Neoseeker : News : Voice of GTA IV's Niko unhappy
Hardware Newsletter:
Email:

Latest News

send article   article comments (10)

Voice of GTA IV's Niko unhappy
Sean Ridgeley - Wednesday, May 21st, 2008 | 10:46AM (PST)


"Don't see any" of the pay

Voice of GTA IV's Niko unhappy Image 1

The ever-popular ($600 million popular) Grand Theft Auto IV, as we know, features a fellow by the name of Niko Bellic. Niko kind of starts off in the game as a nobody in America, much like the actor who voices him, Michael Hollick. Hollick also was the 'motion actor' for Bellic. To most, this would be the opportunity of a lifetime. While Hollick says he's grateful, he's also pretty t'd off about the pay - "only" about $100,000 over roughly 15 months:

“Obviously I’m incredibly thankful to Rockstar for the opportunity to be in this game when I was just a nobody, an unknown quantity,” Mr. Hollick, 35, said last week over dinner in Willamsburg, Brooklyn, shortly after performing in the aerial theater show “Fuerzabruta” in Union Square. “But it’s tough, when you see Grand Theft Auto IV out there as the biggest thing going right now, when they’re making hundreds of millions of dollars, and we don’t see any of it. I don’t blame Rockstar. I blame our union for not having the agreements in place to protect the creative people who drive the sales of these games. Yes, the technology is important, but it’s the human performances within them that people really connect to, and I hope actors will get more respect for the work they do within those technologies.”

Another part of the reason he's upset is because of royalties: redistribution of his voice in works sees him nothing. This I agree with (that he should receive some kind of compensation).

But let's do some basic math: 150 developers worked on the project (just developers alone), $5000 was paid per track in the game, think of all the other voice actors, technicians, etc. The game cost about $100 mil to make over three and a half years. So, $500 mil among, I don't know, 250 people? Well, that's about $2 million each. Naturally I'm sure a good chunk of this goes straight into Rockstar/Take Two operations, so take off a nice bit there. Before cutting anything, that's $500,000 per year, per employee, on average. This guy is a voice actor. Yeah, he's the voice of the main character, but it's voice acting. I'm not saying it doesn't take any skill or talent, but try developing a freaking game like GTA IV before you whine about your petty 100 grand a year. The dude was working in bagel and perfume shops before this! Also keep in mind, the President of the United States makes $400,000 per year. Voice acting...running the country. Hm.

But you know, I think celebrities of any kind are all overpaid these days anyway, so I'm biased just like the people who don't care are biased. With that in mind, the reason he's upset, specifically, is because he, and voice actors in general, are paid much less than actors, as the contracts between the actor's union and entertainment industry make little room for media like video games. Apparently this is all expected to blow up this summer with an actor's strike much in the vein of the writer's strike we saw recently. Personally, while I'm all for people getting paid what they're worth, I think maybe these people have it a lot better than they remember; there are millions of people in the world in much worse situations, and a reminder of that to these actors I think would do a lot of good.

Of course, with all that said, if it means less money for traditional celebrities, I couldn't not support it, but there's got to be a better system than that.

Source: New York Times

Section: Console Games

  Related Stories

back to news    comments or corrections
- This news story is archived and is closed to comments now -

Comments:

May 21st, 2008 12:22PM(PST)
VeGiTAX2
The voice acting situation is actually pretty bad with few roles delivering decent royalties if any to the voice of the character. The funny part is that most people often go "dude honestly bro, like totally how hard is it to VA? like I bet I could right now" and the fact of the matter is, if those people go to a VA studio, they'd be laughed out for not being able to maintain a consistent character delivery and even moreso that they'd fail to keep a decent harmonic consistency.

A lot of work goes into training a voice, just as much as with singing, keeping those voices and making a library of vocal options is even harder and it's what makes or breaks people in the industry.

I'd like to see them get a better stake because they drive characters that people know and grow to associate with. You can do visuals all day long but as history has proven, if people don't have an association to the figure then it's pointless. In this case the actor put their physical and audible form into the main figure that drives the game and they're seeing a minimal return on it. Even suit models for movies get a cut of the film because it's their body that drives the central figure.
May 21st, 2008 12:36PM(PST)
chautemoc
Oh no, I agree, and thanks for shedding some more light on that side of it. I'm sure I couldn't do it, I just think 100K a year for the work is fair at worst.
May 21st, 2008 1:28PM(PST)
bruceleethree
VA's shouldn't get as much as actors. But only 100k on a product that has grossed near a billion? That's what I call stealing. This is no worse than Nike employing 8 year olds while they make billions.

This actor deserves at least 1 million for his efforts as the main character. And shame on his union for not negotiating contracts correctly. He needs a new union. Big budget movie lead actors get at least 10 mill for their efforts even if the project bombs, and they'll still get royalties for DVD sales.

No matter you view point, 100K for a lead VA in the highest grossing game in history in a booming gaming industry is purely insulting and Rockstar should be ashamed.

Giving 900K more to this poor man would not bankrupt them.


P.S. If you think that 100K is a lot and he should be happy, well consider being an actor that doesn't get a gig between months or years, then that 100K starts growing thin my friend.

May 21st, 2008 1:29PM(PST)
bruceleethree
P.P.S That image of Niko on the right looks like Jason Statham - amiright?
May 21st, 2008 2:28PM(PST)
RabidChinaGirl
I'm just pleasantly surprised that the VA is a looker. And he's done Law & Order appearances <3

I think it's tough for VA's to demand the same pay as celebrity actors. But in the case of voice acting, you also have certain people who are hired repeatedly, much more than others in the field.

As it stands, being a VA isn't any easier than acting. You aren't presented with everything up front, forcing you to sort of imagine everything as you go. Kinda like how many sci-fi movies are often done to green screen, so the actors are just interacting with........... nothing. But hey, they still gotta try.

Gonna agree with bruceleethree on the pay thing. You can't live on 100k unless..I dunno, you have a *steady* job.
May 21st, 2008 3:05PM(PST)
VeGiTAX2
"I just think 100K a year for the work is fair at worst."

Depends on the location of the person. You're talking about generally the living wage for a person (in this case in a large city) for a year not including tax deduction from that wage, so you started at 100k and then the government takes a nice chunk of that and then you get your living wage to budget for a year while the title you acted in booms greatly. In the end you come out living in an area with a high cost of living so that you can be available locally for positions and under that 6 figure sum to manage with until your next bread and butter comes along.

Given that his physical and vocal ability has helped people enjoy the character and the game quite a bit, I'd say he could do for a bit more than the kick to the nuts they gave him.

Siding with the industry and saying it was a generous pay is pretty laughable given the amount of money paid into CG actors these days, if you compare the difference in wages from the gaming to entertainment industry the gap gets pretty large in the pay scale. I do hope that the VA's get an adjustment in their pay system though because stuff like this only keeps people out of the field and honestly it needs more diversity, the studios that have their rosters always say they could use more qualified people to step up to the plate but no one wants to do it because they know the current industries still spit on them.
May 21st, 2008 4:44PM(PST)
chautemoc
quote
Depends on the location of the person.
Point taken.

Not necessarily siding with the industry, just saying I find it depressing people are bitching about such a salary. I dunno. I guess I think its not that they shouldnt make more, it's that I think everyone should (on a proportional level) make less.
May 21st, 2008 7:01PM(PST)
VeGiTAX2
To ever have that work you'd need an economy with a currency value that wasn't spiraling into the depth of hell. On top of that you'd need a standardized cost of living across the nation to establish it.

Given that the standard of living is around 60k in New York thats not much room for this actor to work with if that's their primary trade. Plays don't pay that well even when they're on Broadway unless you have some legendary name to lend to the show.

For your thought to work, the entire nation would basically have to restructure and you'd have to find a way to eliminate corporate greed and CEO retirement bonuses of over $400m.

In reality though, costs of living vary greatly even by a few hundred miles depending on your location and the work that people like VA's need so they can keep a job resides in those larger cities. On top of that the currency they rely on shoots up and down throughout the year and right now foods aren't getting any cheaper.
May 21st, 2008 7:22PM(PST)
chautemoc
I'm an idealist, what can I say.
May 21st, 2008 7:49PM(PST)
VeGiTAX2
Probably that sometimes idealism doesn't actually do much good in an editorial like this.

"Personally, while I'm all for people getting paid what they're worth, I think maybe these people have it a lot better than they remember; there are millions of people in the world in much worse situations, and a reminder of that to these actors I think would do a lot of good."

If you're living at the line of the cost of living in your city then you're not living in some luxurious apartment furnished with fine furniture and filled with exotic trinkets.

They don't need to know that life can be hard and stressful and drive people to the brink of many reactions, they already know it in their daily life. Show that these people are all in some great luxury and then you could start on a point. But as it stands you're assuming the best and assuming that living expenses are quite easy in a major city. NYC isn't back home in some suburb, there are few actual markets there are few actual things that you can just do on your own because the speed of the environment is beyond what people normally deal in.

Ideals are fine in blogs, but in something like this it's trying to inject a dream into a situation that will never adopt it. The NYT piece does a lot more justice to the situation by elaborating on the other factors around.

- This news story is archived and is closed to new comments now -

  RSS Feeds

Latest Comments
Most Comments
Latest Net Reviews:
Latest Inhouse:


Compare Prices

Motherboards
 Abit
 ASUS
 Gigabyte
 Intel
 iWill
 Shuttle
 Soyo
 Super Micro
 Tyan
 More...

Processors
 AMD
 Intel
 More...

Memory
 SDRAM
 RDRAM
 DDRAM
 More...

Video Cards
 ATI
 Visiontek
 PNY
 3Dfx
 More...

search for lowest prices

(0.0200/mc/nova)