So dodgy, glad this has changed.
SAG-AFTRA Reaches Tentative Agreement to End Video Game Strike (no sales royalties)
- Thread starter Mushroomer25
- Start date
So dodgy, glad this has changed.
The publishers agreed on something that is ultimately easy to provide and is giving union VAs some chump change in the process while getting to evade the big issue of residuals and having a stronger hand in any future negotiations. The publishers definitely came out of this with the long-term W, as expected.
Delusibeta
Banned
The rumours was the the strike was entirely to get royalties, and everything that was announced here had already been agreed. If true, then the strike failed completely and the union winds up with egg on its face.
Probably, since Idea Factory was not involved in this strike.
Probably, since Idea Factory was not involved in this strike.
They were going to get a 9% wage immediate increase and a $950 bonus based on the number of sessions, and now they were get no wage increase and up to a $2100 bonus based on the number of sessions.
It's not actually clear if that's meaningfully more money given voice actors get upwards of $100 an hour, and sessions are 4 hours, so even if you were only at $100 an hour, you would have gotten $720 in raise payments plus $950 in session bonuses for the 20 sessions required to hit $2100. I think you had less sessions to hit that $950 as well.
Both sides were largely okay with all the other provisions, and the "scary" sounding things the publishers brought to the table were the normal sacrificial negotiation lambs they never intended to enact.
But yes, it's possible you could view this as a 30% larger session bonus if we remove the wage increase and move that to the sessions instead (at the cost of 12 month's work).
Huge Succeeded
Banned
Is there a summary of events for this whole ordeal, or does the OP have it all? I'm sorry, I'd skim the thread to look but I'm at work and my smoke break is almost through.
The royalties thing always seemed like a dead end, because residuals aren't worth that much in gaming. I've taken royalties as payment for dev work, and as a function of how they work, the more people on the project, the more of the royalty pie you are splitting. The royalty money was so low I just walk if a royalty setup is brought up for anything involving more than like.. 4 people, because upfront pay is literally worth thousands of dollars more.
They were probably looking at like what, low 3-4 digit payouts on most projects outside of two game releases in a generation? Games have much shorter production and sales tails than media, just due to the nature of how they work. A movie can be easily replayed to audiences over and over again. A game requires matching and working hardware, which has like, 5-6 year windows at best on average. There's a reason the only money in royalties in gaming are if you are making engines, because they're more or less a near aggregate of all the competitor sales combined.
They were probably looking at like what, low 3-4 digit payouts on most projects outside of two game releases in a generation? Games have much shorter production and sales tails than media, just due to the nature of how they work. A movie can be easily replayed to audiences over and over again. A game requires matching and working hardware, which has like, 5-6 year windows at best on average. There's a reason the only money in royalties in gaming are if you are making engines, because they're more or less a near aggregate of all the competitor sales combined.
So the usual negotiation posturing from both sides then. And it sounds like there will one day be another fight on the issue of vocal stress since all that was agreed to is an "examination" of the issue (read as: we'll think about doing something if we feel like it, maybe, if we remember etc.)
The publishers seemed open to the idea, but apparently the voice actors only submitted one medical case, and potentially traded it for higher session bonuses (since publishers wouldn't need to pay for full priced half-sessions).
N21
Member
Lol, that was a crazy demand to begin with.
EDIT:
Not trying to be rude, but I don't see any company seeing voice acting as important like developing or producing.
I feel like both sides have motivation for kicking the can down the road on the issue of vocal stress but if the union actors are going to get more bonuses then I guess I understand why they potentially traded up on that issue.
BlackLagoon
Member
In original animation and commercials the residuals can bring in far more money than the original session if they do well and receive a lot of airings. Anime/dubbing doesn't have residuals beyond theatrical screenings, and even then the payments are not anywhere near what they are for original animation.
Not sure what you're going on about here. DR4's voices were done in dev's hometown of Vancouver using local talent, same as DR2. Frank was voiced by Ty Olsson (under a pseudonym) who's had a few recurring roles on shows like Battlestar Galactica, Supernatural and The 100, but he's hardly some big shot actor who could demand additional pay.
RichiRamjag
Member
Yeah, I couldnt see the pubs opening that door.
Yep. Which is why the strike was silly.
Publishers were never going to go with residuals.
Residuals were the sole reason the strike was called. Publishers were cool with other requests, but were firm on the "no residuals" thing.
SAG called a strike because it thought it had the leverage to force publishers to agree to residuals.
This agreement could have been signed last year, with no stoppage of work for any SAG VAs had the union not forced a strike.
BudokaiMR2
Member
Sales based royalties was never going to happen. Most companies don't even give incentives to their actual developers based on sales performance. In some cases, the biz dev/sales people might get bonuses but that's all I have ever seen.
UnderWaterTree
Member
glad a deal was worked out at least they got something
Marvel vs Capcom infinite
NinjaCoachZ
Member
Is a union production.
What? Then why all the voice changes?
NinjaCoachZ
Member
On Marvel's side the voices were changed to
Laura Bailey didn't reprise Chun Li likely because she was busy with mocap on Farpoint and/or Uncharted: Lost Legacy. Her replacement (Ashly Burch) is a union actress. Everyone else on the Capcom side is the same as MVC3.
Glad they did... it would have never ended otherwhise
. Don't know why actors/voice actors/performers feel more entitled to royalties compared to the actual devs who shed tears, blood and sweat working on these games. :/
MaverickHunterAsh
Member
Damn shame. The voice actors deserve way more than what they got. There's so little genuine, informed appreciation for the craft in general, especially in the gaming sphere.
Not surprising, though. People suck. :/
Not surprising, though. People suck. :/
Tertullian
Member
Yeah, it always seemed like they didn't really have the leverage to go all the way. There are way more people who would love to break into voice acting than there are publishers desperate for competent voice actors. And the game industry didn't seem to stumble even for a moment due to the strike.
Do you mean they deserved the royalties for each sales? More than the actual devs... -_-
Also... "little genuine, informed appreciation for the craft in general", are you kidding? Critics and gamers alike praise actors/actresses when they do an amazing job in a game. These people are not nominated for paperweight meaningless awards each year. They are nominated because both the industry and the public/fans vote for the actors and actresses who did a great performance in their favorite games of the year. VGX and Joystick always have awards for the great performance of actors and actresses in games.
SAG-AFTRA is not the only union where video games companies can get decent actors/voice actors and/or performers.
MaverickHunterAsh
Member
Not more, but voice actors deserve and are entitled to some form of sales-based royalties, yes. Please don't twist what I said into an either/or situation; my believing voice actors deserve sales-based royalties does not mean I think developers don't deserve them. They both do - and developers probably deserve a larger cut of any such royalties, sure - but voice actors certainly deserve royalties as well.
Full disclosure: My dad is a well-known voice actor so my position here is obviously biased, but it's a position informed by what voice actors actually go through on a daily basis/what they sacrifice for their craft and not just an approximation of what I think I know.
And yet many of those same critics and gamers won't turn out or speak up in support of these voice actors when it comes time for payday. Funny how that works! It's almost as if the droves of entitled gamers out there who blame "lazy devs" for everything they dislike don't actually care how the games they love get made or who gets stepped on or underpaid in the process as long as they get to play. ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Leon S. Kennedy
Member
Did they get a limit on the maximum number of hours per session? There were complaints of vocal chord damage due to extreme vocalizing for long sessions.
Why do you say that?
Voice actors should be paid for their work, but why should they get extra money in the future? They're already been paid.
If a voice actor is taking a risk on a project and working for little-to-no-pay upfront, in exchange for royalties in the back end, that's understandable. No different than someone at a startup who takes equity instead of pay, as they're taking on some of the risk.
But if a voice actor is paid a fair wage for the time worked, then there is no argument for royalties based on video game sales.
MaverickHunterAsh
Member
Because a huge part of the reason some characters become so popular is because of the actor's voice associated with them. That is an undeniable fact. If the argument can be made that a character or IP has legs predominantly or even partially because of an actor's contributions, that actor deserves royalties - period. (By the same token, I would say that if such an argument cannot be reasonably made, that actor isn't entitled to royalties. I'm not saying all developers should have to pay all actors crazy royalties despite the importance, length, or size of their role within a game.) And of course, many major publishers know this but want to have their cake and eat it too - that is, they want to profit off of these actors' craft and hard work and increase their own profit margins by not giving these actors their due compensation. This is all, like, a freshman-level business class on "how to dick over the people who work for you by paying them as little as possible."
It's no great mystery why the suits at any given developer would want to hang onto as many of their profits as possible by not properly compensating everyone who had a hand in generating those profits, but that sure doesn't make it right.
You can talk all day about what someone deserves or what's right but the publishers basically made the union look weak in all future negotiations by saddling them with an old deal that they simply took anyway. What is "right" typically has nothing to do with business negotiations and it's kind of naive to leverage this emotional argument on a forum focused on the industry. As others have said, the union will have egg on their face for a while.
In that case, you are right. Both the devs and the VA should have royalties for their hard work. The only problem I could see with this is publishers would focus only on the reduced profitability of the new upcoming games, only if they did allow to give royalties to both devs and performers.
Btw... is your dad Nolan North? XD
And yet many of those same critics and gamers won't turn out or speak up in support of these voice actors when it comes time for payday. Funny how that works! It's almost as if the droves of entitled gamers out there who blame "lazy devs" for everything they dislike don't actually care how the games they love get made or who gets stepped on or underpaid in the process as long as they get to play. ¯\_(ツ
Actors/VA/Performers are not the only people who are underpaid in the video game industry, especially for the amount of work devs put into these games.
MaverickHunterAsh
Member
It's really unfortunate, but you're not wrong about any of this. :/ Good post.
Agreed. And?
No, really. And...? Again, you seem oddly preoccupied with this strange idea that it has to be one or the other and that, when I say voice actors deserve royalties, I am somehow also saying that developers don't. I am not saying that at all. They both deserve them.
BlackLagoon
Member
The view of SAG for traditional media has been that the actor retains ownership of their performance, the producer is merely buying a license to use it for it's initial showing. For subsequent showings the producer has to pay a gradually declining residual fee. This is an important source of income and predictability for actors, especially the majority of them that aren't big stars and spend much of their work hours unpaid, auditioning for parts they don't get. This strike was their attempt at getting something similar established for video games.
Hmm, thanks.
BudokaiMR2
Member
One reason a lot of people take issue with VAs getting something like sale based royalty kick-backs is because they already have a ton of protections and safety nets thanks to being unionized.
There is literally 0% chance that developers would get something similar as there are not unions in place to fight for them.
So while it's great to say that you are for both, the reality is that there is only one side that has someone fighting for those bonuses,
with developers/artists having absolutely no means to make something like that happen. So it honestly comes off as a bit of a hollow or empty statement IMO, even if it isn't intended to.
So yeah, as someone working for a developer I would personally be a bit pissed if I knew that VAs were going to be profiting more off my own work than I ever would.
I know it probably sounds a bit selfish but I got kids and shit to feed too and no union fighting for me!
Mockingbird
Member
How does this compare to Japan? Anyone know?
Maybe you should organize, then?
BudokaiMR2
Member
A nice thought, but it will never happen IMO.
Unions are losing power across the board in most industries, and there is never any shortage of young graduates who want into the game industry.
Japanese VAs/artists have it fairly well, and have a ton of negotiating power through their agents.
They don't get sales based royalties, but there are usually one time payments for any further use of their work. So if they did work on a game 20 years ago that is now ported to PS4, the developer usually has to write a check to them for a certain amount. This extends to things like using their voice/songs in promotional material like trailers and everything so they can get quite a few kick-backs from a single project.
cj_iwakura
Member
Also, Japanese VAs and their characters are considered a major bond, practically inseparable. Fans will notice.
The amount of thirsty entry level prospects ready to take your job in the game industry make that unrealistic. The level of walkouts required would be unprecedented.
This isn't meant to downplay the purposes of organizing and striking, it's just a reality of the game industry. Publishers have concentrated immense power in their sphere and everyone else pays.
BudokaiMR2
Member
Yup, it's important to remember that SAG-AFTRA is not just a union for VA.
Game voice actors were just lucky enough to be counted among one of the most influential and powerful labor unions on the planet thanks to the fact that they obviously work on movie and television projects as well.
It's not like they started a separate movement and had to fight and organize themselves, which would be necessary for any other game development talent to unionize.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Actually Marvel's side is weird
Iron Man, Hawkeye and Captain America had the same actor as 3 which were the Avengers EMH actors, (Neither is the current voice of the characters)
Current Marvel Captain America voice is the same actor as Chris Redfield(Roger Craig Smith)
Spiderman, Thor and Gamora are their latest voices
Tal Shiar Agent
Banned
They were never going to, they are lucky to have gotten what they've gotten. They were bargaining from a very weak position.
America needs better labor laws.
REmake 2 suffered from this, IIRC.
Either they haven't done VA so the old cast was never called for production purposes, or they skipped on the cast that did earlier entries because of the strike.
I forget if it was Leon or Claire's VA from prior entries that alluded it was the strike that affected potential VA work.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Claire's VA said it had nothing to do with it,Its just Capcom being Capcom.
This year alone Chris Redfield has had 3 separate English voice actors, with MvCI being the longest going
Claire's VA was already changed back in 2015 to someone who used pseudonym.
SpikedGunner
Member
Sucks about the royalties thing, but if they were able to get some better conditions (like better transparency) that it wasn't all for naught.
I guess it depends on the actor, because I remember hearing some getting paid really low that they have to take a second job, but that might have been hearsay.
I think for Cap, it was just so RCS didn't have pull double duty, could be wrong.
Current Hawkeye is Troy Baker, who didn't not voice him nor Nova.
For Iron man, I guess it was easier to get back his EMH actor rather than Adrian Pasdar...though I usually see Matt Mercer take over these days.
But yea, Marvel is a bit weird...I miss Cockney Rocket though.
I guess it depends on the actor, because I remember hearing some getting paid really low that they have to take a second job, but that might have been hearsay.
I think for Cap, it was just so RCS didn't have pull double duty, could be wrong.
Current Hawkeye is Troy Baker, who didn't not voice him nor Nova.
For Iron man, I guess it was easier to get back his EMH actor rather than Adrian Pasdar...though I usually see Matt Mercer take over these days.
But yea, Marvel is a bit weird...I miss Cockney Rocket though.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Capcom fans also notice. lol