Yea but that applies to a certain extent and it highly depends on the game. But the thing is, if the devs don't get paid well, then the game itself might be poor. Its one thing to have poor VA or no VA at all but its another thing to have the gameplay itself be poor. Reviewers can dock some marks for poor VA but that won't break the game but what will is having poor gameplay and bugs. And not to mention that developers work on post content where as VA does not unless its like specific content which requires VA which doesn't apply to all games...

And yes, I do want the people that are more essential to the development of the game to get more than the ones who aren't as essential... I am not saying that everyone shouldn't get paid decently but to me, it doesn't make any sense for a person that isn't as comparatively essential to the development of the game to get paid the same as a person who is.

Yea but games vs movies/tv shows are completely different things. Like when companies pay for the VA in movies/TV shows, they pay for the actors + VA. And the actors are one of the essential draws of the movie/TV show. Like for example, Leonardo Dicaprio made this documentary about climate change very recently and it is on youtube for free. Now I have zero cares about documentaries but since he is in it and he is one of my favorite actors, I watched the documentary. But if the ND's Voice actor from Uncharted did a VA in a different game, would I care? Is that the reason I would buy the game? No... And of course, as with actors, they are also paying for the acting and etc. Also not to mention that there isn't coding and etc involved in making movies like there is in making games since all you are doing is just watching which makes the actors/VA become more crucial to the medium.

Where as with games, it is a different story. With Nathen Drake for example, I am not buying Uncharted due to the Actor but I am buying it because of what the developers created. I liked the gameplay and I liked Nathen Drake who is mostly created by developers. The VA comes in for his voice and there is of course some acting but they aren't as essential as the developers who are making the game. We have seen this with MGS V where the VA got replaced and most people didn't seem to care outside of the minority. Now imagine of Johnny Depp got replaced in Pirates of the Caribbean sequel. Gl with that is what people would say.

More or less, in movies/TV shows, due to me only watching it, VA/Acting becomes very crucial. But when I am playing a game, the gameplay itself becomes far more crucial. Like you don't experience input lag, user interaction, bugs and etc when you watch a movie but when you play a game, you do and depending on the developer, it is either a positive experience or a negative one.

We're still getting to that point where devs>VA's rather than being the same. Again my earlier point where you may as well make it out that devs get paid a metric ton more than VA's and then we reach back to the same situation where VA's don't get paid enough. Are you as interested and into voice acting like I am?, because you sound like you're more for the dev side of gaming than generally for VA's. I understand both sides, but I also know VA's really do get underpaid for what they do and they only have a single set of chords, devs have hands and the means to keep on working. When a VA loses their voice or it gets damaged, their entire life career is shot, at least with devs you have multiple projects to come up with or apply for, VA's don't get that luxury when their only means of work are damaged.

Most add on content these days in the form of "expansions" does involve VA work, unless it's shiny weapons, in which case those happen with all sorts of games, but you do realize that a lot of expansion content does actually include VA work in the form of returning characters and even new ones. Look at Starcraft and the whole announcer pack deal going on, they had to get those VA's to return to a game that's been around for nearly 6 years now. See I disagree with your viewpoint because I don't think it's essentially being fair at all to those who put their chords on the line and work for it. Your viewpoint is telling me that VA's don't really matter all that much when they actually do matter like it or not. I know you're not as passionate for voice acting as I am, but at least understand how important voice acting is to any industry rather than brushing it off as mediocre and non important.

You're different from me then, because I tend to buy games that can also have popular VA's attached to them. Take Steve Blum and Bullet Storm for example, I mostly bought into the game due to him being involved, same goes for Tara Strong. Gameplayis an absolute must btw, so yes gameplay has 100% got to be there with the game, if it isn't then it's a bad game.

With VA in TV shows, that's also a must because they are based on those acting. I still hold gameplay and VA in the same league, if the VA is terrible, then high chances are I am not going to find the game as fun or memorable. 

I agree with you. They're just fighting for what they think they deserve. Jim Sterling said it perfectly last week, here.

Yeah, I've seen that and I agree. I don't think people necessarily realize that this isn't about voice actors getting more than everyone else, it's about them getting a decent compensation for their work. That doesn't mean that other people working in the industry shouldn't also receive more, but it has to start somewhere if the video game industry is going to become a healthy place to work for people.

Well... I do play Nintendo games which have hardly any voice acting so maybe it is a lot harder for me to understand where you are really coming from. Cause like, I am not saying VA's aren't important, I just don't find them as essential to the game as game developers. When ever I bought a game, I never thought about the VAs even once. I have thought about the gameplay, the story, the art style and etc but not really about the quality of the VA. There is no way I can see that VAs are as equal as game devs as far as making a game goes. So lets just agree to disagree.

And I havn't really seen that many, you have Cod with its mappacks and skins, you have BF with its mappacks and skins, you have GTA with its modes and etc. Like sure there are some such as Witcher 3 but even in that, there are more skins and cosmetics and other dlc than VA. The devs had to make the world, make the characters, make them all work and etc where as the only thing VA did is VA. And I get the whole argument of if they lose their voice, they can't work in the industry anymore but it is not the duty of the company to take care of that. It is the job of the VA to ensure they don't lose their voices. They made their choice to pursue this carrier path and they should know how to keep their voices in check. I do acknowledge that it matters but I will not say that it matters as much as the gameplay and etc does.

I actually have like no idea or either of them are. Glad I searched Tara Strong though, just damn.

Anyway, lets just agree to disagree

Chazore said:

I'm sorry but I cannot agree to disagree. You're still taking it in as though VA's are on their tod and not as important, you aren't moving from that stance and I can see that. I know you don't see eye to eye but I wish you would consider the importance of VA in general. Maybe in a few years you'll see or perhaps never at all (which would be a shame in terms of understanding).

The fuck?

@Bolded part, well of course it will, because it shows that you aren't on the same level of understand that I am =P.

I've followed a lot of VA's for years from movies to tv shows and even to games. Did you know Reinhardt'sVA also plays Dredd in the Judge Dredd animated Superfiend short? (made by the same guy who made the 2012 Dredd film), or that Reaper's VA is the same one who played Blu From Foster's home for imginary friends? (seriously hard for me to unhear lol).

You say that you claim to not be saying that they aren't as important, but go on to say that they aren't "essential" and yet we see plenty of games around us today that have more VA going for them than the old NES days where there was just bleeps and music in the background. ME:A will have prominant VA's, the enxt ES and Fallout game will have VA's, practically most AAA games will have VA's, heck even some indie games have them and there are even some dedicated Skyrim modders out there who have some voice work for their own mods. Those that tend not to contain VA's are the very low budget games and games like Pokemon which have never bothered with VA's. There is still a large majority of games out there today that require voice work in one way or another, from announcing to storytelling to playing a character or even singing in the background.

The voice is a powerful tool, just as much as the eyes and the hands, the chords are not lesser than the hands, otherwise we'd be talking more with our fists and our pencils than going out and using our voices to get things done.

@Bolded 2, well that's you and not me. I've got a bunch of mates that come up to me and let me know that they thought someone in a game sounded like someone they knew, thenw e look up said eprson and find out it was someone we've known beforehand and reminisce about their past works and even their upcoming ones too. You and I look at VA very differently though, but the thing is, you really have to understand just how important the voice can be for something, it isn't a thing you just disregard on a whim as nothing (otherwise we could do this for plays and acting in general since silent films at one time were at the top of the charts a century and a half ago).

I'm sorry but I cannot agree to disagree. You're still taking it in as though VA's are on their tod and not as important, you aren't moving from that stance and I can see that. I know you don't see eye to eye but I wish you would consider the importance of VA in general. Maybe in a few years you'll see or perhaps never at all (which would be a shame in terms of understanding).

They get paid for what they do. Just like most jobs in the world. They actually get paid more than most jobs in the world. Should builders who help build a store get paid more later if the store becomes popular? No, they have done their job and gotten paid for it. This is just actors wanting more for doing nothing.

The problem is, the pay itself isn't necessarily very high. The only voice actors who actually make more money than the US average are established veterans who've been doing the job for decades. The average yearly salary for a voice actor in the US is roughly $29,000, while the overall average yearly salary in the us is arond $50,000. So, them getting paid more than most isn't true.