Video Game Actors Say They Don't Get Their Due 573
Dekortage writes "The New York Times reports today about Michael Hollick, the actor who provided the voice of Niko Bellic in Grand Theft Auto IV. Although the game has made more than $600 million in sales for Rockstar Games, Hollick earns nothing beyond the original $100K he was paid. If this was television, film, or radio, Hollick and the other GTA actors could have made millions by now. Hollick says, 'I don't blame Rockstar. I blame our union for not having the agreements in place to protect the creative people who drive the sales of these games. Yes, the technology is important, but it's the human performances within them that people really connect to, and I hope actors will get more respect for the work they do within those technologies.' Is it time for video game actors to be treated as well as those in other mediums?"
Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
I respect the work that these people do, but come on. I think this guy might be stretching it a bit. People don't buy video games for an actor in the same way they go see a movie for an actor in it. It is a completely different medium. Besides, voice actors in video games right now are pioneers. They will have to fight for a while before they get the recognition and money that they expect. Just like Hollywood actors did.
100k... (Score:2, Insightful)
What's wrong with that? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
work is.a mutually benefical arrangement... (Score:2, Insightful)
if he feels he didn't get paid enough, he shouldn't have taken the job. he can't blame the union now. obviously he's so famous he could have gotten work somewhere else and earned more, right?
if he think he wouldn't have gotten the job if he held out for more money, well, that's how it works. if you provide a service that anybody else can provide (reading from a script), then your pay will not approach 7 digits. i can't go to my boss now and ask for 300k/yr, when i can be easily replaced.
Keep the greed contained (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the same with films. I don't give a rat's ass about who plays which role. I just watch the damn film and enjoy it or not. I don't even know more than ten actor names. I just don't care enough.
Sorry but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd rather give those bonus's to the dev's that actually deserve it who spend 60-70 hours a week, then to some greedy VA, who does jack shit, when compared to the massive engineering that coders and artists and others on the team have to do.
VA's do not add anywhere near the value that the actual team does, they're spoilt and the game industry should not cater to these fucks. I'd rather hire amateur VA's off the street then some hollywood fucktard.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
covetousness (Score:3, Insightful)
How long does it take? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd say that for a year or less of work, 100-grand is good money. If it's more than a year, then depending on the actual work/hours involved, perhaps he should be getting more. However, a million bucks? Maybe big-name actors make this much, but that doesn't automatically entitle video-game actors to the same. Moreover, I'm not really sure how much movie voice-actors make, but that would be a closer comparison.
Sorry bud, but that's the way the industry works. If I write a piece of software for my company which they resell to clients, all I get is my original paycheque (perhaps a bonus if they're feeling generous). Just because some other overpaid smoe is making a million buckazoids or more doesn't automatically entitle you to that type of cash any more than it does me or the various others that work their butts off for a living.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
He's bitching about getting paid 100k for speaking lines that he didn't write to begin with into a mike. What a fucking tool.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
You've got to be kidding me... (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me get this straight...this no-name actor comes in about halfway into the development of the game, gets a script, gets into a recording studio and records some voice for a period of a few weeks, two months tops, and gets paid $100,000 for it, and now he's complaining that he's not getting royalties for the game?
What about the programmers, artists, and designers who worked at the company for years from beginning to end of the development of this game, and near the end of the development cycle worked every saturday and some sundays, and worked 10-14 hours per day to get the game done in time?
Games are different from movies and TV shows. In film, actors are central to the product, in games, they're secondary, they're flavor that the developers of the game can choose to put in, but don't need in order to sell the game. The people central to video game development are the people who work on making the game itself. If anyone deserves royalties on the game, its these people, because they put in way more effort than a few weeks of reading lines off a sheet of paper.
oh please (Score:1, Insightful)
When your name can... (Score:4, Insightful)
risk vs. reward (Score:3, Insightful)
If someone wants to share in the rewards of a blockbuster products, they need to be willing to share in the losses from flops.
Re:"creative people"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Successful unions usually do all they can to ensure everybody in their fields joins them, and those who don't get no work. I deal with unions all the time and often they are worse than the mafia. In many places, you can't hold a job for long or get promoted if you don't join the union and obey.
In short: if a video game actor's union is created, you quickly won't be able to employ a non-union actor at all.
This is not television, film, or radio (Score:5, Insightful)
Contrast that to movies or television where people go to see movies and watch television shows because of the actors and actresses involved. People will go to see a movie with Angelina Jolie in it because she's so damn hot and the studios know this so they hire her, and she knows this so she charges $20M.
Now to this guy's credit as near as I can tell he's not saying "I was robbed and deceived", he's just saying "gee, I was the main actor in a game which has made $500M, it would be nice if I had been paid more." With all due respect, you didn't get paid more because you're a nobody. I'm not trying to be mean - but you're not George Clooney, you're someone who did soap operas to this point. You did an excellent job, and you were helped by the "Pixar Effect" of using a high quality but unknown actor to avoid distractions. But you were paid the amount you were because you're an unknown. Heck, you got paid a lot more than the average person does in a year, and I doubt this was the only gig you had. If they ever make a sequel to this game and reuse your character (unlikely, since like the Final Fantasy franchise they change characters and settings entirely from game to game) then renegotiate for more money. But in the meantime, just enjoy the fame and likelihood of getting future work.
What bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
And his voice is not an integral part of the game. Any halfway competent voice actor would have sufficed. The real stars are the programmers and designers.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:2, Insightful)
Now what do you see on your copy of GTA4?
Sour grapes (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you considered negotiating for yourself? That's what I do when I get a job.
I hope he gets it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, all due respect to your angry unappreciated programmer 'tude, but frankly they're not.
They're just one piece of a big puzzle. This isn't the 80s when squeezing a few extra polygons on the screen meant the difference between 12 and 40. Most of the type of work that the "rock star" people did back in the day is now handled by Engineers at ATI and NVIDIA, with some finishing touches by the DX team. Lately, with shaders to be written and what not, it's coming back a bit, but on the big console games more times than not they're using an engine that has most of that done already. (if you want to laud someone for the looks of GTA, check the credits for rockstar's ping pong game)
I'd argue modellers/graphic artists are just as important, and on a game like GTAIV, story writers are a big piece of the picture.
They could have had anyone with a decent eastern-european sounding accent and good delivery voice Niko. It's the situations he was in that made the game interesting.
*note: this is coming from someone who makes a living writing software, so I'm not just tearing down people's contributions out of spite for the profession or anything.
Boo hoo. poor little spoiled brat (Score:5, Insightful)
A hundred thousand fucking dollars for reading out loud? How long did he have to read to earn that hundred thousand dollars? Poor little baby. I work all goddamned year long for half that much. That's twice what my house is worth!
I've never seen a hundred thousand dollars!
How much did the programmers get? I'll bet they didn't get a hundred grand each!
The asshole signed a contract and he was paid what he was offered. If he thinks a hundred grand isn't enough, then he shouldn't do any more video games.
I'm sick of the God damned money worshiping greed today. Hollick can kiss my ass.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
They aren't the same thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess my point is that the game business isn't built like the movie or music business and it should be very wary of going the way of the beloved MPAA or RIAA.
Thank you for that (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't work that way for programmers, Q/A, artists, etc. FAR too many projects start off with modest goals and reasonable timelines, only to hit "crunch time" a couple months into the 18-month schedule when the real scope becomes clear.
I've seen people in the game industry work themselves into the hospital, hallucinate from fatigue, neglect their families, and sacrifice their personal life in order to meet absurd schedules that were mandated long after the initial work agreement. After a cycle or two, they burn out and leave the industry and another starry-eyed crop of newbies takes their place.
No sympathy from this corner.
Re:What bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. Which makes things like this laughable:
How about blaming yourself for agreeing to terms you apparently find unconscionable? Oh but wait, once you've got the gig it's easy to bitch about how you deserve more, but I bet if you had said to them up front that 100K wasn't enough, they'd have laughed in your face and hired somebody else for 100K. Because let's face it, no matter how much money they made, you aren't worth more than 100K to them. And if that's not acceptable to you, you shouldn't have accepted the job.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
After all if this guy thinks he's worth millions of pounds then he's free to audition for Shrek 8 or whatever.
The way I see it his creative input in the game was minimal, he just turned up did his bit and left so by his reasoning everyone should be on a huge cut of the whole, the tea ladies, the cleaners, the receptionist, everyone.
Re:oh please (Score:1, Insightful)
At least there's a helpful travel section in GTA IV for Texans and other ignorant US citizens.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
Do the production crew, programmers, and creative team deserve this too? Absolutely! Do they get it? No, because they were not able to negotiate this and accepted what was given to them.
Its no wonder that thousands flock to Hollywood each year, not only for fame but the fortune got from doing as little as possible for maximum gain.
Reminds me of the old adage where a business man and inventor. The inventor sells his gadget to the business man for $100K. The inventor says to his colleagues, hah! I would have taken $10K!
The businness man goes back to megacorportation with the device and says, hah! I would have paid up to $1 million.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:2, Insightful)
Even actors in a commercial is getting a bonus every time a commercial is shown! It's not that they did not get paid initially.
I can even take it to the recent writers strike. When I write code for a software company, should I get a recurring income on every copy of the software sold?
So we see these unions are very powerful. Anybody up to start the Software Programmers Union and squeeze some profits for 'our people'?
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
It's different because those actors being paid millions by Disney/Pixar are _already famous_ - Disney/Pixar think that by having them working on the film, they will get bigger audiences and sell more DVDs.
This guy's name on the credits won't sell any more copies of the game so he is paid for the work he does rather than the value of his personal 'brand'
If he wanted more, he should have demanded it before he signed the contract but he didn't because he knew that if he did, they just would have got someone else to play the role.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
"Reading out loud" (Score:2, Insightful)
Voice acting isn't just "reading out loud", the same way movie acting isn't just walking around a stage. Voice actors have to be expressive, able to inject all sorts of emotions into their readings, able to laugh or scream or cry as necessary--and have to be able to do it on short notice, without reading through an entire scene every time, often without being able to hear the other characters they're interacting with--and have to stay in sync with whatever animation they're voicing. It may or may not be worth $100k a game to be able to do that, but it's not something you can just grab J. Random Sixpack off the street for.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:2, Insightful)
--disclaimer: I am still school and working on my programming skills and this has been my experience so far.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
By getting a known (not always good) actor they will get more money from the population, so the actor worth alot of money, in comparison the GTA voice could have be replaced by some other guy without losing 100 millions in sales
Re:VA are awesome (Score:3, Insightful)
Acting (and writing) could very easily ruin the high-quality hard work of everyone else, or elevate good to great (as the writing and acting in Portal did). How much that is worth in $$$ should be negotiable, that's all Hollick is saying.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
It depends on the definition of "written" you are using. Architecture wise, that sounds probably true, that one guy does 70% of that work, with a lot of input and discussion from other people. But writting the code, no way. Things are too specialized. There are AI guys, there are physics guys (or just buy a solution), there are rendering guys, there are networking guys. And that's not even getting into the subspecialties. All the lead programmers I know for games have the same attitude (with the exception of whatever specialty they started in): let the specialists figure out how it works. Pathfinding is a bitch, and, from what I understand, has changed a lot in the three years since I knew how to do it. Hence, if I were the lead programmer, I would echo what a different lead programmmer had to say about the issue; make it work well.
It's a fulltime job just getting the parts to play nicely and to have a vision of the program.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
Hollywood voice actors in video games (Score:2, Insightful)
My friggin' heart bleeds... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
Eivind.
Actors get more when the studios want them (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I don't think this guy should get more than what he initially agreed to, and I also think he's sounding a bit more arrogant for wanting more. The fact is that his employer could hire someone else and get virtually the same result, because (as many people have already said) people don't buy games for the actors.
But I certainly don't have a problem with actors getting paid a lot if it's just a case of market forces. A really good example of this is the Simpsons' voice cast, who are now earning on the order of millions of dollars per season [scotsman.com]. That's a huge amount of money for the amount of time it takes and compared with other people on the staff (such as writers and producers and animators, presumably), especially considering it doesn't even prevent them from doing other work. The difference is that they're nowhere near as replacable. Fox can (and did) replace most of the original writers of the show to the extent that the plots and quality have changed hugely (imho), but it still makes money because the show's primary pulling point these days is the voice acting.
The reason they get this much isn't because they're arrogant, it's because that's what the studio thinks they're worth. The actors have been doing voices on this show for something on the order of 20 years! Nearly anyone would rather be spending their time doing something else by that time, and it's not as if the actors owe it to the show's fans to keep working at low rates for the rest of their lives. They've named a price that'll convince them to stay, and Fox thinks they're worth it. At some point it won't be worth it for Fox to keep paying the amount that the actors want, the show will end or they'll find someone else, and the actors will still be happy because they'll finally have time to spend on other projects they've wanted to to for ages. Meanwhile it's market-decided compensation for whatever else they're giving up which they'd much rather be doing.
If this GTA4 guy (whom I never heard of) reckons he's worth more than $100k then more power to him, but he needs to convince someone to pay him what he thinks he's worth. If a studio pays him more they'll probably be subsidising it by dropping alternative actors or talent somewhere else, which he'd be expected to replace. If he can't convince them to do that, he's worth less.
Re:Keep fighting, but be realistic (Score:5, Insightful)
1) I think this guy was well-compensated, but I also think a royalty deal (a small one) would be fair.
2) For me, actually, voice talent is basically the make-or-break point for a video game. I'm serious. Here's a review of Mass Effect [gameosaur.us] to prove it. However, while I don't think I'm alone in that, I think it's fairly uncommon.
3) If acting is so easy, why aren't you doing it? It's one of the hardest things to be good at out there. That's why it pays. Anyone can do it poorly. But as a guy who does a little acting, writing, and directing, I have to tell you that most people are frickin' terrible. Even trained people are often terrible. It's partly a talent, partly an art, and partly a technical skill. It's really quite difficult.
4) Y'know, IT work is not the only job that requires expertise and skill. In fact, I've met a lot of dumb IT people. Really dumb. But the dumber they are, the smarter they seem to think they are. It's just a job, dude. We all have them. You couldn't do mine and I couldn't do yours. That's why we have jobs!