SAG Rejects Game Contract 65
Reuters is reporting that the Screen Actor's Guild has rejected the contract with the Games Industry, despite earlier signs negotiations would be successful. From the article: "The Screen Actors Guild's bitter infighting claimed another victim Tuesday as members of the national executive committee voted to reject the recently negotiated video game contract against the wishes of members and the negotiating committee. It is believed to be the first time in the union's 72-year history that board members have used the routine approval process to overrule the unanimous recommendations of a negotiating committee."
Blatant Team America quote (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Blatant Team America quote (Score:2)
Re:Blatant Team America quote (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Totally offtopic, but.... (Score:1)
Re:Great!!! (Score:2)
More Mon-ay more mon-ay (Score:1)
Because SAG is trying to get the games industry to go COMPLETELY union.
Re:More Mon-ay more mon-ay (Score:2)
That must be why they consistently ignored the plaintive cries from programmers, artists, designers, and other members of the game development teams that they deserve residuals before voice actors do.
The SAG execs don't give a rat's ass about the games industry, or about their own rank-and-file members, for that matter. They saw an opportunity to land some significant cash in the form of residuals for their top members whenever popular games sign brand-name actors (think the GTA series). The earl
That's my point... (Score:2)
Re:More Mon-ay more mon-ay (Score:2, Interesting)
I *did* RTFA... did you? (Score:2)
Even then, with almost no other option but to accept the gaming industry's final offer, some of the more militant negotiators still demanded that the contract be rejected, sparking one of the most embarrassing rebellions in recent memory. "
They don't want this contract and only want Restore Respect out so they can bully the union into striking against
Screw 'em (Score:4, Interesting)
Their future doesn't look too bright.
Re:Screw 'em (Score:2)
===
Heck I have a few in my head they could use.
Re:Screw 'em (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Screw 'em (Score:2)
The point of the developments in voice sythensis as linked above is that if you have enough controlled samples of anybody's voice, you can reproduce how they talk almost indistinguishably. The article s
On a positive note (Score:1)
Though his voice does work better than counting sheep... zzzzzzzz...
Re:On a positive note (Score:2)
In the words of David Maj... (Score:2)
<insert funky hand motions here>
Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:3, Insightful)
Good voice acting is nice, but it is hardly on my top 10 as a consumer of games. I can stomach half assed voice acting if the game is bug free and well written. I can't stomach a game with bugs and poor writing though, even if the voice acting kicks ass.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:1)
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:1)
Damned good idea...I'm certain that there's college students out there who would enjoy working as voice talent for a pittance...hell, I'd do it for free, just to have my name in the credits.
How about this? Put up a script on a web page...anyone who wants can record a MP3 of themselves reading the lines and email it in. The game people pick which voice they want to use, and give the submitter credit for his work. SAG not required...thanks anyway.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:3, Insightful)
Fact is visuals and sound are the two senses that video games have to deal with. Ignoreing one is just silly.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
Take the game Vampires: Bloodlines. The game was solid in concept. It had three problems though. First, it was buggy beyond all comprehension. Second, it ate system for breakfast, even though the graphics were nothing to get too excited about. Third, the voice acting sucks. The game was a failure and the company went under. A few fans an ex-employees got together and patched the game up though.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
>For most games, the answer is not that much.
I would like to respectfully point out that good voice acting is one of several elements that a well-produced game has to have in order to succeed. You're correct in pointing out that a game with bugs and bad voice acting will benefit more from bug fixes than voice acting; however, a truly stellar game will have neither serious bugs or distracting voices.
I make my case with a short list of games
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
And the acting was a lot better than the later "professional" ones.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
Good voice acting CANNOT save a bad game. Just like incredible visuals can't save a crappy movie.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:1)
On a similar thought, I hate it (in animated films or games) where the voice is so dominate that it overshadows that art. (examples, the complete Madegascar (spelling) lineup, Sam L Jackson in GTA:SA, etc etc)
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
Rob
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:1)
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
Not to be nitpicky, but what about the sense of touch? I would think that would be incredibly important, especially with today's hardware (vibrating controllers, pressure-sensitive buttons, etc.) and peripherals.
But even so, a third is still a lot. Seeing as how voice acting is a given in so many games these days, I agree that it should be done well whenever possible.
Re:Screw Voice Acting, To Be Blunt (Score:2)
That example shows why acting is unimportant... who cares about acting quality when the script is so bad? A good writer / translator and a decent director are what's needed there. Even if they'd hired Harrison Ford, he couldn't make "You, the master of unlocking, should take it with you" sound cool.
Fact is visuals and sound are the two senses that video games have to deal with.
True, but voice acting is a tiny part of the sound experience of a game. Fol
Is this actually meaningful? (Score:1)
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:1)
btw, I doubt John Madden is a member of SAG.
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:1)
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:2)
There's thousands of actors in SAG who aren't Sam Jackson or Harrison Ford. If you want professional-quality voice acting, you're going to get guild actors.
Sure, game makers could have their programmers or people on the street do the voices, but then you end up with crappy voice acting, which gets real annoying before long.
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:1)
I can't say i'm a fan, but I do like David Duchovny quite a bit. However, his acting in XIII was AWFUL. In the opening scene, where he says "Ugh, my head." it sounded like he had picked up a piece of paper and was reading it to himself out loud, trying to figure out what it was saying. And his performance through the rest of the game wasn't much better.
This is one instance where it would have been better to get some random person to read the script than going with a highly-recognizable actor.
Re:Is this actually meaningful? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So whats the real story. (Score:3, Informative)
I recall reading an entry on Wil's site
" http://www.wilwheaton.net/mt/archives/003293.php#
that had the perspective from the non big name hollywood voice actors, was very good as well there is a recent addition responding to the personal attacks Wil recieved shortly after his orginal post.
I think we forget about the majority of actors that do voice actor.. I am not talking hollywood A-list types but the guy who does it along with working at Starbucks or where ever.
But i'd like to know more about what they are really demanding before I make my judgement.
Re:So whats the real story. (Score:2)
Let me get this straight.... (Score:2)
Excuse me while I catch my breath from laughing so hard.
Looks like game developers will have to continue doing what they do most of the time... Hire non-union talent.
Oh no.
How I imagined it went down... (Score:1)
SAG: Well, we get points and residuals in movies.
Game Industry: We don't make movies.
SAG: Yes, we understand that. But, points/residuals is how SAG has always operated.
GI: Yeah, but we don't make movies.
SAG: Yes, I understand that, but that's how we've always worked.
GI: And the game industry has always worked without residuals.
SAG: But, but, but...fine, we strike.
GI: Fine. AFTRA has agreed to our most recent con
Oh noes? (Score:1)
In fact, it may end up helping the industry by freeing it from the whiny bitches in Holywood and encouraging game companies to hire people off the street who can do the job just as well but will work for peanuts.
In short, fuck SAG.
Why do all of you think residuals is so bad? (Score:1)
....fuck HTML formated defaults... (Score:1)
fuck my wonderful stupidity...
Here's a properly formatted one:
Seriously These guys aren't making millions...
I KNOW VIDEO GAME VOICE ACTORS... not one of them pulls even a "normal" 30k salary based off their Voice work. Most of them get a few good day or two jobs a year.. maybe 10, 1 hour or two sessions.
So that ends the "they are making more than the programmers" arguement. Even these changes will not change that.
Next arguement "They will have to hire less programmers...skimp in other places...etc"
Yo
Re:....fuck HTML formated defaults... (Score:1)
I know a guy who builds and paints models on commission for table-top war games like Warhammer. Some months he can make upward of $1000 - but most of the time he only gets a few hundred a month. That's not enough to live off of... which is why he has a real job, too.
If voice actors actually feel like they should get paid enough doing 10 hours of work a year to live off of, I have no sympathy for them. They're complaini
Re:Why do all of you think residuals is so bad? (Score:2)
>>KNOW VIDEO GAME VOICE ACTORS...not one of them
>>pulls even a "normal" 30k salary based off their
>>Voice work. Most of them get a few good day or
>>two jobs a year
>>than the programmers" arguement.
So? You work a 'few hours' on a project, and you expect to get a share of profits? (or 'risiduals' or whatever games you want to play). Um... fuck
Re:Why do all of you think residuals is so bad? (Score:2)
Why should some voice actor doing work-for-hire get residuals for their miniscule contribution to a game when the designers, level builders, programmers, and artists don't get any? So a voice actor puts in a few hours and gets a few hundred dollars, why should that contribution be considered more important than any of the work done by the people who designed and build the game? Games aren't movies. The members of SAC aren't the import
Re:Why do all of you think residuals is so bad? (Score:2)
That never has been an argument. What everyone's been saying is that programmers work 60+ hours a week for two years straight, yet a voice actor comes in for a few hours and makes more than $150 an hour. If a programmer got paid that kind of rate, they'd be raking in close to half a million dollars a year.
Next arguement "They will have to hire less programmers...skimp in other places...etc" You have no frigging CLUE what you are ta
Unions Not Representing Their Members (Score:1)
Cue the sound of people familiar with unions falling over with not suprise.
Re:Unions Not Representing Their Members (Score:1)
Silly Actors.... (Score:2)