Gaming Voice Actor Strike?

^ Wait, can you explain the another contract thing if possible?

YOU RUINED THE NEAT NUMBER

YOU RUINED THE NEAT NUMBER

Okay, so when the strike started, SAG-AFTRA released two new video game contracts (a regular contract and one for low-budget games), which the struck companies refused to sign.
During the strike, 24 other companies signed them to continue working with union actors.
The strike ended when the union and the companies compromised on another contract which settled on a different pay structure.

Now let's show the actual contracts!

• Here's the 2016 SAG-AFTRA Video Game Agreement. The terms include everything the union wanted from the strike.
• Here's the 2016 Low Budget Video Game Agreement. The main differences are:
  • The voice actors can voice as many characters as you need during the 4-hour session
    • (The original contract allows up to 4 characters per 4-hour session)
  • Each voice actor works for 6 months or less and will not do motion-capture
  • Budget must be under $250,000
  • One bonus payment for every 500,000 copies sold, capped at 2 million.
• And finally, here's a pamphlet of the 2017 Video Game Agreement. You already know this one.

Keep in mind, game companies can sign any of these contracts to use union actors.

"Everbody got that?"

Edited by PSColdFire on Oct 27th 2020 at 2:57:45 PM

Spaceballs the reply!

Hm yeah, thanks, pretty good summary.

^^^ LEL

^^ Ah, thanks for the summary!

edited 8th Nov '17 8:16:17 PM by onyhow

So why is there so much complaining in the comment section on IGN then?

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11/08/the-video-game-voice-actors-strike-is-officially-over

Were the demands supposed that unreasonable? Mind you, I have serious disdain towards the users of IGN since they're the equivalent of Youtube comments that try to sound like they know their shit but in reality they're just a bunch of pretentious punks but I want to have a better understanding on this complaint since V.A's demand didn't seem all that unreasonable.

edited 8th Nov '17 8:44:30 PM by agent-trunks

The demand for residuals was the only unreasonable request they had, since while a character like Nathan Drake is quite famous thanks to Nolan North's voice acting, why should he get residuals for Drake and not any of the animators who worked on him or the programmers who got the character to actually work?

Well, I can see where this is going. Very much regretting it now.

The residual demands weren't "unreasonable" so much as they would set a precedent that could convince devs to unionize and demand residuals themselves, which would cut into the executives' paychecks.

My opinion on why they are unreasonable is because there are a lot of people who work on a character in video games, so it's not fair for only one person to get residuals for that while everybody else gets nothing.

To use the Nathan Drake example a lot of people were involved in bringing the character to life, why should only one person get the reward for the whole package?

edited 8th Nov '17 9:52:12 PM by Shaoken

I think Irrose's point is that they weren't demanding that. Nolan North didn't want to be the only one earning residuals from Drake. But since this was a voice actor strike, they only had the power to demand residuals for voice actors. Other groups might have used it as a stepping stone to get residuals of their own, which is likely why the execs fought against it so hard.

Okay, I can understand that point.

And I was only using Nolan North / Nathan Drake because it was the most recognisable character/voice actor combo I know.

Jesus Christ, looking past the last few pages, I completely regret reviving this thread.

Why regret it? Discussion is always healthy, even if it doesn't sway in the direction one desires.

edited 11th Nov '17 6:02:26 AM by SgtRicko

Because it starting to sound too political for me which is always a volatile topic. I suppose it can't be help but I think voice actors under appreciated as it is. When it comes something like Subbing Versus Dubbing chances people are going to prefer the subs & berate dubbers for not watching whatever medium it is in it's natural language. I'm not going to pretend that dubs are infallible, but when I keep hearing how "bad" a dub is & find out that it isn't nearly as bad they make it out to be, I get very much frustrated. It's also one of my 5 reasons why I gave up on anime.

edited 11th Nov '17 7:17:55 PM by agent-trunks

That's a pretty bad reason to give up on anime. It'd make more sense to just stop going on forums.

I said 5 reasons & I could care less whether it's legit or not

Yeah well I wasn't talking about all five, was I?

This is going off the rails, and since the strike is over, that combo points to this thread probably needing to die a quiet death.