Video game actor strike

[slowbiz]

Sometimes America can be so ridiculous.

Kenyan health care workers are on strike because they want a 600% pay increase. Meanwhile, patients are dying, and the health care workers are being arrested.

Small chips in comparison.

 

[Triple B]

This muddled mess brought to you by me.

Cam Clarke (Leonardo, Tetsuo, Liquid Snake) is a voice actor.
Will Smith (Shark's Tale), Cameron Diaz (Shrek), are NOT voice actors. They're actors.

This is a bit of a stretch, as it involves movies, but when a major feature anime is released state-side and they do voice work using Big_Hollywood_Name01 through 05 just to get "star appeal," it pisses me off. A specific example of this would be Princess Mononoke. Gillian Anderson is NOT a voice actor, nor is Billy Bob Thornton. So when SAG starts bitching that their horribly underqualified SCREEN ACTORS aren't getting residuals for providing around .00001% of the production of a game, I don't shed any tears. They are not the star, nor are they the driving force in the creation of the project. Fight for the programmers and the artists to get residuals before you start complaining that your highly paid actors who make in one hour almost as much as I do in one week aren't getting a cut at the end.

I DO feel a little bad for the truly great voice actors out there. Michael Ironside, Cam Clarke (only not so much, since the dude is in EVERYTHING), David Hayter, etc... they do make a major difference in production. But then I remember that game companies tend to put the money they earn back into production, creating MORE games for the actors to have jobs to fill.

Rant over, if anyone found a point in that let me know.

 

[jon_k]

funny you mentioned will smith who did voice over acting for the animated move A Shark's Tale.

 

[El Nacho]

funny you mentioned will smith who did voice over acting for the animated move A Shark's Tale.

I dont really think voice over in movies = voice over in games.

 

[Triple B]

funny you mentioned will smith who did voice over acting for the animated move A Shark's Tale.

Why is it funny? My point was that people who do voice work in movies are not voice actors, they're actors hired for their name. And they usually suck balls when it comes to voice acting. And that leads into the point that SAG (the SCREEN actors guild) is a big part of this whole mess. Most actors don't even get residuals on films, so why should they all be entitled to residuals on games?

 

[jon_k]

Why is it funny? My point was that people who do voice work in movies are not voice actors, they're actors hired for their name. And they usually suck balls when it comes to voice acting. And that leads into the point that SAG (the SCREEN actors guild) is a big part of this whole mess. Most actors don't even get residuals on films, so why should they all be entitled to residuals on games?

I agree with you on that. I don't think voice acting is a big enough part of video games that the actors should get a % of the profits. However, I do think that they should be paid fairly. Most professionals make between 40k - 50k a year, and I think that is what the average voice actor should make as well. Really top notch ones should make between 60-80k a year just like any other top notch professional would make.

 

[[KFKAS]Death-Speak]

Having read the responses, it's pretty clear to me as an actor, that none of you have a clue how the business works. Many of you are griping over the fact that voice actors are being paid $278/hr, but what you don't understand is that the voice acting biz is NOTHING like regular 9 to 5 jobs, and that even at $278/hr, voice actors are getting ripped off.

What I doubt any of you know is that voice actors are among the rarest type of actors there are. Universities and workshops may teach speech & voice techniques, but developing a character through voice requires very specialized training. Few actors actually take the time (years of voice practice) to learn how to develop voice characters, which means there is a low supply of voice actors. If those of you who refer to voice actors as "faceless tards" would actually take the time research this topic, you'd see that the high demand in the industry for voice actors is falling on the shoulders of a small number of people. As those of you who started working the computer business during its massive expansion in the early 90's noticed, the high demand for skilled computer experts brought with it big bucks during a time when there weren't as many experts as there are now. And, I'm quite sure none of you complained about YOUR big salaries in your 40/hr a week jobs. Voice actors only work for a few days on a voice gig, so it's not like that $278/hr actually translates into big bucks. At most, those voice actors are only making a few thousand dollars for any one job. Many of my computer friends were making 6-digits a year, and YOU'RE complaing about MY fellow actor's wages? On top of that, these actors don't get paid vacation, medical insurance or 401k.

It's also important for you to understand that voice actors are required to have many, many different types of voices at their disposal because once a voice is used for a show or game, that character voice is no longer owned by the actor unless otherwise specified in the contract. The voice actors aren't just getting paid $278/hr to gab all day, they're potentially giving up the rights to ever use again what may be a very lucrative voice.

And, what's this about voice actors not contributing to the experience of a video game? You make it sound like just any actor can talk into a mic and expect to be as good as any of the voice actors used in the gaming industry. Heck, if the voices are that inconsquential to you, try playing Doom 3 or Half-Life 2 without them and see just how immersive they'll be. Out of a 1000 actors, maybe 100 actually have the skill to be good voice performers, and maybe 10 of the remaining 100 can actually be good voice ACTORS. What you're getting in most video games published by reputable software companies are the best of the best in the industry, and they deserve to be paid more than $278/hr.

Your arguement is flawed from the get go. An actors voice does not impact a games sales that much. That weight falls on the shoulders of the developers. They (the devs) should call the shots, not an actors union. I'm afraid in this case if the union is to pushy, they will be dropped. Will this affect whether I purchase HL3, Doom4, etc. No....

What drives me to purchase a GAME? The GAMEPLAY does!

DS

 

[El Nacho]

[QUOTE='[KFKAS]
What drives me to purchase a GAME? The GAMEPLAY does!
DS[/QUOTE]

Woh there budy......thats crazy talk.

 

[Ryland]

yes it is, they're the only ones bitching

Its the big actors who are taking the stage claiming the evils of the game developers and how THEY want their fair share. I have only read quotes from big hollywood names, not names that I don't know.

 

[Zorro]

I'd like to see one of those voice over actors in the position of a programmer working towards a deadline, working 10+ hours a day to finish a game. The people making these 6 figure salaries have everything to lose and these actors have nothing to lose.

Again, based on your comments it's clear that you have no idea how the acting industry works. Also, your comments look suspiciously like you didn't read the whole of my responses. First of all, those voice actors aren't doing one or two gigs and then sitting on their laurels. They're out there finding many gigs, often one right after the other. Because they don't have steady income, they are constantly having to find work. A thing like a head cold can mean the difference between fame and famine when you're living from paycheck to paycheck as most actors do. You say the actors have nothing to lose, that's patently false. The next 3 hour gig for $278/hr can mean they get to live in their apartment for another month, let alone having enough money to feed themselves or pay for health insurance of which they have none. I'm sure you can recognize the stress that can cause, so it's not like having to work 10+ hours a day is all that bad because you can be sure that you're going to have a home and food on the table. Plus, with a 6-digit job you can put aside money for a rainy day. Voice actors need their entire paycheck just to stay alive.

You're not going to understand this looking from the outside. I may be an actor, but I'm also a techie and the biggest difference between me and all of my acting friends is that I was never a starving artist. 10+ hours a day you say? Boo hoo hoo.

 

[Mr_Evil]

(BTW, I don't know if this has been said before, but I didn't want to read 7 pages of thread.)

The games industry will no doubt start hiring Talent in Canada to do voice-overs. Look at all the TV shows that are entirely produced in Vancouver...

Why do they make so much Sci-Fi TV in Canada? No unions, plain and simple. Not only that I'm guessing nobody up there demands that high a wage anyway.

There is NO other place in the American workplace that you can "strike" and not lose your job. Only if you're in in a union. If I tried to "strike" in my job, I would lose it in a heartbeat to someone else who is willing to do my job for less money. Therefore, it is my responsibility (not some union boss's) to get better training, make the money I make work for my life and try to be happy about my job. The "union" is one of the biggest excuses to NOT be responsible for your own career life. I'm actually somewhat comforted by the fact that I MUST be motivated to be good at my job (in contrary to a union position). Now... after that rant, on to this specific situation...

You don't quite understand unions, at least in the terms of unskilled labor. Now I'm going to use a simplified example here of the purpose of unions.

You got a guy making Widgets at Factory X, all this guy does is install a couple bolts into the Widget ensuring it's operation. Other workers do other stages of the assembly in just the same manner. Anyway, how can you get more training to put a few fucking bolts in a Widget? The fact of the matter is, even if you had a PhD in physics, and knew what all goes into that bolt and the forces at work that keep the bolt in place, you're still just as disposable as the guy next to you that never graduated high school. Seriously, how much fucking education or skill does it take to put a couple bolts in a widget? If your boss can find someone who'll bolt up widgets for less money than he pays you and do the same task. You bet your ass he's going to fire you and hire the cheaper guy. Hell, if PETA wouldn't throw a fit, I reckon they'd find some way to get a Chimp to put the bolts in the Widget.

Unions represent employees without any marketable job skills in jobs that require no skill to do. Abuses by the UAW and these bullshit actors' and ball players' unions aside, unions ensure that their employees make a living wage and have a greater degree of job security. They also make shitty jobs alot easier to stomach. Remember, not everyone is cut out for a college education, and even the uneducated got children to raise.

 

[El Nacho]

Zorro, You still havent shown why we should feel sorry for them. They have the chance to make alot of money. I also live pay check to pay check. Should I go on strike to for more money?

 

[Zorro]

Your arguement is flawed from the get go. An actors voice does not impact a games sales that much. What drives me to purchase a GAME? The GAMEPLAY does!

Many of the more recent top games involving voice actors either don't have demos, or didn't have demos until several months AFTER they'd already become best selling titles. Therefore, gameplay couldn't have affected sales since no one purchasing the game knew what the gameplay was actually like. So, it would be YOUR argument that is flawed.

 

[Ryland]

Again, based on your comments it's clear that you have no idea how the acting industry works. Also, your comments look suspiciously like you didn't read the whole of my responses. First of all, those voice actors aren't doing one or two gigs and then sitting on their laurels. They're out there finding many gigs, often one right after the other. Because they don't have steady income, they are constantly having to find work. A thing like a head cold can mean the difference between fame and famine when you're living from paycheck to paycheck as most actors do. You say the actors have nothing to lose, that's patently false. The next 3 hour gig for $278/hr can mean they get to live in their apartment for another month, let alone having enough money to feed themselves or pay for health insurance of which they have none. I'm sure you can recognize the stress that can cause, so it's not like having to work 10+ hours a day is all that bad because you can be sure that you're going to have a home and food on the table. Plus, with a 6-digit job you can put aside money for a rainy day. Voice actors need their entire paycheck just to stay alive.

You're not going to understand this looking from the outside. I may be an actor, but I'm also a techie and the biggest difference between me and all of my acting friends is that I was never a starving artist. 10+ hours a day you say? Boo hoo hoo.

Sorry but that argument does not cut it. What you are essentially saying is that since VO isn't steady work that the VO actors should get more money. Thats BS if you think about it for even a second. The people who get the money are those that give the biggest CONTRIBUTION to a project in whole. VO is only one small portion of an overall game development project compared with the programming and art work done. I just don't see a reason why VO actors should get residuals for something that they only spend 20-30 hours on vs the THOUSANDS of hours an individual may spend working on the rest of the game.

Give them a raise so that they don't starve, maybe, give them residuals for something that htey have a very minor percet contribution on, no way in hell.

 

[Ryland]

Many of the more recent top games involving voice actors either don't have demos, or didn't have demos until several months AFTER they'd already become best selling titles. Therefore, gameplay couldn't have affected sales since no one purchasing the game knew what the gameplay was actually like. So, it would be YOUR argument that is flawed.

Have you ever heard of a thing called a REVIEW? Or a BETA test? Or game play movies? Hell, how about a leap of faith for an established developer?

Are you really that (oh hell not sure what to put here) to think that gamers buy games depending on WHO WAS THE VOICE of character X????

 

[KidzMD]

My $.02 - let them strike.

I actually dislike voice-acting in most games. With good story, music, mood, all the voice-over work does is slow me down. I usually turn on subtitles so I can read through the text in 1/5 the time it will take the actor to recite the part, plus IMO >90% of voice acting in games sucks.

But, I also think actors in general make too much money for the effort they put forth and if they think they need more, they should get a real job...

 

[Torgo]

I've read over 130 posts and only a few have gotten what this issue is about: residuals. It's not about paying the voice actors or not. They are getting paid and the publishers have offered a 30% raise above the current union rate. The Top AAA Hollywood talent will negotiate their own separate contract anyway, so this is mostly about the rank and file voice talent.

BBA has hit the nail on the head in an earlier post. To get residuals above that of the game developers is just friggin' insane. Hell, we sold 2 million copies of Age of Empires and as a bonus, we got to keep our jobs. Gee, I got to work 60 hour weeks for close to two years for only a free copy of the game I made? Thank you, may I have another?

Now these asstards want residuals based on a few hours work? What the hell is wrong here? Instead of raping the developers, why not help establish a game developers union? Instead, they're being selfish and not realizing that game development is one of the most unstable professions out there. Most people in the gaming industry stay in it for only five years before getting the hell out. Oh, you think that the publishers are going to go for this and risk a revolt among their current developers?

Here's the thing, the publishers have the upper hand here. They're not going to cave in and they could frankly care less. They will get other people to do the work. Most of the time, they just use developers anyway. (I was involved in the foley work on the intro to Age 2, along with four other developers.) So, if the VO guys want more hourly money, fine. They can kiss my shiny white behind if they get residuals before the developers.

 

[Zorro]

Sorry but that argument does not cut it. What you are essentially saying is that since VO isn't steady work that the VO actors should get more money.

You're taking my arguments out of context. I responding to that other person. Refer to the comments in my initial post.

I just don't see a reason why VO actors should get residuals for something that they only spend 20-30 hours on vs the THOUSANDS of hours an individual may spend working on the rest of the game.

An actor's voice is a form of intellectual property that they might end up selling, permanently, if the voice becomes property of the software company. Thus, the actor's voice has substantial value, even if they aren't working for as long as the programmers. There will always be programmers and game engines that can be used over and over again... but there may be only one voice for that one special game character, and if the software developers want to own it, they'll need to shell out the extra money.

 

[Zorro]

Have you ever heard of a thing called a REVIEW? Or a BETA test? Or game play movies? Hell, how about a leap of faith for an established developer?

Oh, so now you're changing your story. What really sells a game is the game review, faith and the silent opinions of beta testers that are normally made to sign non-disclosure agreements. Glad we managed to clear that up.

And here I thought it was action, plot, environment and personal preference that sold a game. Silly me.

 

[bonkrowave]

Screw the actors .... have the developers send me a script and I will record it on the microphone on my pc, at work, for 30$ and hour, during my lunch break.

These morons do such a simple job, they should be paid a flat fee ... end of story. Honestly why not have these voice actors man a jackhammer for 12 hours a day, or do back breaking manual labour ... and then ask them if they think its fair for them to get paid much much more.

 

[Ryland]

An actor's voice is a form of intellectual property that they might end up selling, permanently, if the voice becomes property of the software company. Thus, the actor's voice has substantial value, even if they aren't working for as long as the programmers. There will always be programmers and game engines that can be used over and over again... but there may be only one voice for that one special game character, and if the software developers want to own it, they'll need to shell out the extra money.

How is a voice a form of intellectual property? I can understand how a recorded segment may be but thats understandable. A voice is made up of modulation, waveforms, frequency etc depending on what is being presented so what would a developer do, register a specific combination?

From the brief demo I played on the latest Splinter Cell game I did recognize the actors voice so what you are saying is that because he used his real voice for the game that he can't act in any more movies???

 

[Ryland]

Oh, so now you're changing your story. What really sells a game is the game review, faith and the silent opinions of beta testers that are normally made to sign non-disclosure agreements. Glad we managed to clear that up.

And here I thought it was action, plot, environment and personal preference that sold a game. Silly me.

Hmm...last time I checked we used those devices todetermine whether or not a game contained gameplay we actually like. If I don't like the gameplay then Im not going to buy the game. Point in fact I played the demo for Splinter Cell and hated the game play so I didn't bother buying the game whereas I liked the gameplay in the ProjecT:Snowblind demo so I bought the game. Im not changing anything...

 

[Torgo]

Many of the more recent top games involving voice actors either don't have demos, or didn't have demos until several months AFTER they'd already become best selling titles. Therefore, gameplay couldn't have affected sales since no one purchasing the game knew what the gameplay was actually like. So, it would be YOUR argument that is flawed.

Ryland, Zorro, let me settle this. Initial sales can be slightly affected by the either the voice talent or by the actor filmed in the game. That only lasts for a little while as the reviews come in and gameplay finally wins out.

This is borne out by over a decade of sales figures to prove it. In fact, most of the games that relied on the talent to sell the game bombed because of poor gameplay. (Examples: Hell, Daedulis Project, Dune 2000, Night Trap, etc. etc. I could list a few dozen). Even with excellent voice talent and gameplay, it isn't often enough to put the game over the top. The best example is probably Planescape: Torment which included both famous actors (Michael Wiess, Mitch Pileggi, John De Lancie) and the best voice talent (Keith David, Jennifer Hale, Dan Castellaneta, Rob Paulsen) around... and it still didn't help sales. They did combine to make one of the best games of all time.

The game industry wouldn't be as good without the voice actors, but they can get by without them. The best voice over ever done in a game was done by a developer (Terri Brosius as Shodan). It's not going to matter much. The publishers have the upper hand and I think the VO actors know it. The threat of a strike is empty and their demands for residuals are having the VPs in the boardroom laughing at them. The union would be best served by taking the hourly rate raise and being happy.

 

[Ryland]

The game industry wouldn't be as good without the voice actors, but they can get by without them. The best voice over ever done in a game was done by a developer (Terri Brosius as Shodan). It's not going to matter much. The publishers have the upper hand and I think the VO actors know it. The threat of a strike is empty and their demands for residuals are having the VPs in the boardroom laughing at them. The union would be best served by taking the hourly rate raise and being happy.

THAT I can agree with, finally a sane response (jk).

 

[jon_k]

Screw the actors .... have the developers send me a script and I will record it on the microphone on my pc, at work, for 30$ and hour, during my lunch break.

These morons do such a simple job, they should be paid a flat fee ... end of story. Honestly why not have these voice actors man a jackhammer for 12 hours a day, or do back breaking manual labour ... and then ask them if they think its fair for them to get paid much much more.

yeah.... how about this. Take a famous scene from a movie, video game, play - your choice. Record it with your mic at lunch time, and post the wave file for us to download it. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is.

Oh you won't? Why's that? Maybe because it would sound like complete shit and we would all laugh at you. That's exactly what actors have to deal with. You don't just waltz in to the studio unprepared, picup a script and cold read it for money. You actually have to work and rehearse until it is perfect. If you don't, the producers would fire you on the spot for doing a shitty job. THEN after you perfect it, you drive to the recording studio and pray that you'll do everything just like you rehearsed.

No one is telling you that your job is easy and any monkey could do it, so what are you talking shit about other peoples jobs? It's what they do for a living, and it's harder than you think.

 

[Ryland]

yeah.... how about this. Take a famous scene from a movie, video game, play - your choice. Record it with your mic at lunch time, and post the wave file for us to download it. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is.

Oh you won't? Why's that? Maybe because it would sound like complete shit and we would all laugh at you. That's exactly what actors have to deal with. You don't just waltz in to the studio unprepared, picup a script and cold read it for money. You actually have to work and rehearse until it is perfect. If you don't, the producers would fire you on the spot for doing a shitty job. THEN after you perfect it, you drive to the recording studio and pray that you'll do everything just like you rehearsed.

No one is telling you that your job is easy and any monkey could do it, so what are you talking shit about other peoples jobs? It's what they do for a living, and it's harder than you think.

Voice Acting probably isn't easy but is it so difficult that a VO should get residuals for something he spent 20-40 hours on versus the programmer who spent thousands of hours of work?

 

[jon_k]

Voice Acting probably isn't easy but is it so difficult that a VO should get residuals for something he spent 20-40 hours on versus the programmer who spent thousands of hours of work?

oh i agree, I don't think they should be getting residuals, but I do think that they are justified in asking for a raise every once in a while. I am just getting sick of people who are saying "OMG WtF PURE GREED! Acting is a joke. I'll do it for $30 an hour at my lunch break." As an actor (not voice over work but still an actor just the same) that offends me.

On another note, my favorite game of all time is Zelda OOT. I don't recall any voice acting in that game, yet the gameplay is unmatched. Voice acting isn't an integral part of a game to a point where the game will suck without it. *Therefore* I don't think they need to be makeing 6 figures or getting residuals, BUT I do think they need to be paid fairly and get a raise every once in a while.

 

[Torgo]

An actor's voice is a form of intellectual property that they might end up selling, permanently, if the voice becomes property of the software company.

You're joking right? That'll never happen for voice overs. There's too much established precident that's been set. You might get royalties, but once you die and are replaced, you don't continue to get royalty work on any *new* sounds based on previous work.

For example, Mel Blanc doesn't get any royalties based on the work Billy West does for Bugs Bunny. The quality, timbre and characteristics can be established through the actor, but those qualities remain with the character and not the actor. The actor is paid for the performance matching those qualities, but not for any IP rights. The actor needs to get that established in his contract, which the IP owner would never do.

The voice cast for the Simpsons are paid so well for their work because they are so good at performing. But if Dan Castellaneta quit tomorrow, he'd be replaced within a week. Get good enough actors and you'd never noticed. Heck, it worked great with Scooby-Doo and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference. (Although Mindy Cohn does a much better Velma, IMHO.)

 

[Ryland]

oh i agree, I don't think they should be getting residuals, but I do think that they are justified in asking for a raise every once in a while. I am just getting sick of people who are saying "OMG WtF PURE GREED! Acting is a joke. I'll do it for $30 an hour at my lunch break." As an actor (not voice over work but still an actor just the same) that offends me.

Im pretty sure I never said that they were being greedy. People need raises occasionally but getting residuals should be out of the question. Im just curious whether the actors guild actually thought this all the way through or if past experience made them assume that game producers would be a walk in the park...

Edit: Made Gawd with this one, laugh.

 

[bonkrowave]

yeah.... how about this. Take a famous scene from a movie, video game, play - your choice. Record it with your mic at lunch time, and post the wave file for us to download it. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is.

Oh you won't? Why's that? Maybe because it would sound like complete shit and we would all laugh at you. That's exactly what actors have to deal with. You don't just waltz in to the studio unprepared, picup a script and cold read it for money. You actually have to work and rehearse until it is perfect. If you don't, the producers would fire you on the spot for doing a shitty job. THEN after you perfect it, you drive to the recording studio and pray that you'll do everything just like you rehearsed.

No one is telling you that your job is easy and any monkey could do it, so what are you talking shit about other peoples jobs? It's what they do for a living, and it's harder than you think.

HAHAHAH take it easy there buddy no need to blow a gasket. It is infact easy. Have you ever listened to the acting in games ? It is far from perfect.

I would try decaff next time.

 

[Torgo]

Oh you won't? Why's that? Maybe because it would sound like complete shit and we would all laugh at you. That's exactly what actors have to deal with. You don't just waltz in to the studio unprepared, picup a script and cold read it for money. You actually have to work and rehearse until it is perfect. If you don't, the producers would fire you on the spot for doing a shitty job. THEN after you perfect it, you drive to the recording studio and pray that you'll do everything just like you rehearsed.

I've got an old DAT tape of Vanna White doing the raw voice over work for a Wheel of Fortune video game. She does like 10 different takes of "You're a winner!" with different inflections. (It's a lot like the Chewbacca recording studio Cingular commercial. "I love it. Now make me hate it. Interesting choice.")

VO recording is 50% the actor and 50% the voice director. The director needs to coax the right sound and inflection from the actor. Get the right combination and you can get absolute magic happen. Conversely, a good director can manage to get some gold out of a deaf-mute actor and there are those professionals who can walk in, do one take and walk out. (Patrick Stewart is a absolute god at this, as well as Frank Welker and Billy West.)

 

[jon_k]

Im pretty sure I never said that they were being greedy. People need raises occasionally but getting residuals should be out of the question. Im just curious whether the actors guild actually thought this all the way through or if past experience made them assume that game producers would be a walk in the park...

Edit: Made Gawd with this one, laugh.

Except for a few special cases I would say, yes, residuals are out of the question. Even in movies, Tom Cruise is the only actor I know that gets a percentage of the movie profits. And he's what, the biggest movie star on the planet?

However, consider this. Supposed a video game comes out based on Tom's new movie "War of the Worlds." Suppose he gave the right to the developers to make a character that copied his looks exactly, he did all the voice overs, and even filmed special scenes just to use as cutscenes in the video game. Would he have a right to ask for a percentage? I think he would, becasue his image and voice would make people feel like they were actually in the movie.

 

[JethroXP]

I'm all for people being paid fairly for what they do. However in my opinion, the issue here is whether or not we as consumers of video games are willing to pay the price that quality voice acting requires.

None of us questions dropping $9 to see Star Wars Episode III, even though we know that actor's salaries for that one movie are massive, perhaps more than most of us will earn in a lifetime. We don't have a problem because (and maybe Star Wars was a bad example) actors are central to the "medium" of movies. Without actors, you'd have a hard time having a movie.

However for video games, actors are not central to the medium. They have only been added in recent years as a means of embellishing the content. So because they are not central, I don't feel that they bring the same value to video games that they do to movies.

This is not to say that if used, they should be paid any less. I'm simply saying that I wouldn't pay more for a game because it used actors. So if the actors go on strike for more pay, I say fine, go find work elsewhere because I don't care if they are used in video games, and I'm not willing to pay more to have them.

 

[Ryland]

Except for a few special cases I would say, yes, residuals are out of the question. Even in movies, Tom Cruise is the only actor I know that gets a percentage of the movie profits. And he's what, the biggest movie star on the planet?

However, consider this. Supposed a video game comes out based on Tom's new movie "War of the Worlds." Suppose he gave the right to the developers to make a character that copied his looks exactly, he did all the voice overs, and even filmed special scenes just to use as cutscenes in the video game. Would he have a right to ask for a percentage? I think he would, becasue his image and voice would make people feel like they were actually in the movie.

He would be getting paid a percentage for the use of the franchise called "Tom Cruise", not just for the VO. That would be similar to paying a royalty to the studio that holds the rights to a movie that a game is based upon. Completely different than what we are discussing IMHO.

 

[jon_k]

HAHAHAH take it easy there buddy no need to blow a gasket. It is infact easy. Have you ever listened to the acting in games ? It is far from perfect.

I would try decaff next time.

And that's why they don't get paid millions of dollars or get residuals. Even still, acting that you consider sucky, you have no idea how work is needed to achieve even sucky acting.

I happen to think that 90% of all voice acting in games is pretty bad, but I'd rather have the acting than not have it. At least it isn't painful to listen to, and it does add something to the game. When it is the 10% that is good, it adds a lot.

 

[Torgo]

And he's what, the biggest movie star on the planet?

Nah, he's only 5' 7".

However, consider this. Supposed a video game comes out based on Tom's new movie "War of the Worlds." Suppose he gave the right to the developers to make a character that copied his looks exactly, he did all the voice overs, and even filmed special scenes just to use as cutscenes in the video game. Would he have a right to ask for a percentage? I think he would, becasue his image and voice would make people feel like they were actually in the movie.

This scenario happened for the Matrix. The movie studio sells the likeness rights as part of the character in the movie, not the actor. I'm not saying that it's fair, just that it's the way that it's currently done.

 

[magoo]

Having read the responses, it's pretty clear to me as an actor, that none of you have a clue how the business works. Many of you are griping over the fact that voice actors are being paid $278/hr, but what you don't understand is that the voice acting biz is NOTHING like regular 9 to 5 jobs, and that even at $278/hr, voice actors are getting ripped off.

What I doubt any of you know is that voice actors are among the rarest type of actors there are. Universities and workshops may teach speech & voice techniques, but developing a character through voice requires very specialized training. Few actors actually take the time (years of voice practice) to learn how to develop voice characters, which means there is a low supply of voice actors. If those of you who refer to voice actors as "faceless tards" would actually take the time research this topic, you'd see that the high demand in the industry for voice actors is falling on the shoulders of a small number of people. As those of you who started working the computer business during its massive expansion in the early 90's noticed, the high demand for skilled computer experts brought with it big bucks during a time when there weren't as many experts as there are now. And, I'm quite sure none of you complained about YOUR big salaries in your 40/hr a week jobs. Voice actors only work for a few days on a voice gig, so it's not like that $278/hr actually translates into big bucks. At most, those voice actors are only making a few thousand dollars for any one job. Many of my computer friends were making 6-digits a year, and YOU'RE complaing about MY fellow actor's wages? On top of that, these actors don't get paid vacation, medical insurance or 401k.

It's also important for you to understand that voice actors are required to have many, many different types of voices at their disposal because once a voice is used for a show or game, that character voice is no longer owned by the actor unless otherwise specified in the contract. The voice actors aren't just getting paid $278/hr to gab all day, they're potentially giving up the rights to ever use again what may be a very lucrative voice.

And, what's this about voice actors not contributing to the experience of a video game? You make it sound like just any actor can talk into a mic and expect to be as good as any of the voice actors used in the gaming industry. Heck, if the voices are that inconsquential to you, try playing Doom 3 or Half-Life 2 without them and see just how immersive they'll be. Out of a 1000 actors, maybe 100 actually have the skill to be good voice performers, and maybe 10 of the remaining 100 can actually be good voice ACTORS. What you're getting in most video games published by reputable software companies are the best of the best in the industry, and they deserve to be paid more than $278/hr.

WAAAAH,WAAAH,WAAAAH. i dont like you,either. maybe you should GET A JOB voice boy.

 

[bonkrowave]

^^^ Voice actors sure as hell dont deserve over 278$ an hour. Get a real job and stop bitching.

Honestly ... I Design stuff for the US military and I get no where near 278$ an hour. I consider my salary fair. 278$ an hour is just plain stupid, there is absolutely no way to justify this fee.

 

[wfalcon]

I do believe that VO actors don't contribute THAT much to a video games sucess so I don't think they need to be making six or seven figures - and their not. However, they do contribute some to the success of the game, and they need to be properly conpensated just like everyone else. $247 an hour is very misleading. That 247 per hour is ONLY for the time you spend in the recording studio. For every hour in the studio, you can count on an actor needing to do at least 8 hours of homework and preparation. Most projects you're going to spend about 10 hours in the studio total. That's about 2500 per project. If you are a decent voice actor, and line up 10 projects a year, that $25,000 per year. That really ain't shit. The people that market the video games make double this, and they don't do anything to help improve the gameplay of the game.

So, giving your numbers the benefit of the doubt, a project is going to require 90 hours total - 10 in the studio and 80 preparation. (If it really requires 8 hours prep for 1 hour of work, then something is drastically wrong.) Working on 10 projects per year is going to require a total of 900 hours at most. A normal worker is going to spend 40 hours a week/52 weeks a year minus say a couple weeks vacation, not counting any potential for overtime. That equals 2000 hours annually at least. So I should feel sorry for someone making $25k for 900 hours of work and that they should make as much as someone who actually works more than double that amount? Fuck that and fuck the voice actors. They need to either get a real job, or a supplemental source of income.

 

[jordan12]

yeah.... how about this. Take a famous scene from a movie, video game, play - your choice. Record it with your mic at lunch time, and post the wave file for us to download it. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is.

Oh you won't? Why's that? Maybe because it would sound like complete shit and we would all laugh at you. That's exactly what actors have to deal with. You don't just waltz in to the studio unprepared, picup a script and cold read it for money. You actually have to work and rehearse until it is perfect. If you don't, the producers would fire you on the spot for doing a shitty job. THEN after you perfect it, you drive to the recording studio and pray that you'll do everything just like you rehearsed.

No one is telling you that your job is easy and any monkey could do it, so what are you talking shit about other peoples jobs? It's what they do for a living, and it's harder than you think.

Quite honestly, I do agree with this statement. It is harder than it seems. And that is what they are getting paid to do. And if they did not do it well, they would be fired. So for us to complain is a bit ridiculous. Especially when us "working" people would gladly take a raise, and even ask for one as well. Same with these guys out there Voice acting for games and such.

We just feel used because they might make more per hour. Just craziness..If that were the case, why are we not upset with Basketball players? Football players? Because we feel that since it is not just the 3 hour game they are getting paid for, their salary is justified more so than the small amount of time a Voice actor puts in.


Lets all look at it from their prospective and see if we might change our outlook just a little bit..