Bungie and Sony resolve plagiarism dispute over Marathon assets

Artist Fern Hook (known online as Antireal) says her concerns about Bungie using uncredited artwork in Marathon’s alpha have been settled to her “satisfaction.” The announcement follows Bungie’s earlier confirmation that some assets in the game’s alpha were taken from Hook’s work and its pledge to investigate.

Bungie delayed Marathon in June 2025 after the controversy and later ran updated closed playtests in October. Sony now lists a target launch by March 2026. While the settlement appears to remove a major legal and reputational hurdle, details of the agreement have not been publicly disclosed.

What happened

• Alpha assets: Portions of textures and assets in Marathon’s early alpha were claimed by Hook to be taken from her work without credit.
• Investigation and delay: Bungie investigated and delayed the game’s release amid the allegation; it later updated assets and conducted new playtests.
• Settlement: Hook posted on X that the dispute with Bungie and Sony has been resolved to her satisfaction, suggesting terms were reached behind the scenes.

Why it matters

Marathon is Bungie’s first major new franchise since Destiny 2, and the controversy risked undermining launch momentum and public trust. Resolving the dispute reduces legal exposure and may help refocus the studio on polishing the game for release, but unanswered questions remain about how the assets were used and what procedural changes Bungie will implement to prevent similar issues.

What to watch next

• Any public statement or postmortem from Bungie about the origin of the assets and steps taken to improve crediting and asset sourcing.
• Further playtests or developer updates detailing changes made to Marathon since the alpha.
• Confirmation of the March 2026 release window and whether the studio will accelerate PR to restore community confidence.

For the artist’s note, see the announcement on X (formerly Twitter) and coverage in gaming press for additional context.

Discussion: Does settling this dispute restore your confidence in Marathon’s development — or do you want more transparency about how the issue arose and was fixed?