A couple of people have commented on this a couple times, but I just wanted to add that while anyone can code, talented coders are not particularly common. The top 5% can easily produce 4x as much work as your average coder, and yet they're still invisible - not because they're more common, but because programmers simply don't have celebrity status, which means they don't get bargaining power. (With very few exceptions.)
4x is an underestimate, top coders are anything between 5x and 28x more productive than the average coder. They are the greatest bargain in information technology.
Supply and demand. People negotiate their own price and if you think you are underpaid according to market value, you find yourself another job. Programmers are a dime a dozen, that's why they don't get paid all that well. And evidently this guy thought he was only worth 100k at one point or that there was a pool of potentials who were just as good as would jump at the chance for that low a sum, so there is really no reason for him to be whining about it right now.
And what the hell does easy have to do with salary?
PeekingDuck on
0
Options
Triple BBastard of the NorthMARegistered Userregular
edited June 2008
The fuck? Another one? Does everyone who does VO in a GTA game end up whining about their pay after the game is released? Isn't thisexactly what Ray Liotta did? And the dude who voiced Roman? Did anyone who worked on San Andreas bitch about money afterward? I mean, give me a fuckin' break. You signed the contract, you agreed to the terms. That means you don't get to be whiny about it and ask for more money later.
The fuck? Another one? Does everyone who does VO in a GTA game end up whining about their pay after the game is released? Isn't thisexactly what Ray Liotta did? And the dude who voiced Roman? Did anyone who worked on San Andreas bitch about money afterward? I mean, give me a fuckin' break. You signed the contract, you agreed to the terms. That means you don't get to be whiny about it and ask for more money later.
The fuck? Another one? Does everyone who does VO in a GTA game end up whining about their pay after the game is released? Isn't thisexactly what Ray Liotta did? And the dude who voiced Roman? Did anyone who worked on San Andreas bitch about money afterward? I mean, give me a fuckin' break. You signed the contract, you agreed to the terms. That means you don't get to be whiny about it and ask for more money later.
The problem he's voicing is that the contract was written by his union/guild, and he had no say in the terms contained. His problem is with the actors' union, not Rockstar.
Pardon me if this as already been said, I only read the first two pages, but where I work, artists and programmers DO earn residuals, so it isn't impossible that other studios do too.
Gihgehls on
0
Options
Triple BBastard of the NorthMARegistered Userregular
The fuck? Another one? Does everyone who does VO in a GTA game end up whining about their pay after the game is released? Isn't thisexactly what Ray Liotta did? And the dude who voiced Roman? Did anyone who worked on San Andreas bitch about money afterward? I mean, give me a fuckin' break. You signed the contract, you agreed to the terms. That means you don't get to be whiny about it and ask for more money later.
The problem he's voicing is that the contract was written by his union/guild, and he had no say in the terms contained. His problem is with the actors' union, not Rockstar.
I see. That I can understand, then. Does he actually have a legitimate gripe, though? Meaning, is there anything to be gained from his aforementioned griping?
Honestly, I can kind of see a parallel to artists and music labels - the artists don't usually read the contracts too well, or demand terms, so when their albums go multi-platinum, the label gets rich and the artists get dick. However, in that case the artists are usually creating their own songs, but in this case he's just giving a performance of other people's work.
However, without knowing other things like how much Rockstar would have been willing to pay, how much other actors in similar situations make, etc., it's hard to know how fair the contract was. Honestly, I think he was compensated pretty fairly. Due to the HUGE amount of people who supplied voice acting for this game, let alone the total number of people who worked on it, I can't see any possible way to divide royalties fairly without the percentages having to be miniscule and pointless.
The only time you get royalties is if they know ahead of time that you are singularly important to the success of the project. Even actor don't get royalties unless they were sought for the role and they knew the movie's success depended on them.
I don't see Niko getting royalties when Tom Clancy goesn't get them for games that have his name on the cover.
The only reason he doesn't is because Ubisoft gave him an assload of money upfront instead of an assload of money spread over several years (which was the prior arrangement).
What I'm saying is that I'm not sure what your point is.
I don't see Niko getting royalties when Tom Clancy goesn't get them for games that have his name on the cover.
Tom Clancy used to get royalties until he decided he'd rather have a hunourmous fuckton of cash up front, instead. Ubisoft also liked this idea and basically drove a dump truck full of Euros to his house.
I don't see Niko getting royalties when Tom Clancy goesn't get them for games that have his name on the cover.
The only reason he doesn't is because Ubisoft gave him an assload of money upfront instead of an assload of money spread over several years (which was the prior arrangement).
What I'm saying is that I'm not sure what your point is.
Isn't that the same arrangement game VAs currently have? It's not Clancy money, but it's still $100K lump-summed rather than spread out over the retail life of the game.
The point is that if the leading creative elements of games, ie the people who would get royalties in other industries, are moving away from a royalty-based payment structure, then why would the publishers move back towards it for VAs?
In Hollywood most royalties are limited to above the line (creative) elements of production, rather than below the line (technical) elements. Actors and writers get royalties, grips and sound technicians not so much (their union prefers better deals on health care and pensions). Well, here's one of the biggest above the line elements in the industry prominently moving away from royalties, not towards them.
I don't see game royalties gaining any traction without the support of big names, and that means they need guys like Clancy and Sid Meier and Ken Levine more than guys like Mike Hollick. If SAG royalty demands were only supported by actors you've never heard of and not the likes of Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts as well, they'd never get anywhere either.
I don't see game royalties gaining any traction without the support of big names, and that means they need guys like Clancy and Sid Meier and Ken Levine more than guys like Mike Hollick. If SAG royalty demands were only supported by actors you've never heard of and not the likes of Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts as well, they'd never get anywhere either.
The last time this issue came up, Samuel L. Jackson was one of the actors leading the push. And oddly enough, it revolved around a GTA game as well.
Posts
I thought that was the point.
Iriquois Pliskin
Snake Pliskin is the quintessence of over-the-top and campy.
I've no doubt that that is exactly what it is supposed to be.
4x is an underestimate, top coders are anything between 5x and 28x more productive than the average coder. They are the greatest bargain in information technology.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
And what the hell does easy have to do with salary?
I don't know where you live, but around here even just okay devs make well above the average household income.
But it's GTA! Huge moneys!
I never asked for this!
The problem he's voicing is that the contract was written by his union/guild, and he had no say in the terms contained. His problem is with the actors' union, not Rockstar.
I see. That I can understand, then. Does he actually have a legitimate gripe, though? Meaning, is there anything to be gained from his aforementioned griping?
However, without knowing other things like how much Rockstar would have been willing to pay, how much other actors in similar situations make, etc., it's hard to know how fair the contract was. Honestly, I think he was compensated pretty fairly. Due to the HUGE amount of people who supplied voice acting for this game, let alone the total number of people who worked on it, I can't see any possible way to divide royalties fairly without the percentages having to be miniscule and pointless.
I doubt this is the case for the Niko actor.
The only reason he doesn't is because Ubisoft gave him an assload of money upfront instead of an assload of money spread over several years (which was the prior arrangement).
What I'm saying is that I'm not sure what your point is.
Tom Clancy used to get royalties until he decided he'd rather have a hunourmous fuckton of cash up front, instead. Ubisoft also liked this idea and basically drove a dump truck full of Euros to his house.
Isn't that the same arrangement game VAs currently have? It's not Clancy money, but it's still $100K lump-summed rather than spread out over the retail life of the game.
The point is that if the leading creative elements of games, ie the people who would get royalties in other industries, are moving away from a royalty-based payment structure, then why would the publishers move back towards it for VAs?
In Hollywood most royalties are limited to above the line (creative) elements of production, rather than below the line (technical) elements. Actors and writers get royalties, grips and sound technicians not so much (their union prefers better deals on health care and pensions). Well, here's one of the biggest above the line elements in the industry prominently moving away from royalties, not towards them.
I don't see game royalties gaining any traction without the support of big names, and that means they need guys like Clancy and Sid Meier and Ken Levine more than guys like Mike Hollick. If SAG royalty demands were only supported by actors you've never heard of and not the likes of Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts as well, they'd never get anywhere either.
The last time this issue came up, Samuel L. Jackson was one of the actors leading the push. And oddly enough, it revolved around a GTA game as well.