Forum - View topicPotential Video Game Voice Acting Strike
|
|
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Dessa
 Posts: 4438 |
|
|||
|
Wil Wheaton just posted this about why he voted to authorize a union strike.
On the subject of the residuals, I personally don't think voice acting work really deserves residuals. But that's besides the point, with what else Wil reveals. The work day stuff? That the companies won't even consider the union's proposals? Ridiculous. Not having stunt coordinators for, well, stuntwork? That should be illegal. Being fined for un-defined inattentiveness? And not only fining the union because an agent doesn't send you to an audition? Or forcing the agent to be fired because you don't WANT to go on an audition, which would, in turn, prevent you from working? This makes me not want to support any of the companies that the union is against. What do you guys think? |
||||
|
||||
Cam0
 Posts: 4926 |
|
|||
|
I agree about residuals. They get paid for voice acting. Success of the game should have no impact on their wages.
But having to voice act till you voice wears out? That shouldn't be allowed. Fining for being late or "inattentive"? That's downright silly. You shouldn't be allowed to fine them. What do normal employers do with employees who don't show up for work? From the blog post:
I doubt that is what "inattentive" means here. I'd imagine it's more akin to refusing to work. |
||||
|
||||
|
Dessa
Posts: 4438 |
|
|||
That's the thing. It's so poorly worded and vague, that a vindictive producer could claim ANY distracted behavior is "inattentive". |
||||
|
||||
|
Cam0
Posts: 4926 |
|
|||
|
I just assumed that suggestion wasn't necessarily in its final form. I assumed the representative (or whoever suggested it) of those employers wouldn't suggest a loophole for the employers to abuse since possibly among those employers are large, even multimillion dollar, companies.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Dessa
Posts: 4438 |
|
|||
|
Considering that what the video game companies want basically boils down to "Agent A didn't have Voice Actor X audition for us, so now you have to fire them, and all of their clients aren't allowed to do union work anymore", I'm not so sure...
|
||||
|
||||
|
GrayArchon
Posts: 393 |
|
|||
Take it with a grain of salt. The article while interesting, is basically Wil commenting on an email that SAG-AFTRA sent out. One where SAG-AFTRA is attempting to convince it's members to vote to authorize a strike. That it's one sided and casts the development companies in the worst possible light should not be surprising. I highly doubt it's as simple as "the game makers rejected them without even looking at them or discussing them". Considering that a quick look into the comments section turns up this post purportedly from the other side, which opens with
The other things the email talks about likely have some logic behind them, or are attempts to address some problematic behavior. Obviously they're attempts intended to be most favorable to the game development companies, but they likely aren't random power grabs for the sake of it. |
||||
|
||||
AiddonValentine
 Posts: 2341 |
|
|||
|
And now the industry is suddenly seeing what happens when you want to push all these "cinematic" and "story-based" games. The thing is, it wasn't the actors who were pushing these in the first place, they just took roles like any other job. The designers and companies are the ones who kept bragging about how much voice over they had in their titles (like how Star Wars: The Old Republic holds the world record for VO) and how vital it was to the narrative and characters. They're the ones who shoved Nolan North and Troy Baker to the front and would gush whenever they got a major named actor on the cast. And now they're forced to see that the actors they use might want to be treated a little better. They don't get to create this environment and then complain about it.
This is going to be something companies will have to seriously think about going forward. If they want to continue their beloved pet projects with all these talented actors using extensive VO, they're going to have to learn to treat them better. It seems like the standard is when they're bragging about VO, they're doing it out of respect for the ability of the actor, but so they show off. Like how they always gush about how much time and money they spent on rendering or whatever. It's a passive-aggressive way to say "Look at how awesome we are!" It's going to be an interesting event as this whole thing is negotiated |
||||
|
||||
|
DranzerX13
Posts: 84 Location: USA |
|
|||
|
Does this affects anime as well, because some video game VA's voice in anime as well.
I wonder if this is related to the strike... English Bushiroad put in their description of Future Card Buddyfight Hundred animation episode 25: "Kindly note that Episode 26 onwards will be dubbed in Japanese with English subtitles." Future Card Buddyfight is simuldubbed every week on YouTube, and simuldubs are recorded at least a week in advance. |
||||
|
||||
|
Dessa
Posts: 4438 |
|
|||
The strike won't affect anime at all. However, depending on how the negotiations go, it could affect anime. One of the things that the companies reportedly want is to be able to force the union to fire an agent who doesn't submit their actors for roles the companies think they should be submitted for. If the agent is fired, then ALL of the actors under that agent are, in effect, fired as well. Which means that they'd be unable to do any union productions unless/until they can get under another agent who is still part of the union. |
||||
|
||||
|
GrayArchon
Posts: 393 |
|
|||
That's a pretty ridiculous "demand" that the game dev studios are never going to get. I can kind of guess at their logic. The studios probably suspect agents of gaming the audition process by deliberately not submitting actors the studios want to work with, and instead submitting actors the agents want to get the job. Perhaps they've even encountered it upon occasion in the real world. I'm sure it would be particularly annoying to ask for a veteran actor who you know can do the job well, be told only rookies are available, spend extra time and money working with the person who isn't as good at the job; only to find out later the veteran was available and willing, the agent just wanted to build up the rookie's portfolio some. The game studios would want some stiff penalties in place to ensure that agents don't do that, and that they can get the actors they want to get. But as said, as described it's far too ridiculous to be accepted. The union will never stand for being fined for an agent doing something they're likely to do in the normal course of doing their job. Nor will they accept outsiders being able to destroy the career of one of the agents they work with. So I wouldn't worry about that. |
||||
|
||||
|
#843666
Posts: 8 |
|
|||
|
This reminds me of Ray Liotta getting mad at Rockstar for not paying him for GTA VC. Then the VA for Niko Bellic from GTA IV too.
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group