That all sounds very self-important and "this is the reality of things, and if you don't like it you can divorce yourself from mankind", but it misses and obscures the fundamental point I was getting at. This isn't about intellectual properties or the line between parody and plagiarism or whatever other semantic debate you want to hide behind. I'm talking about:
-Taking another artist's work
-Putting some cursive editing in
-Uploading it to the internet and asking for money in return
If it was only 1 and 2, even that ultimately would be inconsequential on a grand scale, but it's 3 that changes the whole context. This isn't about who holds the copyright, it's about the individual artists who put work into what you're recycling and are completely disregarding in this whole affair. No amount of post-modern thinkpieces justify that, nor does being desperate for money. This isn't a judgement of what you're creating, it's a judgement of your attitude towards other artists' work and your business model. If your goal is to make an artistic point, you can do so without making money off recycled artwork.
The act of taking esoteric media and editing it in this case was intentional and at the core of the aesthetic and work, it is not something we intend to hide in - we are proud of it. For the sake of the debate however, we will share that in the case of this image - the dimensions, colours and pixels make this into a transformative work. The design of the character and the outfit was made before finding the source image, however the source image is not just convenient - it adds to the games design which is making an artistic statement on multiple levels in regards to the source image.
Here are the two versions side by side:
You seem to be really stuck on the idea of money here though so lets talk about that;
We worked on this game for over a year, thousands of hours of work went into creating this - programming, audio, level design, narrative, writing and the art/technical art all take up much more of the game than a single reference to an i.p you recognized. The games price when it it stops being free will be $3 AUD - that is less than a cup of coffee. The company who produces Cardcaptor Sakura makes more money than we will ever make in our entire careers and the original artist who created that image is not going to get any future payment from them, they were contracted and paid to create content for a franchise - they completed the brief, handed in the work and moved on onto another job.
It is quite ridiculous to dismiss our points only to stubbornly show your age and experience. Really if you don't agree with the ideas or creative intent in this work that is your problem and not ours. Collage, pastiche and post modern art practice have existed in the art and economic world for decades now and its not our job to convince you of that, you are free to disagree with it, though it is a bit embarrassing for you to assume that the creators didn't consider or research this stuff when making a game that is literally about existing content.
We will now end this conversation publicly. If you wish to continue this in private you can contact @pewkapew on twitter and she will discuss the issue with you.
Yeah.. this is 100% how I feel. And I know the rules, and remix culture ( as a vast majority of the things I make is remix culture, even my profile pics and stuff are repurposed edits )
I'm glad you explained all of this ( even though you didn't need to ) There's a stark contrast between stealing and fair use, and your game is clearly not a replacement or carbon copy of the assets you have edited in your own way.
What strikes me as odd, is I have this argument against literal asset flippers - liek on Steam; selling porn games and whatnot with literally stolen assets, art and so on...an nobody bats an eye ( except for me )
And then, creative works such as your dev team's here.. this is the literal face of remix culture at it's finest, and I love every second of it.
Your world reminds me of Crypt Worlds, which also uses some remix culture of it's own. And then, let;s not forget memes exist, and are literally a mascot to represent remix culture, and it's overlal effect on media.
anywho xD thanks, and liek I said before ; can't wait to see this game get finished ^^
Your attitude towards the situation is rather dismissive of the amount of work that has gone into the game as a whole, and it ignores the fact that the reused assets in the game have been edited and transformed into something new entirely. It's not uncommon to see artists using existing art as inspiration for their own, which is what I see happening here. While there are some similarities between the original art, and the edited art in Cursedom, it has still been edited to the point that the differences outweigh those similarities, which, in my opinion, makes it justifiable to ask for donations in this scenario. This holds especially true when you think about the amount of work put into the game on the whole, even if they removed the art you pointed out, there is still an entire game there that took a lot of work to create. To close off any form of funding entirely just because of some assets that are based off existing art, would be absurd and dismissive of the rest of the work put into this game.
I think in the end, it boils down to "If you have an issue with the game, don't pay for it." The game is offered to you entirely free, and only costs money if you want to support the developers. If you don't want to support the actions made by the devs, then don't. Obviously it's not something that bothers everyone, since some people have donated money, but if it bothers you, then don't pay.
Recycling and recontexualizing is a valid technique in art. Like how Max Ernst used collage for A Week of Kindness or how Hip-Hop artists sample and loop instrumentals from old soul/funk. I'd understand your concerns if this game was demanding money (due to the grey area of what is & isn't considered transformative), but this is a free game.