An addendum to the basic rule: A fair and reasonable price is also what the seller is willing to accept. If a buyer offers me $10,000 for my home, is that "fair and reasonable" just because that is what the buyer is willing to pay? Hardly. If the seller is only willing to accept $125,000 for his house, but the buyer doesn't want to pay that, then the buyer needs to find a house that only costs $10,000. THAT is how capitalism works.

Like I said, actors are not obligated to accept work if it doesn't pay their standard rates.

Thanks.

Everyone is entitled to there own standard rate, however unlike selling a house, contracting is like running a race with many other professionals all offering similar things, if prices get too high, just as we have seen on many other fronts away from voice acting, people will look to affordable alternatives, if its outsourcing or hiring people away from unions/etc.

You say it shouldnt be compared to other arts within gamedev on any effort/time/skill scale, yet it will be, because at the end of the day, your average tightass manager wont be taking losses to HIS royalties so he can get better voice acting, when he could make massive potential savings by hiring others, or just untrained, or put the money into other areas of need (gameplay anyone?). While im not denying a professional voice actor could bring alot to the table, for the time being the position is too easily filled to be a problem.

Cheers

Everyone is entitled to there own standard rate, however unlike selling a house, contracting is like running a race with many other professionals all offering similar things, if prices get too high, just as we have seen on many other fronts away from voice acting, people will look to affordable alternatives, if its outsourcing or hiring people away from unions/etc.

You say it shouldnt be compared to other arts within gamedev on any effort/time/skill scale, yet it will be, because at the end of the day, your average tightass manager wont be taking losses to HIS royalties so he can get better voice acting, when he could make massive potential savings by hiring others, or just untrained, or put the money into other areas of need (gameplay anyone?). While im not denying a professional voice actor could bring alot to the table, for the time being the position is too easily filled to be a problem.

Cheers

Quote: Original post by VoiceActor
[...addendum...]

The addendum is irrelevant and unneeded. A "price" is always set by the seller.

Quote: Original post by Farmergnome
[...]

Your argument doesn't make sense in light of the fact that studios are willing to pay six-figure salaries to celebrity actors for use of their likenesses and/or voices (e.g., David Duchovny in XIII) whereas the typical voice actor will charge a thousand times less.

Actors Eye Video-Game Voices

David Duchovny Talks Going Virtual

Hollywood Actors Getting in the Game

Not everyone is entitled to their own standard rate. Quality assurance, programmers, artists, etc., ... these are seen as commodity resources. Remember: supply and demand.

Celebreties are the exception in this case, its like saying someone hires <instert AAA BIG NAME DESIGNER/PROGRAMMER/ARTIST HERE>, its going to cost you alot more reguardless, its like comparing carmack to a newbie programmer, ofcorse theres going to be a cost difference reguardless of profession, dont assume its just voice acting.

The difference is they CAN demand that much, since they have something unique to sell, and they have proven themselves to be top of there game/have a following of fans. However a standard professional in any field has little barganing power compared to that, and while voice acting is more specialised, there is more than enough people out there to do it, so until there is more demand for it, or alot of voice actors leave for other arenas, there will always be enough people to fill the ranks, as it is with all gamedev jobs at the moment.

Quote:

Sure, it's sad when something generates a huge chunk of cash and the money doesn't actually get to those who produced it, but that's business.

Except that as a whole, the game industry actually loses money. Basically, There are more people trying to enter into to it then the market can support.

As with all wages, (beyond minimum wage), the amount is set by market rate of the job, not its importance. Hence, programmers tend to make much more then artists only because there are fewer good ones in relation to the number of people needed, not because they are more important to a project. Actors get payed 7 digits because that is the market rate, not because they deserve it.

Royalities and other incentives are exactly that - incentives designed to get someone to work for you, and to work harder. If there were a surpless of talented professionals, I gaurentee companies wouldn't offer royalities at all. In fact, most game companies have already shifted to more salary based compensation since workers demand more consitency. That is, most of us would rather have a solid base salary and bonus's because when you work on a game project for 4 years, you can't deal with the variance of a game sucking.

$278.00 an hour, there already over paid IMO.

Like I've been saying all along -- this whole thing is quite simple:

If game producers don't want to pay residuals, then don't hire union actors. It's as simple as that. By ALL means, go ahead and use whomever you want. The office secretary, the cleaning crew, whomever.

If the voicework in games is just not important enough to pay actors' residuals, then why have games employed professional actors at all...ever?

I really don't understand what there is to discuss here. Union actors have a price -- residual payments. (And TINY ones at that.) Don't want to pay residuals? Then don't use union actors. Simple.

And maybe it's unfair, but the hard truth is that union actors stick together -- from the big stars down to the unemployed. We have a camaraderie. If union actors strike video games, then the big stars won't do them either. This is the other "ace" in actors' hands -- and the star system wasn't created by actors...it was created by the public. Not one major star has ever crossed their own picket line in any previous actors' union strikes. Is this an unfair advantage that actors' have? Sure it is. But like the old saying goes, life isn't always fair.

Anyway, if game producers don't want to pay residuals, then by all means -- use someone else to voice the games. No hurt feelings here. But nobody is obligated to do work for less than they want to be paid for it. Nobody.

What I don't understand is how voice-actors hope to support their argument by drawing a paralell between themselves and the film industry. Blockbuster income is usually heavily related to featured actors, game income isn't. Simple as that. John Cleese did the VO for a character in Jade Empire but in the end did it make much, if any difference for games sold? Don't think so. Reason being that joe customer doesn't really care wether he's hearing Sam Jackson or some equally skilled unknown actor, he's relating to the cg entity he's seeing on-screen anyway. Actors in games can never carry the same weight as they do in movies because they lose most of their market value when their mug is not flashing around on-screen.

Quote: Anyway, if game producers don't want to pay residuals, then by all means -- use someone else to voice the games. No hurt feelings here. But nobody is obligated to do work for less than they want to be paid for it. Nobody.

Sure, voice-actors can ask for the moon all they want. Like you say, they have the right to. Just don't expect comparisment to the movie industry to get them anywhere. Far as I can tell, games have shown not to have to rely much on VO-casting for marketing anyway. Just my (uneducated) guess.

Can you explain to me why actors receive residuals for animation features? Television cartoons? Voiceovers in commercials? Radio voiceovers?

Their "mugs" aren't there...only their voices. But actors are paid residuals for those.

Why should video games be exempt? What is so "special" about video games that actors should waiver their standard fee of residuals for this "special" industry?

Thanks for your response! ;)