| sethnintendo said: Looks like Nintendo strategy of having few if any voice actors is paying off. |
That seriously needs to change.
Royalties they want which is redicolous. The devoopers of the games deserve royalties more than these overused voice actors.
Also its only the english speaking voice actors. The rest of the world doesnt care about this movement. Just make more german voice acting please.
.
Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 12 November 2019
| ClassicGamingWizzz said: When no one calls them to voice games anymore and start to get new people that want to start a career they will open their eyes and will stop with the greed. |
This 100%. If they get what they want, with this one move the current core actors are finished.
The only time it would matter is for popular characters across multiple games, like Master Chief/Drake etc. In nearly all cases there's plenty of voice actors who could fill the role, and I've not seen people sell a video game by advertising voice actors much outside of Liam neeson in fallout 3 and Patrick Stewart/Sean Bean in Oblivion, none of which are primarily voice actors.
TheGreatGamerGod said:
|
I'm not so sure. Hollywood has a long history of blackballing folks who don't play ball. I can easily see the union doing everything in their power to make sure anyone who crosses the picket fence here will have a hard time finding work outside of videogames in the future, and even in videogames once this strike gets resolved. That would cut down on the number of applicants, barring folks content to do only short-term stints.
But then maybe I'm just overestimating the union's reach.
As much as I appreciate the work voice actors do, I think some of the requests of this strike shouldn't be fulfilled. Namely the royalties from game sales.
Unlike Hollywood actors, video game actors usually don't play a key role in game sales.
Honestly, I think developers should get more income via royalties before voice actors do.
"Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
-Samuel Clemens
It comes down to the fact that they are not the lead like an actor would be. Case in point David Hayter losing out to Sutherland in MGS V, turns out it didnt matter the developers define Snake, not his voice actor. They arent treated like Hollywood actors because they arent Hollywood actors. That being said, I do think they should be treated better, but the terms i've seen outlined are ridiculous.
Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda!!!!
pokoko said:
Actors in film are usually tied very closely to the commercial success of a project. Tom Cruise is worth millions, perhaps billions of dollars more than a no-name actor who is just as good at acting. In gaming, the development studios are the stars. People buy games because of who made them, not because of who provided the voices. Logic should have more do to with this than "that's how it's done in other industries." That's not being inconsistent, that's just being realistic. In my opinion, the argument that they deserve it is the argument that has to prove itself. Just because it's done that way elsewhere does not mean it should be done that way everywhere. Why do voice actors in games deserve residuals? "Because live action," or, "because artists deserve more than everyone else," fail for me as reasons. |
Wonderful.
Imagine the original VA's for RE1 and SO2 demanding residuals. Ha!
spurgeonryan said:
I was told by many users here that say they only buy some games for the voice actors. |
Name 'em and shame 'em.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
