J2games
07-01-2005, 09:30 AM
I was reading an article this morning about Hollywood actors in video games and them voting on a new contract which would increase the pay they receive for the work they do (article clip attached below.)
It got me to thinking, "Do I really care if the games contains a Hollywood Star likeness? or Voice?"
And honestly, I don't! Not if it will make the cost of the games more expensive. Or having the Hollywood type is just a smokescreen for another crappy game!
What happened to spending money on important things like gameplay, graphics, storyline... maybe I'm truely just an oldschool gamer. PacMan didn't need voiceovers by someone famous to make it a great game. Neither did 100's of other games.
Do you think we should care about actors in our games? Does it actually add anything to the game itself? Or is it just another step further down the path of advertising IN, ON and Around the games we play?
I'd be curious to hear others opinions.
J2Games.com
"LOS ANGELES - Actors who provide voices for video game characters will vote on whether to accept a new contract with producers that increases wages but does not pay residuals on the most popular games.
The Screen Actors Guild national board voted Wednesday to hold a referendum on the contract, which was previously rejected by its executive committee. Ballots will be mailed to the approximately 1,900 SAG members who work in video games.
Actors currently are paid a minimum of $556 per four-hour work session and are often required to voice more than one character per session. The new 3 1/2-year agreement would increase the rate to $759 by 2008, with an immediate 25 percent increase to $695."
It got me to thinking, "Do I really care if the games contains a Hollywood Star likeness? or Voice?"
And honestly, I don't! Not if it will make the cost of the games more expensive. Or having the Hollywood type is just a smokescreen for another crappy game!
What happened to spending money on important things like gameplay, graphics, storyline... maybe I'm truely just an oldschool gamer. PacMan didn't need voiceovers by someone famous to make it a great game. Neither did 100's of other games.
Do you think we should care about actors in our games? Does it actually add anything to the game itself? Or is it just another step further down the path of advertising IN, ON and Around the games we play?
I'd be curious to hear others opinions.
J2Games.com
"LOS ANGELES - Actors who provide voices for video game characters will vote on whether to accept a new contract with producers that increases wages but does not pay residuals on the most popular games.
The Screen Actors Guild national board voted Wednesday to hold a referendum on the contract, which was previously rejected by its executive committee. Ballots will be mailed to the approximately 1,900 SAG members who work in video games.
Actors currently are paid a minimum of $556 per four-hour work session and are often required to voice more than one character per session. The new 3 1/2-year agreement would increase the rate to $759 by 2008, with an immediate 25 percent increase to $695."