Some of you may have been aware that SAG and AFTA were voting this week on whether or not members of their unions were going to strike regarding voice actor work in video games.
http://pc.boomtown.net/en_uk/articles/art.view.php?id=8425This is obviously a topic that hits close to home. On one hand, I can understand their point-of-view, that they contribute to a product that ultimately goes on to earn the publisher millions of dollars, and they only get paid a couple thousand dollars for their afternoon of work.
But come on... as a developer, I will work hundreds of hours a month over a period of a year or more, working all kinds of crazy overtime, and rarely will I see any royalties from a game. And someone who works one afternoon for a couple of hours somehow feels entitled to it?
I could side with them if their contribution actually made a major difference in the final product. Of course, no one likes bad voice work. But how many people rush out to buy a game because "so-and-so" provided the voice of one of the main characters? And I'm not talking big celebrity voice talent, because those actors have the clout to work in royalty payments into their contracts. I mean the run-of-the-mill voice talent.
So I'm relieved that the publishers didn't cave into these demands. And I'm relieved no strike happened. Because frankly, if the unionized voice talent went on strike, I don't see publishers pausing one second to shrug their shoulders and start using non-unionized talent and never look back.
Any comments?