Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 5:45 AM
Fri Nov 27
29 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
01/23/09
I think the argument "He JUST did voice acting, the programmers worked longer hours so the voice actors shouldn't be paid any more!" is a little odd. Personally, I think fair would be if EVERYONE involved got a percentage, but I know that's not how things work. Also, it's not the responsibility of voice actors to ensure more fair compensation for the rest of the video game industry. Maybe game designers should be voicing the same concerns this guy is... but then all the internet tough guys on Voicetaku would be bitching about that.
Also, I've got this nagging feeling that if it was the lady who did the voice of GLADOS from Portal, there wouldn't be as much hatred thrown at the voice actor. Niko wasn't a lovable character, so we don't love the actor, so we're going to crucify the guy for stating his opinion that payment could have been handled more fairly.
01/23/09
Second, you make some good points, but what rankles with gamers here is that there are so many people in game development who deserve royalties and higher pay ahead of voice actors. This is pretty much undisputed.
However, because voice actors are of a greater importance in the idustries they originated in, they are trying to push their pay-scale and royalties system on game development, where they simply don't play anything as important a role in making the product great. We all hate to see the profits going to management, but we want to see it going to the coders and artists; the writers and designers, not the voice actors.
Games were great when all the elements I just mentioned existed but we didn't have the memory to store voice acting; games would still be great without voice acting today. Now try watching an animated film or tv show without voice, it's a bit of a different proposition.
01/23/09
People forget that the royalty system is meant to protect risky investments and provide motivation. If the project isn't risky and the people are well-motivated given their going pay rate, there is no need to go with residuals. But if a game is a risk and you want to entice publishers, you might ask for good residuals on what would otherwise be an underfunded game.
This is capitalism at work. The value of something is what people are willing to pay for it. People don't really care about voice overs in games, relatively speaking, so voice actors get paid less for work in games than they do for work on animated films and such. Hollick doesn't seem to realize how little his replacement would affect sales of the title.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
"I blame our union for not having the agreements in place to protect the creative people who drive the sales of these games."
The only voice talent I can see being justified as "driving the sales of these games" is the one for Andrew Ryan. Seriously, that's the only one. Voiceovers ARE NOT to games what actors are to movies! How many video game voice acting celebrities are there? Yeah, that's what I thought. People don't buy games for voice actors, bud. Driving the sales my fucking ass.
01/23/09
01/23/09
I suppose that's one reason why James Earl Jones still has been finding good work in Hollywood and Broadway.
01/23/09
01/23/09
If you feel that somebody is underpaying you or you got ripped off, you should say something about it. he was talking about his contract..
All of the "He should be grateful" bullshit is idiotic.
From the Michael Hollic interview at the New York Times:
"I don't blame Rockstar," he was quick to add. "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."
In most other mediums, Hollick would have been paid royalties for his voice appearing in the product. He said that he "asked about residuals when we negotiated, but I was told that was not a possibility."
Give the guy a goddamn break.
01/23/09
In most other mediums, you don't spend the majority of the time holding a controller. When was the last time you bought a game because someone told you it had great voice acting? The guy is delusional about the role he played in GTA IV's success.
01/23/09
I'm actually on the side of the VA with this. Of course, they should have known better when signing an agreement to do the VA, but whatever, doesn't make cooperate greed okay. Plus, in general, non-Disney/Dreamworks/Pixar VAs are massively underpaid. Especially anime VAs. Which I think they all know by now anywho. That's more of a labor of love thing, mostly.
01/23/09
You go and ask the guys in Scotland who actually coded the game how long they worked on it and how much they got paid during that time.
Further, ask them how much it cost them to actually learn the skills required to do it. Then compare all that to what this guy got paid.
01/23/09
Sorry, many of you may think that $100k is a lot of money for voice talent, but in reality it isn't. Yes, $100k is a lot of money. But $100k for voice talent is not a lot of money.
Also, he is lucky he made that much at all, but I do think that the contract was shady since he didnt know what game he would be working on.
But hey thats just my $0.02
01/23/09
01/23/09
@Chase Evans: 100k for voice acting is the most I've ever heard. Tell me, how familiar do you have to be with the latest version of 3DS MAX or Photoshop to be a voice actor? Do you need to know any scripting languages? Do you need years of experience working in the industry before anyone will trust you on a project? Do you ever have "crunches" or "death marches" where you work 60+ hours a week with no overtime pay for multiple weeks in a row?
You and Niko can go cry yourselves a river.
01/23/09
he worked for 15 months on it or more for that $100k. he never condemned rockstar or bitched and whined over it. he thanked rockstar for theo pportunity and just commented that maybe va's in gaming dont get paid as much as they should. Ignorant people with no clue what they are talking about shouldnt really comment on these things.
Also, you need to know how to ACT to be a voice actor.
01/23/09
And I was talking about video game voice acting. Pixar and Shrek have fuck-all to do with it because you can play a game without voice actors (here's a pro-tip: gaming was around for years without any voice acting AT ALL), but you can't watch a movie without actors.
"he worked for 15 months on it or more"
The articles I've seen said "just over a year". Cf. Ars Technica.
01/23/09
If Rockstar are being dicks because of that then I don't know what to say. It's not like Rockstar Games is in a loss of money.
01/23/09
As to whether voice actors should be paid more, why? What unique talent does he or most other voice actors have that the game couldn't live without? Voice acting is a competitive business, and as long as there's someone willing to do it for a certain price, then that's the market rate. You are going to tell me that there is nobody in New York who could do a similar voice and wouldn't take $100,000 for a couple weeks' work?
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
"not to mention all the fame and recognition that came with it."
Before his comments, no one would've known his name. Now that he got all 'whiny bitch' on us everyone knows him. Maybe that was his plan all along...
01/23/09
01/23/09
Not defending him persay, but apparently it was because he signed a contract for a different game and only found out later it was in fact GTA4.
01/23/09
01/23/09
Come on. The guy didn't get hired because he's a famous name that was going to help Rockstar sell games. He got hired because he could do a slavic accent. That applies to probably 100,000 people in New York, if not more. Rockstar offered what they were going to offer, and if he didn't like it, they would have just found someone else.
01/23/09
01/23/09
01/23/09
But dude got 100,000 dollars. I work 40 hours a week as a IT technician and barely make HALF that for a hell of a lot more work that this guy did. He should be grateful for how much he made especially when a lot of VAs are working TGI Fidays right now.
01/23/09
Either way, you don't agree to a wage (which as you pointed out, is a a fair bit higher than the average person gets for a lot less work than the average person does) and then bitch and complain about it afterwards. If it's not enough, don't take the job.
01/23/09
Nail. Meet hammer.
Well said.
01/23/09
$100,000 over 15 months is nothing spectacular. I doubt he's starving, but it's not like he's buying mansions and sports cars with money like that.
01/23/09
And why should he be buying mansions and sports cars? It was just his voice. Even if for "15 months". There are people who work much harder and get paid much less. I'm not saying he should be "happy" with what he made, but since he agreed to it before hand, he shouldn't be complaining about it now. He should have thrown his tantrum during negotiations. It was abovious the game was going to be a hit, its a GTA.
01/23/09
That's the crux of the problem. He didn't know he was working on GTA. He believed it to be another project altogether. This doesn't change the analysis, in the end, but it's not as black and white.
01/23/09
Voice acting isn't ditch digging, but it takes a lot of training and talent. And it's not exactly easy work.
01/23/09
01/23/09