what they did. Now, why they decided to take their own art from IGN, I don't know... maybe they misplaced the original file? It's happened to me at work... But they could have at least cloned out the watermark.
SoshiKitai @ Apr 20th 2008 6:55PM
Maybe they were so used to the watermark they totally didn't notice it. :P
Jason Z. @ Apr 20th 2008 7:41PM
My guess, from following the game, is that they took it from there because sadly they no longer have it. Clover and Capcom split on unhappy terms so when Ready at Dawn wanted to do the port, they couldn't get a bunch of the assets. They had to deconstruct and reconstruct the code of the PS2 game, so it wasn't an easy port. (My source was one of the IGN Wiik in Review podcasts, I don't remember which one they went into this for) Given that information, I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if RaD actually ended up combing the internet for the original artwork unfortunately. It's likely Capcom's blame for tearing apart Clover.
Ritz @ Apr 20th 2008 7:48PM
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I forgot about that whole thing.
Mr Khan @ Apr 20th 2008 8:17PM
That would explain a lot of things, like their inability to replicate that art filter
Although you figure Capcom would've been smart enough to cease all the development assets for games that Clover had done under their name. I mean Nintendo didn't have this trouble porting all the Donkey Kong Country games to GBA, even after Rare split
Orion @ Apr 21st 2008 12:13AM
While that's probably it, I just find it hard to believe a company like Capcom would ever do such a thing. Our company has EVERYthing either on the server (for the last year) or backed up on back up servers/dvds for previous years' work. To misplace it like that, and to not get even the most basic files like that from Clover just .. idk.. doesn't sound right.
And they couldn't replicate the paper filter NOT because they didn't have the file, it's because the PS2's rendering system is different than the Wii's, and they couldn't mimic all the effects 1:1.
Ritz: That's what I'm trying to say there Ritz. Anybody with any sense, would know that if they had to take the file from IGN (which I honestly doubt highly) that most of their images have watermarks on them. And yes, cloning it out would take about 20 seconds... especially since there is no real illustration behind it.. just a gradient really...
Dave A. @ Apr 21st 2008 12:59AM
@Orion:
You'd be surprised how much time is spent at NASA doing duplicate research because the original crap is gone when people retire.
I don't work for NASA, but if all of the original source material is copyrighted to Clover and Capcom was just the publisher, Capcom wouldn't have any of the original materials for it. Plus, the fact that the watermark is in the *exact same spot* as the file on the IGN means there is absolutely no coincidence. You're trying to explain the obvious with obfuscation.
Capcom didn't have access since the copyright went with Clover and turned to the internets for help. Case open and frakking closed.
Covarr @ Apr 20th 2008 7:37PM
I've gotta buy a copy before they fix it (I'm sure they will). Once they start selling the game without the watermark, it's quite possible that it'll end up being a rarity, worth quite a bit in the future.
andy @ Apr 20th 2008 7:44PM
I already bought the ps2 version a long time ago, but your theory might have just sold me the Wii version.
Mr Khan @ Apr 20th 2008 8:18PM
The sole problem with that mentality is that if everyone stockpiles them, how will they become rare?
That idea nearly bankrupted the comic book industry back in the 90's
Covarr @ Apr 21st 2008 11:23AM
Most people won't stockpile the watermark'd version. It's not like the majority of Wii users read Nintendo Wii Fanboy.
Soiden @ Apr 20th 2008 11:44PM
Funny is that even Amaterasu wants to bite that watermark!
I don't know, but I think that's a horrible detail, even if it's hardly noticeable.
Croove55 @ Apr 21st 2008 12:07AM
I got this game today. The watermark is even more noticeable on the physical boxart than on the pictures from here and joystiq. The game is.... pretty damn good. I haven't had as much fun with it as with viewtiful joe, but it's by no means a bad game.
...Except for the fact that my Wii's freezing up again. Frustration isn't a term that carries quite enough potency to describe my feelings on that subject. "Blind, debilitating rage" even comes up a bit lacking this time.
nxtiak @ Apr 21st 2008 4:04AM
U R MR GAY
Dio @ Apr 21st 2008 5:10AM
Dear Orion:
Capcom isn't perfect. They have made quite a few mistakes or just plain bad decisions in the past. It's entirely possible the graphics designer overlooked it. Maybe the staff was tired and overworked. Who knows? No one will know until tomorrow or in the next few days or even the distant future.
Dear rest of commenters:
You don't know the reason why this happened either XP Though you have made very good points.
Signed, Dio
P.S. Props to samfish for his posts in the Joystiq article XD
P.P.S. I'm very tired and I have no idea why I'm even addressing anyone or commenting in this format.
B @ Apr 21st 2008 5:10AM
Oh man, and to think I bought the game just for the cover. I cant believe that people are this concerned about the cover of the game!
If you are truly concerned I suggest making yourself a new cover.
Moose @ Apr 24th 2008 2:55PM
Definitely a second on that one. Who the hell cares? Had I bought the game last weekend (I was very close), if I noticed it at all, I wouldn't have thought twice about it.
Brento @ Apr 21st 2008 7:12AM
Look at the original box art of the VHS version of Disney's Little Mermaid. One of the spires of the undersea castle resembled something Freud would consider quite phallic.
jmf @ Apr 21st 2008 12:07PM
This saddens me
strangemusic @ Apr 21st 2008 5:24PM
I went out and bought Okami today, and yes, it's very noticeable... I pointed it out to the owner of my local comic/games shop, who had a good laugh over it. I figure this will probably become strangely collectible, because Capcom is probably going to end up printing six billion more copies of Okami which will not have this error. Of course, only after they soullessly terminate the poor sod who left the IGN watermark on the front cover.
xgoldx @ Apr 21st 2008 10:38PM
I saw this story about the watermark yesterday or the day before and I was out doing errands today and stopped by my local game store to check it out and noticed it right away. I thought ok mess up, fail? Yes, but really oh well but then I cross referenced it to the strategy guide and it is there too but shifted? So couldnt they a) find it and change it b) why would it be moved if not intentional?
Unbreakable_idea @ Apr 22nd 2008 2:00PM
Well, obviously nobody here know's for sure why it's there/how it got there. Here's a thought, though. Maybe Capcom didn't have the original artwork. So maybe they asked Ign for permission before copying their watermarked image. Perhaps this was put in as thanks, or perhaps it was a stipulation of Ign's before granting permission. After all, even though Capcom may own the original image, wouldn't Ign have the rights to their own watermarked copy of it? Does that watermarked image then become exclusive to the owner and uncopyable? I don't know and obviously I'm not familiar with image rights law, I'm just throwing a guess out there. It does seem doubtful to me that something like this would get noticed by everyone except for the people who actually made the game. Unlikely, but still possible.
Ps- What's with everyone voting down all the posts with a dissenting different opinion today? I could see if they were pro IGN and anti WiiFanboy, but they seem to just be doubtful of this being a mistake, and since nobody knows the truth right now, what's the problem with that?
Joseph Lundstrom, Jr. @ Apr 26th 2008 1:41AM
Well if it is an error and they fix it later it just means it will be worth more money later on. If you're a game collector these types of boo-boos basically mean high value in the long run.