GTA IV Actors Complain About Pay

[Dr.Finger]

The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/21/arts/television/21gta.html?_r=1&ref=arts&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin) spoke to Michael Hollick, better known now as the voice of one Niko Bellic, about his disappointment with how he was paid:
Michael Hollick never thought his big break would come in a video game.

All those years when he was struggling to get by as an aspiring actor — tending bar, working in a bagel shop in Morningside Heights, spraying perfume at Bloomingdale’s — he was aiming for Broadway and prime time. As he moved from regional theater to soap operas, middling musicals and “Law & Order,” he remained just another good-looking guy hoping for an audition.

His face still isn’t famous, but Mr. Hollick’s voice and gait have moved into the pop culture firmament recently as those of Niko Bellic, the sardonic, textured Balkan criminal at the heart of Grand Theft Auto IV, the acclaimed gangster fantasy that has become the fastest-selling game to date. Produced by Rockstar Games and its corporate parent, Take-Two Interactive Software, the game has generated at least $600 million in sales over the last three weeks.
--
That’s because Mr. Hollick was paid only about $100,000 over roughly 15 months between late 2006 and early this year for all of his voice acting and motion-capture work on the game, with zero royalties or residuals in sight, he said.The Screen Actors Guild presently requires residual payments for actors in most other fields: television, commercials, animation and movies, but they're not required for things like video game voice work. “What drives video games is not Tracy and Hepburn; what drives it is the conception of the creative director,” said Ezra J. Doner, a former Hollywood executive who represents entertainment companies as a lawyer at Herrick, Feinstein in Manhattan, N.Y. “The actor whose appearance or voice is used is more analogous to a session music for a band. The session musicians don’t get residuals on the sales of the CD. They get paid a session fee. It’s not like the star quality of Tom Cruise that’s getting people to buy that video game.”Residuals from video game work is just one of the issues swirling around a possible SAG strike set for later this summer.

Source - NextGen (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10591&Itemid=2).

[bKangy]

Voice actors shouldn't get residuals from games - unless you're GTAIV, having to pay royalties on titles will kill a lot of smaller titles... It is fair to say he got paid too little for what he did but royalties in video games would be an appalling move.

[Roc Ingersol]

As gaming gets bigger and bigger they're going to face increasingly strong pressure from the Hollywood guilds to unionize.

And given the quality-of-life issues at many of the big shops, I can't say that's a bad thing.
Here's to hoping they don't just focus on extending benefits for existing members, but actually move to protect the artists and craftsmen who only work in games.

[BalekFekete]

This is a simple issue of greed. He didn't/couldn't negotiate a contract to include residuals, and now that the game is printing money for Take-Two he wants a bigger piece of the pie. $100k for a years work, let alone just voice-overs - I imagine a lot of EvA's here wouldn't scoff at that paycheck. :rolleyes:

[Typical_Michael]

So how much should he have made?

[TDiddy]

"I was paid what they promised, but I want more!!!!" He didn't get ripped off, so too bad for him.

[Johan]

I've done some small amount of voice-over work in the past, and it's more difficult than you might think...but I have absolutely no horse in a whine-a-thon over who gets to eat how much of the financial pie, myself.

[Flatpicker]

This is just a lead in for the SAG negotiations that will ruin our next TV season.
They are pushing like the Writers did for electronic distro royalities to be increased.

[Gorvi]

Don't they sign contracts first? They basically agreed to be paid X amount and now they're not happy with that? If they want to know who to blame, they need only look in the mirror.

[SuperMonkeyFighter2]

This is a simple issue of greed. He didn't/couldn't negotiate a contract to include residuals, and now that the game is printing money for Take-Two he wants a bigger piece of the pie. $100k for a years work, let alone just voice-overs - I imagine a lot of EvA's here wouldn't scoff at that paycheck. :rolleyes:

You make a good point. I wouldn't go so far as to call it greed, and even think some of this is taken out of context.
I heard a radio interview with the guy, and he seemed really grateful.

However, could you blame anyone, in lieu of seeing how huge a production it turned out, for turning around and saying, "I wish I got more considering this think might make a billion when all is said and done."

With that said (and hindsight being what it is), voice actors must realize that their voicework does not help in the overall sales of a game

[Telefrog]

This is a simple issue of greed. He didn't/couldn't negotiate a contract to include residuals, and now that the game is printing money for Take-Two he wants a bigger piece of the pie. $100k for a years work, let alone just voice-overs - I imagine a lot of EvA's here wouldn't scoff at that paycheck. :rolleyes:

I'm in complete agreement. No one forced him to sign the contract. I'm pretty sure that when it was offered, he was jumping at the chance for some work.

I mean, it's not like he couldn't do some research and find out beforehand that the GTA games make major bank.

[SuperMonkeyFighter2]

I mean, it's not like he couldn't do some research and find out beforehand that the GTA games make major bank.

He didn't know it was a GTA game. They didn't tell him the game or his character name until well into production

[biosc1]

Time to start investing more money into technology to make computer generated voices sound more human...

[Mdot23]

I don't really know how I feel about this. In comparison to things like movies, residuals are a big deal because X actor is being used to market the film and is sometimes the major reason why it succeeds or fails. You don't see people on the lighting crew or the grips getting more money based on sales.

I view a voice actor in a videogame as being closer to the lighting crew than to the "star" of the movie, especially when it's not "GTA IV Featuring the voice of whoever". The guy who made the animation for a helicopter isn't necessarily getting more money because the game is selling shit loads.

Plus, I think the 100 grand he initially got is pretty good and I was honestly surprised at that figure when first reading it.

[Flatpicker]

I'm in complete agreement. No one forced him to sign the contract. I'm pretty sure that when it was offered, he was jumping at the chance for some work.

I mean, it's not like he couldn't do some research and find out beforehand that the GTA games make major bank.

He may not have a choice, the guild sets the rates and unless you are a named actor, it's a take it or leave it type deal.

[NationalKato]

Roman Bellic's pissed off, too.

gH2nirEuO-k

[Heretic Machine]

Circle the wagons, circle the wagons!

[Steve_Erhardt]

I'm sorry, but... $100K for 15 months worth of talking into a microphone and fucking around in a mocap suit? Sign me the fuck up, please. I think that's damn good money for the what he did.

[Telefrog]

He may not have a choice, the guild sets the rates and unless you are a named actor, it's a take it or leave it type deal.

Then don't take it at all. Hell, don't do VO work if the pay isn't good enough.

I get that he thinks it's unfair when the equivelant amount of TV or radio work would've generated a ton of residuals, but I could easily argue that my job doesn't pay residuals either. And I'm actually in a couple of the print and online ads for my company.

I think Doner is right. No one (I hope) buys a videogame based on the 'star power' associated with the title. I really couldn't give a crap less who played Niko Bellic, as long as he did a good enough job to not interfere with the game.

If the guild is able to negotiate for residuals in games, then more power to the actors, but don't bitch about it while you collect your fee. It's in extremely poor taste, and regardless of his words, is insulting to Rockstar as it makes them look like villains.

[NationalKato]

The other aspect of this that might bite him on the ass is, while previously he could point to the credit on his resume and get additional work, now casting directors will know he likes to complain about the pay/contract after the fact.

[Roc Ingersol]

It's not really about payment so much as it is about getting reimbursed for the publisher's continuing exploitation of their performance. Sure, the guy got 100k. But he might not work at all in the next three years. Keep in mind this isn't about taking some huge slice of Take Two's revenue. It's about getting something on an ongoing basis as part of the basic contract, so that creative types can build some semblance of a dependable income. No-one gets rich off residuals. Mostly, they help make rent.

And (ime) it's not that voice actors are upset at developers or publishers - so much as they're upset that their own union didn't have the foresight to establish better deals with the gaming industry, like they have with advertising, animation, etc.

[Zander]

I'll never understand stuff like this. You agreed to the job and the pay the job gave on a project that everyone and their mother knows will be huge. AFTERWARDS you feel jilted somehow.

Boo freaking hoo. You don't like the rules of doing VO work, don't do VO work.

[pseudopseudo]

I get that he thinks it's unfair when the equivelant amount of TV or radio work would've generated a ton of residuals.

I think that's the key right there. I've heard of less VO work generating even more money than he made solely based on residuals. (My boss, for one, cut one :60 commercial spot for Coors back in the late 90's, the spot got put into national syndication, and he was cashing checks for a couple years.)

If you make money doing VO work, you have to be pretty crafty at getting what you want when you sign a contract.

I guess I can see how he's pissed, but like a lot of people said, some of his anger is misplaced because he didn't negotiate himself a better contract. Although, I'm guessing that if he asked for residuals, Rockstar would have given the part to someone else who didn't require it. Voice talent is really a dime a dozen.

[NationalKato]

It's not really about payment so much as it is about getting reimbursed for the publisher's continuing exploitation of their performance.

WTF? 'Exploitation?' He agreed to a price when he applied for the job, signed a contract to do the job, did the job, and got paid what he expected. Where's the confusion?

[BloodPack]

1-800-rnt-romn

[Grey]

It's not really about payment so much as it is about getting reimbursed for the publisher's continuing exploitation of their performance. Sure, the guy got 100k. But he might not work at all in the next three years. Keep in mind this isn't about taking some huge slice of Take Two's revenue. It's about getting something on an ongoing basis as part of the basic contract, so that creative types can build some semblance of a dependable income. No-one gets rich off residuals. Mostly, they help make rent.

And (ime) it's not that voice actors are upset at developers or publishers - so much as they're upset that their own union didn't have the foresight to establish better deals with the gaming industry, like they have with advertising, animation, etc.

That would fall somewhere under the copyright law (at least here) - but in film buisseness it's rather for writers and those people, not for actors.

100k might seems low in comparison now, but I think it is actualy an adequate sum for VA. Its not that he is a star voice actor or so...

Whining NOW about the money just makes a fool out of him, since he should have thought about that beforde. If he didnt even realized what Grand Theft Auto stands for he doesnt deserve it anyway...

[Roc Ingersol]

don't bitch about it while you collect your fee.Should devs, designers and artists also never bitch about their lack of residuals or getting screwed out of royalties, or their awful quality-of-life issues, so long as they're getting a paycheck?

I mean, they can pick up and leave the industry too, right? They could turn down the job and walk away.

And 90% of the experience and talent can continue to turn over every five years and we gamers can continue to enjoy the fruits of a perpetual burned-out-and-amateur industry. Fuck knows we don't have any problems with rookie mistakes, soul-less crapware and shoddy work year after year, to the point that every exception is celebrated for greatness. Let's go ahead and line up with same corporations who only greenlight the same warmed over crap year in and year out and chase out the very experience and creatives who might steer us in a different direction.

I look forward to the wonderful future of the medium that you guys are building with your philosophical defense of the profit rights of multinational corporations over the creative rights of artists and craftsmen!

Let's not only celebrate the sequels and knock-offs and perpetual mediocrity of our industry -- let's angrily shout down any threat to the status quo that might actually effect change.

What a great long term plan! I'm so glad we're all thinking this one through.

[JRR006]

Does every single person involved in GTA IV get continued payment except him? Obviously Take-Two is raking it in, but every programmer, sound and visual artist, etc, do they keep receiving payments for Take-Two's continued use of their work? I don't see how reading some lines is different than skinning some models or coding the save system in the context of a game. Actors need to realize that their work is not the be all and end all of a video game and realistically assess their contribution's worth. A one-time series of payments amounting to 100,000k sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[Grifter]

He didn't know it was a GTA game. They didn't tell him the game or his character name until well into production

If that is true I think it's a bit fucked up but the contract was signed and I'm sure if he dug a little bit more he could have found out a bit more info on what he was doing. The fact that Take Two/Rockstar keep what he was really doing a secret from him is a complete douche bag move though, of course I wouldn't expect anything less from the kind of people that run both company's.

[Knite]

I'm a bit confused...

How does he deserve residuals any more than the hundreds of artists, programmers, writers, composers, designers, and managers involved do?

[pseudopseudo]

Should devs, designers and artists also never bitch about their lack of residuals or getting screwed out of royalties, or their awful quality-of-life issues, so long as they're getting a paycheck?

I mean, they can pick up and leave the industry too, right? They could turn down the job and walk away.

And 90% of the experience and talent can continue to turn over every five years and we gamers can continue to enjoy the fruits of a perpetual burned-out-and-amateur industry. Fuck knows we don't have any problems with rookie mistakes, soul-less crapware and shoddy work year after year, to the point that every exception is celebrated for greatness. Let's go ahead and line up with same corporations who only greenlight the same warmed over crap year in and year out and chase out the very experience and creatives who might steer us in a different direction.

I look forward to the wonderful future of the medium that you guys are building with your philosophical defense of the profit rights of multinational corporations over the creative rights of artists and craftsmen!

Let's not only celebrate the sequels and knock-offs and perpetual mediocrity of our industry -- let's angrily shout down any threat to the status quo that might actually effect change.

What a great long term plan! I'm so glad we're all thinking this one through.

Now you're just being a dick about it.

Saying the guy should've negotiated a better deal for himself instead whining about it after the fact DOES NOT EQUAL "defense of multinational corporations".

[Flatpicker]

Then don't take it at all. Hell, don't do VO work if the pay isn't good enough.

I get that he thinks it's unfair when the equivelant amount of TV or radio work would've generated a ton of residuals, but I could easily argue that my job doesn't pay residuals either. And I'm actually in a couple of the print and online ads for my company.

I think Doner is right. No one (I hope) buys a videogame based on the 'star power' associated with the title. I really couldn't give a crap less who played Niko Bellic, as long as he did a good enough job to not interfere with the game.

If the guild is able to negotiate for residuals in games, then more power to the actors, but don't bitch about it while you collect your fee. It's in extremely poor taste, and regardless of his words, is insulting to Rockstar as it makes them look like villains.

So don't eat?
From what I hear, acting is kind of a feast or famine career. You take what you can when you can.
I'm not agreeing with him, but life's not that B&W.

[Reanimated]

Actors in movies get paid residuals, because in a lot of cases, it's their name brand that got a lot of people to go see the movie. People are drawn to movies with big stars in them.

This doesn't apply to video games. Nobody bought GTA4 because this douche is the person playing the part of Nico.

Things should be just as they are now. The people making the residuals should be the DEVELOPMENT TEAMS. They're the ones that put in the years of work and extra long days to make a quality game. Some clown that shows up for a couple of months and stands in a room talking shouldn't be the one taking the residuals home. That's ridiculous.

[MosBen]

NationalKato, you either misread the phrase you quoted or you don't understand the multiple meanings of "to exploit." Roc was merely pointing out that, like movies, an actor's performance in a video game might continue to generate profits for the producer over time and that an actor might be upset that they are cut out from those profits.

The reality of all this, however, is that this is an issue now because the money is there now. When video games were a geeky niche you got actors occasionally doing voice work because either 1) they themselves were fans of games, or 2) voice work is thought to be easier and less time consuming than live action work. An actor may not have been paid much for their work on a game but it didn't matter because it was just a bit of fun between "real" projects. Now games are pulling in hundres of millions of dollars so the people involved are looking for a bigger piece of the pie. People are realizing now that being an engineer on a game isn't a deam job where you're happy to take abuse just to get into the industry while helping to produce huge profits. Actors are realizing that there are plenty of big budget games whose profit margins are eclipsing their "real" acting gigs and they should be fighting for more money for their video game work.

I'm as inclined to scoff at people who have more money than me as the next person, but having more money doesn't mean they're not entitled to a fair shake. Maybe voice acting shouldn't have residuals. Maybe an actor's contribution to a game's success is comparatively small. In the end though, labor or all kinds for video games has not been treated the same as other entertainment industries and that's going to be increasingly hard to justify as games make more and more money.

[fitbabits]

Boo-frickin'-hoo!

[Telefrog]

Should devs, designers and artists also never bitch about their lack of residuals or getting screwed out of royalties, or their awful quality-of-life issues, so long as they're getting a paycheck?

I mean, they can pick up and leave the industry too, right? They could turn down the job and walk away.

Essentially, yes. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would snap up that job even with a pay cut. I'm sorry that he didn't get residuals. Who wouldn't want residuals every time Niko Bellic's voice hit the airwaves? He knew what he was getting into. I'm pretty sure it wasn't presented to him as "Mystery Game X" in the contract.

You know what? I'm pretty torqued that I don't get a flat 20% off the top of any deal I make as straight commission. I can either try to renegotiate my contract (in private), or STFU about it and deal. What I don't do is hit up the newspapers and bitch that my life is so hard because I got a raw deal from my employer.

And 90% of the experience and talent can continue to turn over every five years and we gamers can continue to enjoy the fruits of a perpetual burned-out-and-amateur industry. Fuck knows we don't have any problems with rookie mistakes, soul-less crapware and shoddy work year after year, to the point that every exception is celebrated for greatness. Let's go ahead and line up with same corporations who only greenlight the same warmed over crap year in and year out and chase out the very experience and creatives who might steer us in a different direction.

I look forward to the wonderful future of the medium that you guys are building with your philosophical defense of the profit rights of multinational corporations over the creative rights of artists and craftsmen!

Let's not only celebrate the sequels and knock-offs and perpetual mediocrity of our industry -- let's angrily shout down any threat to the status quo that might actually effect change.

What a great long term plan! I'm so glad we're all thinking this one through.

The last time I checked, there were longstanding industry veterans making the same damn stupid mistakes you're citing. I don't see how that's an argument for or against this.

Regardless, let's say you're right. I would argue that what you want is residuals and better benefits for the game creators, the technical crew, etc, not the bloody dime-a-dozen VO people.

[NationalKato]

He didn't know it was a GTA game. They didn't tell him the game or his character name until well into production

I have a hard time believing this.

[pseudopseudo]

NationalKato, you either misread the phrase you quoted or you don't understand the multiple meanings of "to exploit." Roc was merely pointing out that, like movies, an actor's performance in a video game might continue to generate profits for the producer over time and that an actor might be upset that they are cut out from those profits.

(emphasis mine) That's where video games and movies are massively different. People won't be going to buy GTA IV 5 years from now and go, "Michael Hollick's in this shit! I've GOTTA check this out!" THAT'S why big actors get residuals, and VO talent normally doesn't... unless it's in the contract.

The VO talent isn't what's "continuing to generate profits" in this case. It's the game as a whole.

[Roc Ingersol]

Now you're just being a dick about it.[/quot]Yes. I am. Because this one guy and his 100k is no indicative of what voice actors get paid. If not for residuals in other industries, this guy would never have got to the point where we celebrate his (and his colleagues') work as outstanding in our industry.[quote]Saying the guy should've negotiated a better deal for himself instead whining about it after the fact DOES NOT EQUAL "defense of multinational corporations".Actually, it does. Because creative industries have a long history of showing that you cannot rest on 'negotiate a better deal on an individual basis' without gutting the creative industry overall.

Because the publisher will say 'sorry guy, we're gonna go with this other dude who isn't asking for residuals' every single time. And then that other dude? yeah, he won't be able to parlay his experience into a gig that derives residuals because he'll be undercut by the next hungry amateur.

It's the same process that sees designers and programmers get forced out of the industry year after year by new blood willing to deal with ridiculous amounts of work for peanuts. And throwing out all that experience is not good for the industry.

Sure, some guys will make it. But it'll happen about as often as game designers 'make it' to the point that we even know their names, let alone to the point where they can negotiate some sort of revenue sharing that isn't hypothetical.

When you guys take a philosophical opposition to residuals/royalties/whatever -- you're directly arguing for the status quo, where the only people who can really make a career out of the industry are the suits.

[Apushmataha]

It definitely sucks for those guys, but I wonder if any of the "big name" people ever got residuals. I'd be interested to know if Tony Jay (RIP) and David Hayter got deals like that.

I do question the info about being completely unaware of the game he was working for. There should have been some indication. My guess is that there was some Rockstar or Take-Two stuff, so he'd have a good idea what he might be doing prior to signing the contract. It sounds really weird to say that he saw a contract that offered him a lot of money for some voicework, then he said "I don't care who the hell the company is or what it is I'm doing. sign me up!"

That being said, I do agree that it was a crappy move for Take-Two not to tell him what it was he was doing, but then again, I can understand how they wouldn't want to worry about the possibility of this guy slipping up and giving away the major plot points of a highly anticipated game.

[oldjadedgamer]

Seriously, would any one really even notice if non-union voice actors were in games? The answer, not at all.

[tacitus]

The people who should get residuals are the programmers, testers and others; who probably put in 12 hours a day (while only getting paid for 8); not some whinny actor. BTW this is speculation based on what I have heard about pay in the video games industry.

[Phades]

I can't think of how many games I purchased because of the high-quality voice acting.... Personally, if a game is fun but the voice overs suck, I still like the game. Good voice just adds to the game, it certainly doesn't make it or break it. That's the huge difference. If the actors deserve some kind of residual, how much more so for the designers, programmer, etc....?

[Kelegacy]

I think the industry should replace all voice-overs with Okami-like gibberish.

[Flatpicker]

I have a hard time believing this.


I don't.
There are many scripts out there that are just your lines.
Take Niko's lines just as themselves and ask yourself if you could tell what they were for if you were reading them.

[GrinR]

Artists should definitely unionize. There's no doubt about that, unless you know nothing about the creative art industries. There is no way to quantify the value of an artist in the same way you can quantify engineer, management, or other task-based jobs, so there is a natural tendency towards "not wanting to pay for nothing."

Good for Nico.

[Isamura]

This guy went from the purfume counter at bloomingdales to having his voice acting talents heard by millions. I think he needs to take a step back and reasses his fortune.

[Apushmataha]

I think the industry should replace all voice-overs with Okami-like gibberish.

Oh Jesus, don't say that.:eek:

I don't think I could stand watching/hearing an MGS cutscene with "wahwahwahwah" in a raspy voice for 30 minutes.

[Froggy]

In acting, unions and strikes aren't always effective. The main reason is because there's always someone willing to do the work for less, or free. I'm sure there are pleanty of great actors willing to lend a voice to a game like GTA for little compensation.

The nice thing is that the medium doesn't suffer for it. It actually helps to weed out the jerk-offs who are in it for the money; making room for those dedicated to the art.

[MosBen]

And acting like voice actors shouldn't get residuals because they "stand in a room talking into a mike" is just a silly argument. Programers may have easy jobs from the point of view of a trash collector. He worked for 15 months on the project, which is hardly insignificant. If you're opposed to residuals alltogether, that's fine. If you're opposed to voice actors getting residuals because you think they don't affect the product's sales as much as live action actors, that's fine too. But characterizing the job as "easy" and therefore not entitled to residuals opens up all kinds of doors for which jobs are too "easy" to receive residuals. It's simply not an issue about the difficulty of the job.

Also, it's important to note that often times residuals are a means of having the performers share in the risk of releasing the product. If residuals were banned in live action acting it would just mean that the producers would have to pay the actors more up front. Paying residuals reduces the up front cost to producers.

[Lima Beans]

A lot of (most???) video game voice actors are not even members of SAG so a boycott would really not be terribly effective.

[Roc Ingersol]

What I don't do is hit up the newspapers and bitch that my life is so hard because I got a raw deal from my employer.You guys don't seem to be reading the article.Obviously I’m incredibly thankful to Rockstar for the opportunity to be in this game when I was just a nobody, an unknown quantity....I don’t blame Rockstar...asked about residuals when we negotiated, but I was told that was not a possibility.Hollick does exactly one thing: he complains that his Guild has sold Actors short in their dealings with the gaming industry, as opposed to any other entertainment industry. He was told, flat-out, that residuals were not a possibility. Before they even talked about possible percentages, it was off the table. And this from a company that actually values decent voice-work.The last time I checked, there were longstanding industry veterans making the same damn stupid mistakes you're citing.Veterans aren't immune from mistakes. But go to GDC some time. Ask people what they think about veteran turn-over and whether it has an impact on what they're putting on the shelf.I would argue that what you want is residuals and better benefits for the game creators, the technical crew, etc, not the bloody dime-a-dozen VO people.I want better benefits for every single person involved in making videogames. They're all important.

Dismissing VO people as 'dime-a-dozen' is the sort of attitude that earned our industry it's longstanding tradition of deplorable voice-work.

[Telefrog]

I don't.
There are many scripts out there that are just your lines.
Take Niko's lines just as themselves and ask yourself if you could tell what they were for if you were reading them.

He also did the mo-cap for Niko. I'm fairly certain that in a property of this size, he was required to sign an NDA that specifically stated what he could and could not talk about to anyone. Usually this includes very specific language about the end product. (Speculation, of course. He may not have had to sign an NDA at all, but I highly doubt it.)

The linked article only has this to say.

Mr. Hollick said he “asked about residuals when we negotiated, but I was told that was not a possibility.”

Which implies to me that even if he didn't know it was for a GTA game, he knew that residuals can be negotiated, but that in this case the answer was no. Again, no one forced him to sign.

[pseudopseudo]

He was told, flat-out, that residuals were not a possibility. Before they even talked about possible percentages, it was off the table. And this from a company that actually values decent voice-work.

So if he agreed to a contract after being TOLD that there was no chance of residuals, but then goes on to complain about not getting residuals... that just makes him out to be kind of a bitchy whiner, doesn't it? Almost in a Dante Hicks "I'm not even supposed to BE here today!"-ish kinda way?

Dismissing VO people as 'dime-a-dozen' is the sort of attitude that earned our industry it's longstanding tradition of deplorable voice-work.

You keep saying "our industry"... which industry?

I've been in radio/audio production/voice-over work for almost 5 years now, and voice talent IS a dime-a-dozen. Just look at the roster at almost any production house or online voice talent service. There are MILLIONS of people out there. For almost any voice you can imagine in your head, you can find two or three (or more) people out there who sound damn near exactly what you're wanting - and some are willing to undercut others to get the job.

It's not all deplorable, unless you're saying the "industry" you're in is videogames... then yeah, I guess video game VO's haven't come to par with the rest of the audio/visual world as far as that goes. :rolleyes:

EDIT: To clarify my stance, I think VO talent getting residuals is great, and much deserved. However, VO talent that sits back and EXPECTS residuals for every job (instead of working to make sure he/she can secure them) is stupid. I'm not against unions - I guess I'm just against people who expect shit to be handed to them on a platter.

[JRR006]

Oh Jesus, don't say that.:eek:

I don't think I could stand watching/hearing an MGS cutscene with "wahwahwahwah" in a raspy voice for 30 minutes.

Ahaha. That made me laugh out loud. I'd like that to be a setting in MGS4, please.

[EvilTheBadger]

He is who again? Wake up call, Rockstar just made you, and paid you $100k for the privilege. Didn't like the deal? I'm sure there's a thousand other potential Niko Bellics that would have. And I don't see a story about how much the level designers / character artists / programmers etc. got paid. In this industry they're the real "stars".

Boo-fucking-hoo.

[Telefrog]

You guys don't seem to be reading the article.

I did read the article. If you read my post, I said that regardless of how he worded it, the general sentiment "I didn't get paid residuals and Rockstar/Take 2 is making a mint off my work" does NOT reflect back onto SAG in most readers' minds. It reflects on Rockstar/Take 2.

Dismissing VO people as 'dime-a-dozen' is the sort of attitude that earned our industry it's longstanding tradition of deplorable voice-work.

Sorry. I can't get too much sympathy worked up over it. In the grand scheme of things, I'm more concerned about the wages and benefits of the game makers themselves than the VO people. Get that straightened out first, then I'll discuss VO and mo-cap work.

[NationalKato]

I don't.
There are many scripts out there that are just your lines.
Take Niko's lines just as themselves and ask yourself if you could tell what they were for if you were reading them.

Yes, but how many contracts, contract negotiations, agent meetings, and discussions about the character prior to rolling tape occur without a company or product name being mentioned? This isn't some Black Ops industry.

I've hired countless VO actors in my career and generally you sit them down during casting and explain the character and product (be it soap, Hot Pockets, or a film's plot). To think that Rockstar took this actor and decided to keep him in the dark about Niko and the plot for arguably their biggest production to date is ridiculous.

[MosBen]

"In it for the art." Please. These people aren't making games in their basement or taking jobs at small indie publishers. This is big business and these are their full time jobs. It's always nice when you like your job, but liking the industry you're in doesn't mean you abdicate your rights to protest your working conditions.

Look, you could abstract this argument to any industry. This is the essential core of why people bargain collectively. From any employer's position an employee is free to leave if they don't like being treated like shit; they'll just hire somebody else that's hungry for a meal. Unionizing and other collective bargaining strategies give labor a cohesive voice in a system where they'd otherwise be completely powerless.

In some other industry workers may decide that they'll take stock options over a direct raise, or generous time off. Actors have decided that, given the inconsistency of incoming work that sometimes occurs for them, they'd like to have residual payments over time rather than a lump sum initial payment. That's entirely fine and it's what they negotiated. It hasn't applied to voice actors, but maybe it should; maybe it will if they negotiate it. What it's not is some kind of ridiculous whining by some guy who should just be greatful that when I go home today I'm going to hear his voice coming out of the speakers on my tv.

[AgtFox]

This guy's key problem is he is not a "name" actor as of yet, so he really can't get any residual deal. If this helps increase his voice-over work he may eventually be able to get residuals.

I'm willing to bet David Hayter (Solid Snake, also a screenwriter) has residuals built in at this point for MGS.

[ElfShotTheFood]

Someone start a collection for this guy, pronto.

[Roc Ingersol]

You keep saying "our industry"... do you even work in said industry?I was using 'ours' in the 'we are gamers and give a shit about gaming' sense. So we would actually care if gaming stagnates.I've been in radio/audio production/voice-over work for almost 5 years now, and voice talent IS a dime-a-dozen.Because they've got SAG and AFTRA helping them build careers, thanks in no small part to residuals.It's not all deplorableAnd when it isn't, the voice people are either imports from industries that value the work and provide residuals, or they're people that basically leave the gaming industry and move to radio/tv/film because you can't build a career off gaming work.

[Evil Avatar]

This is a simple issue of greed. He didn't/couldn't negotiate a contract to include residuals, and now that the game is printing money for Take-Two he wants a bigger piece of the pie. $100k for a years work, let alone just voice-overs - I imagine a lot of EvA's here wouldn't scoff at that paycheck. :rolleyes:

That is my thought as well. That is a ton of cash to fake a bad Russian accent.

<Natasha voice>

Big trouble for moose and squirrel!

</Natasha voice>

Ok, I have it down. Someone cut me a check for GTAV.

[Deadend]

I don't think actors matter too much to a game, but I would love for the SAG to wring some residuals into a contract, then the game industry workers may wake up and realize unionization may not be a bad idea. As if the fucker who just says some words gets paid more than the guy who made the world, and long term...

[MosBen]

Why should this guy shut up because software engineers aren't getting their due either? Jobs aren't some mythical gift from god which are perfect in every way and should never be criticized. I generally like my job quite a bit, but I hate that I was assigned to a location which requires me to commute over an hour. Should I not mention that to people when they ask me how I like my job? They're paying me, so should I shut up? Of course not. I'm not going to rage about how I hate my employer because by and large I think they've done right by me, as is the case here. This guy shouldn't be shouted down for disliking an aspect of his job just because fanboys dream of being in a videogame.

[pseudopseudo]

This guy shouldn't be shouted down for disliking an aspect of his job just because fanboys dream of being in a videogame.

This is seriously the single dumbest sentence in the entire thread.

So you think people are criticizing him because they're secretly jealous of being in a videogame?

Jealous that he got paid $100K for voicework maybe. But jealous that he's in a videogame? *facepalm*

[MosBen]

Evil, you're doing Natasha's voice and not Borris'?

[Roc Ingersol]

In the grand scheme of things, I'm more concerned about the wages and benefits of the game makers themselves than the VO people. Get that straightened out first, then I'll discuss VO and mo-cap work.I think you'll find that the arguments for and against are all the same. If anyone gets residuals it opens the door for pattern bargaining. I don't think it's an 'either or', nor do I care who gets them 'first'. I just want to see a healthier creative industry. And frankly, SAG/AFTRA/WGA/et al have a hell of a better chance at opening that particular door than devs in general. And let's face it, devs haven't managed to solve these problems in three decades. They've barely started to address them. So pardon me if I'm eager to see anyone get the ball rolling.

[jacktion]

Sure, $100,000 is great money for a regular joe, but this is not really about this one man. This is arguably the most high profile voice gig in gaming history. If the highest paid voice actor in the entire industry is only making $100,000 for 15 months work, (which is $80,000 a year) then what do the regular voice actors get paid? They get paid very poorly. For an industry that is beating the movies and books and tv and everything and posting record profits, can't we pay our voice actors a decent wage?


Residuals would be a good idea for the games industry. As to people who say that smaller games can't afford it, well there are very small movies that afford it. Indie films that are much smaller than any game so I don't think that is a real issue.

[MosBen]

pseudopseudo, yes, I think that that's definitely part of it. There have been several posts referencing how he should be happy that his work is being heard by so many people or that plenty of people would be willing to do the work for much less, which I'm taking to be an implication that the work is so easy/rewarding that the gift of being a part of GTAIV is an end in and of itself.

Yes, some of this is related to the fact that he got $100,000, which is more than most people get for their work, but there are many jobs which seem overpaid from a certain perspective. The fact that he gets paid more than me doesn't mean he loses his right to complain about any aspects of the job, or that there aren't aspects of his job which are either unfair or which should be changed in the future.

But again, any time labor issues in the gaming industry come out people come to the post in droves to smack down the workers, so I'm inclined to believe that there's a certain degree of job envy in the gaming community which skews their perspective.

[Telefrog]

I think you'll find that the arguments for and against are all the same. If anyone gets residuals it opens the door for pattern bargaining. I don't think it's an 'either or', nor do I care who gets them 'first'. I just want to see a healthier creative industry. And frankly, SAG/AFTRA/WGA/et al have a hell of a better chance at opening that particular door than devs in general. And let's face it, devs haven't managed to solve these problems in three decades. They've barely started to address them. So pardon me if I'm eager to see anyone get the ball rolling.

I do care who gets them first. It's no secret that the game publishers don't want to pay anyone residuals. Ever. If the VO people get residuals first, it will open the dialogue about the game creators getting it as well, but it will make the publishers that much more reluctant to settle on favorable terms for those workers. Most of them don't have a union to negotiate a standard.

[Roc Ingersol]

And it won't take them very long to figure the next step out.

[MosBen]

Indeed, Roc, the takeaway idea here *should* be that game developers need to unionize.

[Gedd]

Awww, someone call the Whaaambulance.

Developers can do the VO work themselves if they wanted to. This guy should consider himself lucky to have been involved with it. Fuck, i'll take $100k for less than a year's worth of "work".. I doubt this assplug does a 9-5 gig like most of us; fuck him.

"...and remember, respect is everything!"

[Schnoogs]

Tough break for him but that's the contract he chose to work under. I'm sure this will result in future generations of actors getting paid more though.

[serion]

The people who should get residuals are the programmers, testers and others; who probably put in 12 hours a day (while only getting paid for 8); not some whinny actor. BTW this is speculation based on what I have heard about pay in the video games industry.

Those people get some measure of job security - they don't code every day knowing that when the game is done, they're going to get the axe. The game's long term success contributes to their paychecks long after the game is out the door.

Voice actors (and mocap actors, etc) only get a regular paycheck until the game is complete, then they're out on their ass. I know in their place, I'd like to share in the continued profits of a game, especially one set to make a BILLION dollars.

I don't understand all the hate - he's not stabbing R* in the back, he's only trying to bring an issue up within the union that is supposed to represent his best interests.:confused:

[SorcererXIII]

It's a small paycheck for a hollywood actor and a little better than average for a game developer. As a dev I'm glad to hear they didn't value the actor more (or much more) than anyone else involved in development, though I suspect the "right" solution is somewhere inbetween - game devs and Mr. Hollick should both be getting paid more for their work, but the hollywood actors that are making us all look bad should be getting paid less.

[MelbaToast]

Seriously, would any one really even notice if non-union voice actors were in games? The answer, not at all.

I don't know about that. Have you played Shenmue 2?

[NationalKato]

I don't know about that. Have you played Shenmue 2?

You can tell who's union just by listening to their voice? That's pretty impressive.

[Telefrog]

Those people get some measure of job security - they don't code every day knowing that when the game is done, they're going to get the axe. The game's long term success contributes to their paychecks long after the game is out the door.

Voice actors (and mocap actors, etc) only get a regular paycheck until the game is complete, then they're out on their ass. I know in their place, I'd like to share in the continued profits of a game, especially one set to make a BILLION dollars.

I don't understand all the hate - he's not stabbing R* in the back, he's only trying to bring an issue up within the union that is supposed to represent his best interests.:confused:

1. Have you seen the rate at which development companies are liquidated as soon as a game ships?

2. Sure, he wants continued profits. So does everyone. Do the guys at Rockstar that coded the crowd behavior get a residual cut? How about the guy that textured Niko? Designed his model? Coded the multiplayer portion?

[Wilkz07]

read contracts and agreements first. lol.

[ElectricMonk]

awww.. only 100k for an unnamed actor for just over a years work. Poor nico.

[jacktion]

I'm sorry but anyone who rips on this guy because $100,000 is a lot of money is an idiot. That is irrelevant.
The point is that he has the number one voice gig in Video games. He worked for over a year which is way longer than a voice actor would work on any big budget movie.

A comparable amount of work in a comparable movie or tv show would be paid in the millions. Then with the success of the franchise there would be additional bonuses over time if it sells well.

So this guy is getting paid like 5% of what other people doing the same work are getting paid. So he is upset. He is not a jerk. He is getting screwed. And as time goes by he just gets more and more screwed.

It would be like if one of us normal people were working in an office doing office work. Everyone else files papers and does office stuff and gets paid $60,000 a year. But you are getting paid $20,000 a year. Wouldn't you be upset? Yes.

And then when you comment on how it doesn't seem fair, some asshole comes along and says,"Oh call a wambulance! I only make $5,000 a year! I would love to make $20,000 a year! What a greedy jerk!"

And actually if people would read the article this guy sounds very reasonable. Check out his quote.

“Obviously I’m incredibly thankful to Rockstar for the opportunity to be in this game when I was just a nobody, an unknown quantity,” Mr. Hollick, 35, said last week. “But it’s tough, when you see Grand Theft Auto IV out there as the biggest thing going right now, when they’re making hundreds of millions of dollars, and we don’t see any of it. 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."

So the guy sounds reasonable. The Union needs to get some residuals so that if a voice actor does a really good job and helps a game blow up big time, they see some payback for their good work.

[morose]

For the record? If you read the article, he doesn't sound like he's complaining at all. He sounds like he had fun and that he's grateful for the opportunity. Most of the negative tone is provided by the journalist from the Times... not Hollic. He merely points out the differences in the agreements between games and other media.

RTFA before commenting folks.

Also, fuck Nextgen for a shitty news title, and boo on Dr. Finger for repeating it. Even the NYT article is titled "Voice actor and his less-than-stellar pay" not "Voice actor COMPLAINS about pay". Again, it was primarily the journalist who gave that article it's tone.

[Sammael]

hmm. You know, I have a hard time feeling bad for him since he was paid 100,000 for his troubles. That's some really good money. 15 months? I wish I got that much for jumping through some hoops and talking into a mic. I know it's hard work, but there is a hell of a lot worse, and this is also a great thing to have on the resume.

I know it hurts him to look back and see if only he had asked for a small bite of the pie, but he got the compensation promised (as far as we can tell). Hey, maybe he can talk himself into the porable one and get residuals from that!

Plus, it's not like his voice made the game. His voice acting is important, but not central.

[DeadPixel]

My name is Pancho,
I work on a rancho,
I make 5 pesos aday.
I go see lucy,
she gives me some pooooosie,
and takes my 5 pesos away.

Give me a fucking break, you got compensated for the job and 100,000k is not terribly bad in 15 months of work because I can't imagine him working 40 hours a week doing voices in GTA4.

[serion]

1. Have you seen the rate at which development companies are liquidated as soon as a game ships?

2. Sure, he wants continued profits. So does everyone. Do the guys at Rockstar that coded the crowd behavior get a residual cut? How about the guy that textured Niko? Designed his model? Coded the multiplayer portion?

Well, first off, the guy that coded the multiplayer portion needs to be taken out and shot. I don't know if its just my network setup, but I cannot connect to anything. :mad:

Also, I have never heard anything about massive layoffs after a game ships. If they're as commonplace and as big a deal as you suggest, I would think it would be common knowledge for anyone that follows the industry. A quick google turns up nothing, and unless anyone else wants to correct me with some references, I think my point still stands that continued employment and residuals are two sides of the same coin.

[DeadPixel]

Also, I have never heard anything about massive layoffs after a game ships. If they're as commonplace and as big a deal as you suggest, I would think it would be common knowledge for anyone that follows the industry. A quick google turns up nothing, and unless anyone else wants to correct me with some references, I think my point still stands that continued employment and residuals are two sides of the same coin.

Umm... Looking Glass closed after a game was shipped, so did Iron Lore Entertainment closed after Titan Quest expansion came out. EA Chicago closed after Fight Night Round 3 (despite being a great game).

I'm sure there are lots more, and please don't mention that shithead John Romero from ION Storm, I was happy his turd didn't sell.

[MosBen]

Sammael, he did ask for more, but they flatly refused. His union hasn't done much to secure residuals for people like him, so he doesn't get them. He said he doesn't blame R*, he blames his union.

Again, the argument that voice actors shouldn't get residuals because programers don't get residuals is just ridiculous. If you think programers should get residuals, that's great. Maybe they should. But just because programers haven't negotiated for residuals doesn't mean that nobody involved should receive them. In this case he's saying that his union should work harder on this issue.

[Bad_Buddha]

The only voice actor that could entice me to buy a game is Stephen Russell as Garrett.

This guy is a no-name and he signed on the dotted line. If he doesn't like what's offered, pick another line of work. I'm sure there are dedicated voice actors that love what they do and will gladly take the next job he turns down.

[LongStepMantis]

In other shocking news:

People across the world still feel entitled to things they don't deserve. We interviewed a man who said "Yeah, they gave me $100K to talk, but since the game is doing so well, why not give me more?" "I mean, it's not like I was a struggling actor to begin with who should be grateful they even gave me work."

More at 11.

[MosBen]

Deadpixel, EA Chicago closed last November. As far as I can tell their last game released before that was DefJam: Icon, which was released in early '07. That's hardly "closed after releasing a game." I don't have time to look up those others, but are you sure those studios were closed right after they shipped a title?

[MosBen]

Ugh, you know what's annoying? It's not that people think voice actors shouldn't get residuals because they don't think voice acting contributes to a game's sales. It's that people continue trot out this idea that he didn't pay close enough attention and is whining now. He's not. What you are saying is not true. Stop saying it. He's raising an issue he has with his union and the industry. He goes out of his way to not blame R*.

[serion]

Not to be overly contrary, but those are better examples of getting the most out of a sunk cost (the dev work that's already done) and then closing than a healthy studio like R* giving all their devs the boot after a game ships and hiring all new ones for the next game.

Another comparison:
Over the Hedge grossed $490 million worldwide. Bruce Willis was paid $10 million for all the talking they could fit into 83 minutes. (+residuals, but they might be included)

How many people saw Over the Hedge specifically to see Bruce? Not many, I imagine. So why doesn't Michael Hollick deserve 1% of what Bruce made, when he provided more dialog and acted for motion capture, especially when you take into account that GTA made a shitload more money than Over the Hedge?

[DeadPixel]

Deadpixel, EA Chicago closed last November. As far as I can tell their last game released before that was DefJam: Icon, which was released in early '07. That's hardly "closed after releasing a game." I don't have time to look up those others, but are you sure those studios were closed right after they shipped a title?

Yeah it was DefJam you're right. I'm sure there have been very few cases where immediate layoffs occurred after a title release (excluding contract hires for art assets, release qa, etc), but Theif II came out on March 21, 2000 and Looking Glass officially closed doors in May 2000.

[tombofsoldier]

I don't make as much money as other people do, so those people are greedy and I'm not look at me whine about it! Geeze, it's not like half of you guys wouldn't want more money if you were in this guys position either.

[Telefrog]

Another comparison:
Over the Hedge grossed $490 million worldwide. Bruce Willis was paid $10 million for all the talking they could fit into 83 minutes. (+residuals, but they might be included)

How many people saw Over the Hedge specifically to see Bruce? Not many, I imagine. So why doesn't Michael Hollick deserve 1% of what Bruce made, when he provided more dialog and acted for motion capture, especially when you take into account that GTA made a shitload more money than Over the Hedge?

But the difference there is quite big. Perhaps no one did see Over The Hedge specifically for Bruce Willis, but I can guarantee that almost no one would've seen it if it didn't have any recognizable names at all. Hollywood movies depend on brand impact, which in most cases, are the actors involved.

In contrast, no one cares who voiced any of the characters in GTA IV.

[MrSatan]

This guy needs to see some reality. The programmers aren't getting any royalties and they slaved away for years on the game. When you think you can come in and contribute your half a percent and ask for royalties you are asking for trouble. Also to everyone above "yes voice actors are a dime a dozen". I am not slamming them, but it would have been very easy for Rockstar to find another person for Nico. Also if they give him royalties wouldn't that mean they should give every voice actor in the game royalties as well? Or is he riding the high horse because he is the main character.

No one here is ripping on the industry, it is just that things like this will kill it. Small game companies do not have the revenue or the time to deal with crap like this.

[TrackZero]

Dear lord. He got paid what he agreed to and now complains? Fuck off asshole, you knew the franchise would make tons of money, you got paid fantastically for a minor amount of work, and you just waited until now to try and complain. What a sob story, how will you ever make it in this cruel world?

Asshole.

[TrackZero]

Not to be overly contrary, but those are better examples of getting the most out of a sunk cost (the dev work that's already done) and then closing than a healthy studio like R* giving all their devs the boot after a game ships and hiring all new ones for the next game.

Another comparison:
Over the Hedge grossed $490 million worldwide. Bruce Willis was paid $10 million for all the talking they could fit into 83 minutes. (+residuals, but they might be included)

How many people saw Over the Hedge specifically to see Bruce? Not many, I imagine.

You'd be mistaken. People do go to those films just to hear actors play the cartoon (CGI) characters voices. If not, why in the world would they sign big stars to be in them in the first place?

[TrackZero]

I'm sorry but anyone who rips on this guy because $100,000 is a lot of money is an idiot. That is irrelevant.
The point is that he has the number one voice gig in Video games. He worked for over a year which is way longer than a voice actor would work on any big budget movie.

A comparable amount of work in a comparable movie or tv show would be paid in the millions. Then with the success of the franchise there would be additional bonuses over time if it sells well.

So this guy is getting paid like 5% of what other people doing the same work are getting paid. So he is upset. He is not a jerk. He is getting screwed. And as time goes by he just gets more and more screwed.

Excuse me, you seem to be under the mistaken impression he didn't realize he was going to be the lead in a GRAND THEFT FUCKING AUTO GAME. That he signed a contract for pay and the work to be done, no one got "screwed" here. What Hollywood pays big name actors is a complete non-factor in this discussion (besides which, those actors signed beforehand for pay/royalties, this guy didn't, it's his problem, not the studios).


It would be like if one of us normal people were working in an office doing office work. Everyone else files papers and does office stuff and gets paid $60,000 a year. But you are getting paid $20,000 a year. Wouldn't you be upset? Yes.

No, that analogy is trash. It's as if you got a job to intern at a fortune 500 company for less pay than someone else for the same work, but you get your foot in the door into the big leagues. Which people do, all the fucking time. Except they don't get to whine about it in the media. And those interns also don't get paid such extreme amounts for simple work.

[vallor]

Huge numbers of people do get laid off as soon as a game is done. In some cases whole studios become defunct when their most recent title ships. Most core teams, especially at publishers are pretty small and are filled out by contractors in a number of roles. Game finishes up and those contractors go bye-bye. Nor do they get residuals or any of the other things people would like to see. I would have thought anyone who has read this site regularly would have noticed this tread.

Gamasutra/Game Developer Mag postmortem articles often say how large the developer team was and what the percentage of contractors was if you want a source.

Nor do they often command quite the paycheck this guy got for 15 months of work which probably averaged out to 3 - 4 hours a "work day". Are contract artists any less creative then a VO guy especially when they probably crunched for 5 months at 80+ hours a week?

I don't want to dis on the work this guy did, and he clearly isn't holding a grudge against R* and maybe there does need to be reform about residuals and the like in the game industry. But really he should take his 100K payday and STFU because it is only when compared to other media that is seems this guy got a raw deal. When compared to any other disipline in the GAME INDUSTRY this guys situation is far from an injustice.

So the question shouldn't be "how can we fix it so VO artists/actors get the same contractual rights as

It should be "how do we ensure people get properly rewarded with residual or other types of income commensrate to the value they have brought to the game, and how can we emperically measure that contribution to standardize it across the industry" It shouldn't matter if it is VO, Coding, Textures or Lofting, or game soundtrack.

[Darkmatter]

As long as Jr 3D Modelers get residuals for all those boxes, crates, and barrels that players walk past or break open in games. Why not? Every time someone plays that game they see their work!

[Thin_J]

I'm sorry, but... $100K for 15 months worth of talking into a microphone and fucking around in a mocap suit? Sign me the fuck up, please. I think that's damn good money for the what he did.

I would happily trade my current job for $100k a year in voice/mocap studios.

It'd be more than triple the money and I wouldn't get dirty all the time at work.

[hotcoffeeburns]

Huge numbers of people do get laid off as soon as a game is done. In some cases whole studios become defunct when their most recent title ships. Most core teams, especially at publishers are pretty small and are filled out by contractors in a number of roles. Game finishes up and those contractors go bye-bye. Nor do they get residuals or any of the other things people would like to see. I would have thought anyone who has read this site regularly would have noticed this tread.

Gamasutra/Game Developer Mag postmortem articles often say how large the developer team was and what the percentage of contractors was if you want a source.

Nor do they often command quite the paycheck this guy got for 15 months of work which probably averaged out to 3 - 4 hours a "work day". Are contract artists any less creative then a VO guy especially when they probably crunched for 5 months at 80+ hours a week?

I don't want to dis on the work this guy did, and he clearly isn't holding a grudge against R* and maybe there does need to be reform about residuals and the like in the game industry. But really he should take his 100K payday and STFU because it is only when compared to other media that is seems this guy got a raw deal. When compared to any other disipline in the GAME INDUSTRY this guys situation is far from an injustice.

So the question shouldn't be "how can we fix it so VO artists/actors get the same contractual rights as

It should be "how do we ensure people get properly rewarded with residual or other types of income commensrate to the value they have brought to the game, and how can we emperically measure that contribution to standardize it across the industry" It shouldn't matter if it is VO, Coding, Textures or Lofting, or game soundtrack.

Ding ding ding.

Exactly, his VO and mo-cap would have meant nothing without the engine, design, etc. Could as easily be said that the game would have been anything without his voice work, but those people (designers, engineers, artists) surely don't make $100k worth of what they end up having to put into the game. Yes, they get bonus checks sometimes and such based on sales, so they get SOME residuals, but it isn't guaranteed and it isn't anything that would bring their pay up to the amounts for what he did.

[MojoJojo]

A comparable amount of work in a comparable movie or tv show would be paid in the millions.
No, they wouldn't. The guy's not George Clooney. He's some random Yo who got hired for VO work. He's not even famous in VO circles. The guy is Mark Hamill in Star Wars.

Note... the one person who didn't get ripped off was the one guy with experience: Harrison Ford.

It would be like if one of us normal people were working in an office doing office work. Everyone else files papers and does office stuff and gets paid $60,000 a year. But you are getting paid $20,000 a year. Wouldn't you be upset? Yes.
But, it's not the same, but even if it is the same, if everyone else was in the job for 20 years and was "known" at the office and got $60k and you were brand new on the job and got $20k, you'd be offended? Are you in high school or something?

Ugh, you know what's annoying? It's not that people think voice actors shouldn't get residuals because they don't think voice acting contributes to a game's sales. It's that people continue trot out this idea that he didn't pay close enough attention and is whining now. He's not. What you are saying is not true. Stop saying it. He's raising an issue he has with his union and the industry. He goes out of his way to not blame R*.
You're right. I'm totally going to buy Bioshock 2 because Bob Bronsky of Pautucket, Georgia is gonna be one of the voice actors. He's someone I've never heard of in my entire life, but I'm pretty sure ole Bob makes the whole game by himself, especially when paired with Rosanna Reed, someone else I've never heard of.

[KlausFlouride]

He voluntarily signed the contract right? End of discussion.

[DeejayKnight]

So the question shouldn't be "how can we fix it so VO artists/actors get the same contractual rights as

It should be "how do we ensure people get properly rewarded with residual or other types of income commensrate to the value they have brought to the game, and how can we emperically measure that contribution to standardize it across the industry" It shouldn't matter if it is VO, Coding, Textures or Lofting, or game soundtrack.

[/thread]

I've been trying to think of a way to properly phrase the question that could shut down vast arguments in this thread, and yours comes to about what I was looking for.

[oldjadedgamer]

Let them go on strike, then they will get the slap in the face of reality that the game industry moves on and uses non-union VO without skipping a beat.

[dividius]

This guy has zero leverage. If he had demanded some kind or royalties or more money at the beginning, Rockstar could have easily said, "See ya later," and gotten someone else to do it.

He made $100,000 over a 15 month period to talk into a mic. There are certainly more physically and mentally demanding jobs that pay much less than that. Because of the exposure, he'll probably have a much easier time landing some very profitable gigs later on as well.

I believe in worker's rights and fair wages as much as anybody, but I won't be shedding any tears for Niko Bellic. This sounds like sour grapes to me.

[Gedd]

If any of you think this guy actually worked a straight 15months on this game, 5 days a week, in regular 8hour shifts, you're delusional. Guys like this come into a sound studio once or twice a week for a couple hours per session over a span of however long it takes the writers (the real people that should be getting royalties) to come up with the shit in the first place.

I'm sure the rest of Mr. Hollick's time is spent at a gym, pandering for the next Colgate commercial, or doing something else with the definative metrosexual in mind.

[Skywalkr]

This guy is pissing into the wind. He signed a contract. And frankly, crate-master junior likely does NOT get royalties on game X. People working on GTA might, but most games don't make their money back and of those that do, very few actually pay out royalties. Most devs, who literally work 80-100+ hours a week crunching on their shit near the end, ever see royalties.

Seeing some dime a dozen VO wank whine about not getting to ride around in a platinum-plated Ferrari is pretty pathetic. He must know that GTA4 would still be GTA4 without his contribution.

The SAG better wake up and realize something about this medium. VO does not make the game. AT. ALL. It can make it better, it can make it worse. But it doesn't make the game, nor does it make a good game unplayable, nor an terrible game fun (not on purpose anyway). It's just atmosphere. That's the reason so many companies turn to non-union VO. For most games you just can't justify the cost.

[reimomo]

Ugh, you know what's annoying? It's not that people think voice actors shouldn't get residuals because they don't think voice acting contributes to a game's sales. It's that people continue trot out this idea that he didn't pay close enough attention and is whining now. He's not. What you are saying is not true. Stop saying it. He's raising an issue he has with his union and the industry. He goes out of his way to not blame R*.

= Truth.

This thread fails.

[MosBen]

MojoJojo, I'm not sure how your response was related to the portion of my post that you quoted. Again, as I've said several times here: it's perfectly legitimate to make arguments about whether the contribution of a voice actor is sufficient that they should or shouldn't get residuals. It's perfectly legitimate to argue any number of facets of this issue. What my quoted portion says is that way too many people in this discussion are arguing against something which simply isn't true. He didn't make a mistake and is now complaining about it. He's not blaming R* for taking advantage of him. He's not suggesting that he's unhappy with the experience of appearing in GTAIV.

This is what you call straw man arguments, kids. If your whole rebuttal is to an argument that no one is making, well, then what kind of power does your oh so witty "Waaaambulance" response have? What's the point of debating against a position that no one holds?

Ultimately, here's my problem. The games industry will shortly be as big as the film industry. Now, film publishers certainly take a huge chunk of the pie, but at least the labor market has some tools at their disposal. It's heavily unionized so many of the workers are able to benefit from the high profits that they help produce. Writers and actors also get residuals on lots of work, which serves many purposes but ensures that the profits going forward are shared with at least some of the workers. As the games industry gets bigger, are we happy to have all those new fortunes go to the big wigs at EA, Take 2, Ubi, etc.? Games have become a mainstream money making industry but the labor market is still treated like it's a niche industry. Voice actors are a logical first group to demand things like residuals because they're already active in the film and television industries. Software producers definitely deserve more benefits from their work, but they won't get them until they unionize and create for themselves the power to bargain with their bosses.

[Apex]

Personally I think the guy should sit the hell down and shut the hell up.

People didnt buy GTAIV for the story or his voice and mocap. It could of been anyone, it could of been terrible and people would still have bought it.

This guy is over stepping the line out of ignorance. He'll prolly get a lot more work now having worked on GATIV. And to be blunt ... he is still a nobody. I didnt know his name until this article.

If he wants more money? Then he should get in line behind the coders, artists, designers and testers in my opinion.

[serion]

Does anyone here belong to a union? Is it unfair for my mom (a teacher) to complain that her union shafted her in their last contract? Should she "shut the hell up and sit down" because "any jackass can do that job, nobody cares who teaches those kids?" That's bullshit.

Unions have a legitimate purpose, and members of them have every right to go to the press if they feel they are not being fairly represented by the people they are PAYING to represent them. He has nothing but good things to say about his employer, and is grateful for the compensation he did receive, but he is completely justified in trying to better the conditions for his fellow union members working in the game industry.

[f1sh3r]

Let them go on strike, then they will get the slap in the face of reality that the game industry moves on and uses non-union VO without skipping a beat.

if any game studios are reading this thread, i'm available. just drop me a pm.

[f1sh3r]

Does anyone here belong to a union? Is it unfair for my mom (a teacher) to complain that her union shafted her in their last contract? Should she "shut the hell up and sit down" because "any jackass can do that job, nobody cares who teaches those kids?" That's bullshit.

Unions have a legitimate purpose, and members of them have every right to go to the press if they feel they are not being fairly represented by the people they are PAYING to represent them. He has nothing but good things to say about his employer, and is grateful for the compensation he did receive, but he is completely justified in trying to better the conditions for his fellow union members working in the game industry.

unions used to have a legit purpose, but they long outlived them awhile ago.

[MosBen]

Right f1sh3r, because now management totally looks out for the interests of the workers. It's not an adversarial environment between management and labor anymore. Nope, everything is great and workers on their own have tons of leverage.

[Pitpig]

I'm sorry, but... $100K for 15 months worth of talking into a microphone and fucking around in a mocap suit? Sign me the fuck up, please. I think that's damn good money for the what he did.
Yeah, but you'd suck at it. If you don't realize that it takes study and work to be a decent actor, you're clueless.

[Pitpig]

Should devs, designers and artists also never bitch about their lack of residuals or getting screwed out of royalties, or their awful quality-of-life issues, so long as they're getting a paycheck?

I mean, they can pick up and leave the industry too, right? They could turn down the job and walk away.

And 90% of the experience and talent can continue to turn over every five years and we gamers can continue to enjoy the fruits of a perpetual burned-out-and-amateur industry. Fuck knows we don't have any problems with rookie mistakes, soul-less crapware and shoddy work year after year, to the point that every exception is celebrated for greatness. Let's go ahead and line up with same corporations who only greenlight the same warmed over crap year in and year out and chase out the very experience and creatives who might steer us in a different direction.

I look forward to the wonderful future of the medium that you guys are building with your philosophical defense of the profit rights of multinational corporations over the creative rights of artists and craftsmen!

Let's not only celebrate the sequels and knock-offs and perpetual mediocrity of our industry -- let's angrily shout down any threat to the status quo that might actually effect change.

What a great long term plan! I'm so glad we're all thinking this one through.
Where do I sign up for your fan club. You seem to be one of the only people who understand this issue. Amen, brother. Amen.

[Pitpig]

Seriously, would any one really even notice if non-union voice actors were in games? The answer, not at all.

Are you fucking kidding me?! You've never laughed your ass off at the atrocious voice overs in video games? If you don't think the voice acting matters, do us all a favor and run into a burning building.

[f1sh3r]

Right f1sh3r, because now management totally looks out for the interests of the workers. It's not an adversarial environment between management and labor anymore. Nope, everything is great and workers on their own have tons of leverage.

maybe where you work you have issues with the management. not everyone suffers that tho. :)

Are you fucking kidding me?! You've never laughed your ass off at the atrocious voice overs in video games? If you don't think the voice acting matters, do us all a favor and run into a burning building.

non-union voice acting doesn't mean it's going to be shit. you can hire a person who does a good job on the street if you find the right person. honestly tho, voice acting is whatever, we don't need to be paying a million bucks to a voice actor for every title out there, unless you want a healthy price bump in the cost of the game.

Yeah, but you'd suck at it. If you don't realize that it takes study and work to be a decent actor, you're clueless.

seriously? voice acting? i think you're exaggerating just a little.

[f1sh3r]

Should devs, designers and artists also never bitch about their lack of residuals or getting screwed out of royalties, or their awful quality-of-life issues, so long as they're getting a paycheck?

I mean, they can pick up and leave the industry too, right? They could turn down the job and walk away.

And 90% of the experience and talent can continue to turn over every five years and we gamers can continue to enjoy the fruits of a perpetual burned-out-and-amateur industry. Fuck knows we don't have any problems with rookie mistakes, soul-less crapware and shoddy work year after year, to the point that every exception is celebrated for greatness. Let's go ahead and line up with same corporations who only greenlight the same warmed over crap year in and year out and chase out the very experience and creatives who might steer us in a different direction.

I look forward to the wonderful future of the medium that you guys are building with your philosophical defense of the profit rights of multinational corporations over the creative rights of artists and craftsmen!

Let's not only celebrate the sequels and knock-offs and perpetual mediocrity of our industry -- let's angrily shout down any threat to the status quo that might actually effect change.

What a great long term plan! I'm so glad we're all thinking this one through.

you think gaming is the only industry with burnout and turnover? no other industry makes demands like actors do. and honestly, if you're making a good salary, you really shouldn't be getting residuals period, no matter what you do. none of these guys would be employed without the evil corporations.

i can think of better ways of properly rewarding people for a job well done. giving residuals to the art guy or the voice over actor isn't one of them.

[oldjadedgamer]

Are you fucking kidding me?! You've never laughed your ass off at the atrocious voice overs in video games? If you don't think the voice acting matters, do us all a favor and run into a burning building.

Never said it didn't matter but again, would anyone notice that Policeman #6 is a non-union actor? Seriously?

There is a lot of talented voice actors out there that are not in the union.

[Crowe]

Roc Ingersol laying it out nicely, well done man.

A lot of people really need to read the articles, understand them before commenting.

[Emma Peel]

Sorry to bring up an old thread but I just had to comment.

I think most everyone reading the article has their math wrong. The guy did not work for 15 months for 8 hour days. He did not work for 15 months for 4-5 hour days. He worked NO MORE THEN 100 hours over 15 months. This is based on the guy who did the Irish character getting $1000+ an hour, and even if the this guy did not get that much SAG minimum (which the article said they got) is something around $900 dollars an hour. $100000 dollars for 100 hours of work.

Also I would like to point something else out. Had this guy been staring in a live action movie where he played Niko Bellic in GTA: The Movie, he would likely have gotten even less money then the $100000 dollars.

Video games are arguably the most like movies more then TV. One time release, after some period of time no one buys them anymore. Actors do not get residuals for movies. Robert DeNiro, Adam Sandler, Eddie Murphy get residuals for movies. Only people whos name will sell tickets in itself are in any position in hollywood to get residuals.