Slashdot Mirror
Developers Want Fatter Paychecks
CodeBuster writes "The programmers, artists, and other creative professions that work in the games industry have taken a rather dim view on paying royalties to Hollywood voice-over actors, according to the article 'Coders Want Fatter Paychecks Too' written by Wired News. From the article: 'The video-game industry's geek workforce has something to say to Hollywood actors: Get in line for your share of the industry's profits.'"
You think that's amazing? I'm in no way associated with the gaming industry, and I want more money too!
I don't see a story here.
"Yeah -- $275 an hour would be a huge amount if actors did that kind of work several times a week," said [Wil] Wheaton, "but the average, working-class actor is lucky to get four of those jobs a year."
Dude, if you're unsatisfied with getting $2200 a year for doing eight hours of voice-over work in a year, maybe you need another job. Take some other acting gigs, drive a truck for UPS, learn a trade. Hell, flip burgers if you're that hard up for cash.
Or, better yet, learn to program, learn to work on sound effects, learn to do 3-D art, learn to do game level design. Then get a real 60-hour-a-week job in the games industry and see how the other half lives. Maybe then you'll realize you should be asking the programmers, artists, etc. to go on strike.
Wait, so the most replacable assets involved in building a game want more money? Skilled actors are rare. Skilled coders are not.
Programmers are easy to replace. People whose job requires creativity and who can do it successfully are a bit harder to come by.
So, go ahead, coders. Hasten your job being shipped to India by unrealistically demaning more money.
I hate to tell you this, but the vast majority of coders in the gaming industry are not replacable. The management would like to think they are though, and that's why we get so many poorly coded titles on the shelf.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Are they asking for simply a larger paycheck? Or are they asking for a royalty-like system in which the extra checks they get depend on the game sales? The article was somewhat light on that point.
If it were the second one, I think it would be a great idea. If a game is fun and sells well, the coders get an extra bit of green to take home.
If it's the first one, well then that's OK too. I hope to break into the game industry once I'm done with college, and the more game programmers earn once I reach that point, the better (for me, anyway..)
That's just not true. Most people in any software project - including games - are just code monkeys. Most of them are not the guys making the creative decisions. Most of the people involved in producing a videogame are NOT a Cliffy B or a Carmack or a Will Wright. Most of them have as much to do with the design and success of a game as the cashier at the local McDonald's has with the success of that food chain.
Are skilled people important? Yes. But skilled and creative are not the same thing. And to suggest that there aren't other people who can write netcode just s well as you or make a menuing system for the game just as well as you is just silly.
Anyone who thinks that they're so irreplacable in the industry should just demand more money and quit if they don't get it. If they're so irreplacable, they'll be wooed back with whatever their demand was. Otherwise, they'll be let go and replaced with someone who has as much skill and less ego who'll be glad to be involvd.
I hate to tell you this, but the vast majority of coders in the gaming industry are not replacable. The management would like to think they are though, and that's why we get so many poorly coded titles on the shelf.
Really? The reason why working standards are so low in the games industry is because developers are replaceable. Want to spend more time with your family? There's the door. We have 4 wide-eyed grads waiting outside to take your job. Everyone is replaceble.
I took a game development class last semester. I learned that programming games is HARD work. Say you're just doing the AI part of the game. Not only do you have to make enemies act semi-intelligently, and naturally, but you have to do it using only so much CPU and memory. In fact, this is true for just about any aspect of the game. To do be able to do this you have know your programming language like the back of your hand, and be effecient as hell. Killing bugs was a total pain in the ass too. Especially when some of the other coder's on my team created some shitty-ass code.
That's another thing: people skills. If you can't work well in a team, then forget game development. You have to be in constant communication with the artists and other programmers if you want the game to come together at all.
I really enjoyed programming for games. But when we had to turn in our game...the game wasn't working the way I wanted it too, and I really stressed out. I got sick the next day...don't know if it's entirely due to the stress but I'm sure it had to do something with it.
After taking that class, I realized that alot of these developers are incredibly smart and creative. It's easy to judge games when you're just playing them. But after taking that cass, I learned to appreciate what these guys can do.
Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
Who in the FUCK would want Vin Diesel to do voice acting? I'd rather hire a code monkey to do it instead! Hell, I'd rather get some code monkey to ACT in a movie instead of that baldie.
Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
Really? The reason why working standards are so low in the games industry is because developers are replaceable. Want to spend more time with your family? There's the door. We have 4 wide-eyed grads waiting outside to take your job. Everyone is replaceble.
But that's exactly the point the previous poster was making. If the developer choosing the door produces a high level of quality code, then it doesn't matter how many grads there are waiting in the line - the end-product will suffer for it.
Of course, management is generally blind to this sort of concept.....
And that would be true... if the actors were PERFORMING and carrying the story which, for the most part, they're not.
The REAL performers in games are the ones built by the Programmers and the game designers... not the actors.
Dont make me PACIFY you.
Omg, I'm like level 60 in C Programming, and level 48 in Java Programming! I finished all the quests, and killed the boss, but this lewt aint phat enough for my twinked items, lol!
I want phatter lewt!
Yes, but the gamer doesn't know if JIM wrote the game or BOB wrote the game. But they know if Christopher Walken is doing the voice of a character or some off-the-street nobody is trying to do the voice of a Christopher Walken character.
Sadly, as others have posted already, most coders can be easily replaced by local or, increasingly, overseas workers. The creative jobs are a bit more secure. But for the ultimate in security (and reward and risk!), start your own company! People in the games industry who really want a piece of the profits are best served by getting their buddies together and forming their own companies. This has been done before, and I think remains one of the best options for those wanting a bigger piece of the profits that come from their hard work. Granted, noncompete clauses and nda issues may need to be resolved, but an entrepreneural path is the surest way to sink or swim based on your own hard work.
Outside of starting a company, forming a union is the only other alternative. But even with massive overseas outsourcing and a general erosion of wages in the IT industry (at least at the coding level), unionization simply has not been embraced in the tech fields.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
"Dont make me PACIFY you."
Oh, shut the duck up.
"Derp de derp."
However, there are NOT 10 Jim Careys. There are NOT 10 Vin Diesels. There are NOT 10 Elijah Woods. THEY can not be replaced, except by really poor voice actors.
A real voice actor would like to take issue with your comment.
I think Seumas has overestimated the number of "code-monkeys" out there that have the talent to make "videogames." Sure an Pakistani programmer could probably make a good spreadsheet/database program, but would he be able to make a good videogame, let alone a commercial videogame? Not it a million years.
Hollywood is has finally woken up and realized that the videogame industry is almost as big as them, and will surpass them very soon and they want to apply their flawed, old, outdated, business model to the game industry and it simply won't stick.
So the fuck what if we can't use Wil Wheaton's awesome voice over talent anymore? There are a million and one more talents actors out there that would kill for any opportunity to make a buck and get noticed.
Patrick Stewart is in the new morrowind game, and that's great, but there are a lot of talented actors out there from the stage and screen who could have filled the same shoes. I am not knocking voice over actors; they truly have talent, but they should not be compensated more than the poor bastards working 60 hour weeks to make the game in the first place.
In five years I can only assume that this arguement will be moot as games by then will have budgets on the line with movies anyway.
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
Actually, the animators and mocap actors are making the performance. The voice talent brings the characters to life. Don't believe me? Play GTA3 then play either Vice City or San Andreas. Tommy Vercetti didn't have a voice in GTA3. When they gave him one in Vice City, it made the game more interesting. It was taken to an even greater extent in San Andreas. (let's not forget the sound tracks to all three games, here.)
I don't know why you guys are being so hard nosed against the actors here. I know your not playing these games with the sound off. I can't believe this attitude that these guys should find a new line of work. Never mind that we all cried and boo-hoo'd when Futurama departed. For some reason, when they entertain us in games, it's suddenly different.
"Derp de derp."
But is he a really poor voice actor?
Most games don't hire talented voice actors. They hire crappy, uninspired voice actors and you end up with cardboard-quality videogames.
Don't make me deck you.
I'm not being hard nosed against the actors here. I don't know why you're being so hard nosed against the programmers, the artists and the game designers.
Don't believe me?
Monkey Island had no voice actors.
Super Mario Brothers had no voice actors.
ICO had no voice actors.
Origin did voice work in house with the regular staff. When Wing Commander 4 was done with union work (because the union came in and shut production down until it became a union job) All the inhouse staff that did voicework received cease and desist notices that they were forbidden from doing future voice work until they joined the union.
But I suppose all those games were designed and built by off the shelf coders that do kewl and elite IMAP modules and artists who learned photoshop in their mom's basement.
I'm not denying voice actors fair compensation for game work.. BUT GET IN FRIGGIN' LINE!
"I don't know why you're being so hard nosed against the programmers, the artists and the game designers."
I don't know, either, since I never suggested anything ill about them.
"Derp de derp."
> YOU are replaceable. There are a million code monkeys and always one willing to work for less than you
... that's because 95% of coders are crap, and those are certainly replaceable. But the real experts in any software discipline (not just gaming) are actually few and far between --- that much is blatantly obvious to anyone who's ever had the sad duty of doing technical recruitment interviews. Maybe it's the fault of the educational system, or maybe too many programmers are self-taught and don't even realize that they're not particularly good, or maybe it's just natural that really good people are rare, who knows, but it's certainly the case.
:-)
:-)
There are a million CRAP code monkeys, yes
My advice to all true-blue experts is to go freelance, ie. become a computer contractor. If your CV is impressive in both education and experience, and if you talk sensibly and professionally and show that you are highly informed at the interview, you will almost always get the job because you are actually as rare as hen's teeth.
And because you are not competing against run of the mill coders, your rate will be different too, inevitably higher because you will be one of the lynch pins of the project. And you probably won't get outsourced either when lesser skilled positions are, if the company has even a shred of sanity left.
The downside? Fewer perks, and you'll have to buy your own insurance, but so what, you can afford it on higher rates. And you won't have permanent employment, but who the hell wants to work all the year round anyway?
It's worth ending with another line from the parent:
> Remember, you ARE NOT A PERFORMER.
Ah, but when you're a top expert, you ARE a performer, and far less replaceable than a voiceover actor.
Have you played any video games? "Talented," "skilled," and "creative" are not how I would describe video game voice actors. I would describe them as "unnecessary." In fact, I'd rather my games didn't have them, because they suck for the most part. Skilled coders, on the other hand, ARE necessary.
If they were such great voice actors, they could get a gig in any number of animated movies or shows. The fact that they aren't and have settled for such "meager" paychecks means that they are at the bottom of the voice actor barrel.
I'm willing to bet that real talent like Sean Connery makes a little more for his services.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for unions, and I guess they should ask for whatever they can get. However, when you are a less than necessary resource, don't be surprised when your jobs are taken. Now if the coders left in the middle of development on a $20 million project, the company may have no other choice than to cave-in.
For $275/hour I would offer my services to the game industry. I do a great impersonation of Cartman singing Nelly's "Hot in Here." Something to think about.
Sorry Wil Weaton, you peaked at "Stand by Me," and even then you were overshadowed by Corey Feldman, River Phoenix, and a heavy Jerry O'Connell. Jerry freaking O'Connell. Sometimes the truth hurts.
Exactly how are the freaking voice actors irreplaceable? They are worse than replaceable. They are unnecessary.
Video games do not need voice actors, and most are better without them.
Why do 99% of computing staff want to be a slave working for someone else as a permanent employee, a small cog in a corporate machine? It's something that I've never really understood.
Make your own company (it only costs a few hundred bucks a year), and offer your development services through a contract agency. If you're good, the rates are far better, and there's plenty of work.
But is he a really poor voice actor?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0921942/
You evidently didn't listen to the interview. His point is that people like Jim Carrey, Vin Diesel, and Elijah Wood *are* really poor voice actors, only hired for their name recognition.
Not every brand-name screen actor does crappy work at voice acting, mind you - Billy Crystal and Eddie Murphy were cited by West in the interview as having real talent. But by and large, quality work isn't the concern when Hollywood hires voice actors, and that trend seems to be infecting the game community as well.
Ever play System Shock 2 or the Thief series? Fantastic voice acting (mostly) in those games, and none of those people did voice acting as a career. In fact, many of them were just people on the development team.
Ever watch recent anime titles (the ones on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim are the best example here)? Dubs have gone from superbly crappy (as they were in the late 80s and early 90s) to, quite simply, superb. None of these new, talented people are brand-name actors that would be recognized outside the cartoon voice-over community (and sometimes, they have to use stage names to take non-union jobs), but they also do great work in video/computer games.
Everybody making the high-up money decisions seems to think that having a star-studded GTA-esque voice cast is important. But people have been doing talented voice-over work for years. It's only now that the brand-name actors are moving in on their turf that AFTRA/SAG wants to get involved, and not to protect the talented voice actors who are heard-yet-unheard-of.
I make games for a living, and sure - I'd like more money for what I do. I knew when I got into the industry, however, what the hours were like and what the pay was like. The only thing that I had an honest misconception about was the royalty issue. I had thought that tons of hard work would result in good royalty checks but after 4 1/2 years in the industry I think I've recieved a grand total of $500 in royalties. Not the end of the world, but I don't think that you're getting the issue here.
I've seen alot of arguments from the voice actors who are seeking the extra money that "...the average, working-class actor is lucky to get four of those ($275/hr) jobs a year." Um... so because you decided to go into a field that pays either poorly or erratically, I'm supposed to give up a portion of whatever money I _might_ recieve from the project I worked on for two years so that you can be "compensated" for your day's worth of work? I'm sorry - if you don't like what you do for a living pays GET A NEW JOB. I got into this industry knowing that there was a chance I would strike it rich, but that the odds of it happening were slim. YOU'RE IN THE SAME BOAT. If you don't like it, do something else.
I agree - there aren't 10 Jim Careys or Vin Diesels, etc. But I know for a fact that top notch stars like that DON'T make the $275/hr minimum that the Voice Actors Guild is worked up about. I worked on Men of Valor for 2015, and one of the voice actors on the project was Sean Astin. He made around $50k for about eight hours of work. That's a HELL of a lot more than the minimum - and it's just me but I'd say that $6250/hr is fairly adequate compensation for that kind of work. What bothers me - and all of the coders, etc. that have been making noise about wanting more money - is that not only do the voice actors get paid anywhere from 5-10 times as much per hour as the developers do, but now they want royalties (residuals) from the game for the four or eight hours they put in on it when the developers who typically put years of 50-60+ hour weeks into the project won't see a dime in royalties.
Of course the developers aren't (usually) stars. But your close comparison between game development and Hollywood isn't very accurate. Set developers, grips, etc. - the support staff in a film - create the atmosphere that the actors and director use to tell their story. They're an essential part of the process, but without the actors and director you have no movie. That's why actors are stars and fameous and all of that.
Without the coders, designers, and artists that physically make the game - create it from the code that drives the game engine to the textures and models that make it look good to actually designing and implementing the gameplay that is the heart of the game: game developers _are_ what makes a game. I've certainly never purchased a game because so-and-so actor did a voice on it, but I _have_ purchased many games because specific developers created them. Like actors in Hollywood, game developers are what bring a game to life and give it character. And that's not a quality you can merely export.
I don't know where you get your info, but not all programmers are created equal. Even if 75% of the coders on a game are just replaceable code monkeys...the lead programmer(s) are not. There's a reason they're put in charge of more code, and generally the design of that code. Programming is a problem solving skill, and not everyone is good as each other when it comes to that. The graphics guys are even less replaceable. If you want your games to have real charm and character...you'll want very talented artists designing, modelling, texturing and animating your main characters. Sure, items and backdrops can be delegated to more "replaceable" artists, but what are you going to see more often throughout whole game?
My point is these guys are artists and performers too. To be a good animator you have to have a good sense of your own motions. It's not something just anyone can pick up and master. The voice actors however are more replaceable b/c if they all go on strike you can just go to your local college theater dept. and find some kids willing to work harder and for less than these big stars and whatnot.
What needs to happen is for everyone to get paid less actually. Here's my reasoning... If everyone gets paid less, there is less of an investment cost. Since the producers have put less money into the project they deserve less. Now you take the profits and split them 50/50. Half goes back to the investors + their investment costs, then the other half gets divied up between all the developers based on how important their work was and how much they did. In the long run the developers can possibly make much more money than they were by being paid less up front. It's a risk, but so is life...
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
If that's true then I should have no idea who Stephen Speilberg or George Lucas are...but I do. The people behind the scenes are just as important, if not more, than the actors on screen whether or not the audience knows who they are or not. Actor's celebrity is a created thing by the media... whoever they focus on can become one. Same goes for games...
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
If it weren't for this 'we're better than workers who have to form a union' attitude amongst programmers and other technical workers, there'd already be a union for people in the game industry, and this sort of problem would have already been resolved.
Right now programmers and artists are being exploited in industry. They are working severe overtime without compensation. It is structual, in the sense that those responsible for managing and renumerating these employees know and plan for this unpaid overtime. Any copyright on created art or code is transfered without any particular compensation, for use of the company in perpetuity. People are literally being worked sick, and most receive a relative pittance in return, when compared with the profits of publishers.
Very occasionally there may be a royalty component offered to employees, but this is often not paid, or comes after the publisher skims off the top and is horribly meagre.
These people can be abused so easily because there is pride involved. People take pride in their work: they want to be associated with something with quality, that people will enjoy. There is also the belief that working for in the industry is an intrinsically cool thing to do. Employers and publishers then turn around and exploit that pride and belief.
What is the shame in forming a union? Do you think people started unions because it might be a fun lark on weekends? The current situation will remain until there is a force present to reverse it. And that force isn't about to come from the Tooth Fairy.
Um... I'm pretty sure the reason, say, Elijah Wood is hired for his voice acting is that he's voice acting the the character that looks and sounds like him in the game that is from the movie he starred in where he looked like and sounded like himself. So, yes, if you want an authentic LOTR (movie-based) game experience, he's more or less irreplaceable.
The fact of the matter is this - people need to stop bitching about what the make. I work in the tech industry and I'm so fucking tired of hearing a bunch of god damned coders who thought they were going to be millionnaires playing videogames all day found out life isn't quite like that. Guess what?! There are a lot of other people in the tech industry who thought the world was always going to be high-pay, constant demand for talent, countless perks and fame and fortune. You know what? Shit changed and now they realize they're just bit-flippers and that they're not going to be uber-rich. That's just life.
Just because your button-mashing contributes to a game doesn't make you any more of a rock star or a movie star or anything than the guy whos button-mashing contributes to a boring desktop application.
You're both doing the same job but only one of you has the shitty attitude.
Here's the deal. Voice actors are worth whatever their employer says they're worth. Not what YOU say they're worth. And coders are worth what their employer says they're worth. Not what they say they're work. Anything else is just a bunch of spoiled brats whining and crying because someone else got the shiny red ball. Oh, boo hoo.
I make games for a living, and sure - I'd like more money for what I do. I knew when I got into the industry, however, what the hours were like and what the pay was like. The only thing that I had an honest misconception about was the royalty issue. I had thought that tons of hard work would result in good royalty checks but after 4 1/2 years in the industry I think I've recieved a grand total of $500 in royalties. Not the end of the world, but I don't think that you're getting the issue here. I've seen alot of arguments from the voice actors who are seeking the extra money that "...the average, working-class actor is lucky to get four of those ($275/hr) jobs a year." Um... so because you decided to go into a field that pays either poorly or erratically, I'm supposed to give up a portion of whatever money I _might_ recieve from the project I worked on for two years so that you can be "compensated" for your day's worth of work? I'm sorry - if you don't like what you do for a living pays GET A NEW JOB. I agree - there aren't 10 Jim Careys or Vin Diesels, etc. But I know for a fact that top notch stars like that DON'T make the $275/hr minimum that the Voice Actors Guild is worked up about. I worked on Men of Valor for 2015, and one of the voice actors on the project was Sean Astin. He made around $50k for about eight hours of work. That's a HELL of a lot more than the minimum - and it's just me but I'd say that $6250/hr is fairly adequate compensation for that kind of work. What bothers me - and all of the coders, etc. that have been making noise about wanting more money - is that not only do the voice actors get paid anywhere from 5-10 times as much per hour as the developers do, but now they want royalties (residuals) from the game for the four or eight hours they put in on it when the developers who typically put years of 50-60+ hour weeks into the project won't see a dime in royalties. Of course the developers aren't (usually) stars. But your close comparison between game development and Hollywood isn't very accurate. Set developers, grips, etc. - the support staff in a film - create the atmosphere that the actors and director use to tell their story. They're an essential part of the process, but without the actors and director you have no movie. That's why actors are stars and fameous and all of that. Without the coders, designers, and artists that physically make the game - create it from the code that drives the game engine to the textures and models that make it look good to actually designing and implementing the gameplay that is the heart of the game: game developers _are_ what makes a game. I've certainly never purchased a game because so-and-so actor did a voice on it, but I _have_ purchased many games because specific developers created them. Like actors in Hollywood, game developers are what bring a game to life and give it character. And that's not a quality you can merely export. ADDENDUM: Hrm. Never posted before - didn't know you needed an account to get this to show up. There's a duplicate under anyonmyous coward, but I wanted my comments to show up.
Sure there are not 10 Jim Careys, but there are millions of people who have moved to Hollywood over the years looking for their break, only to discover talent is not enough. Most of them have moved back home broke a few years latter. Of course there are many millions more who only thought they had talent, who have moved away too.
Once in a while someone makes it. However there is enough compitition that until you are big enough that they write scripts with you in mind, odds are against you getting into any movie you are qualified for. The person who beats you out may not be any more talented, and may be less - it is who you know and who you sleep with, just like every other job (careful, just like any other job offering to sleep with the boss may get you in, may be a non factor, or it may ruin your chances, depending on the boss's ethics)
If you must have Jim Careys' voice, then you have to have him. Be prepared to pay for it. (though you can often get a sound alike that is close enough) Most games do not need any particular voice. There are millions trying to get into acting, so you can choose any of the talented ones, and pay them little for a lot of work. Just like there are millions of developers trying to get into game programing, so they pay them little for a lot of work. (That is why I don't work in game programming)
Supply and demand applies to actors just as much as anyone else. Until you have a unique name that people know, and thus you are a supply of one, there are millions more waiting at the door.
The union needs to be very careful, because if things get too expensive companies will decide that the professional isn't worth it. They will pick some of the more talented staff (many already do this just because it is easier to pull someone from his desk when you want to make a change, than to call the actor back) and record their own. Maybe not as good, but good enough.
There are NOT 10 Vin Diesels. There are NOT 10 Elijah Woods.
Thank buggery for that!
The producers of 'The Iron Giant' say hi.
D
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
There are many MANY professions that are overworked and underpaid, but since we are on the subject of programmers, I will concentrate on us. I have worked for many companies, in the US and in Tokyo. Everything breaks down into Employer, Employee and Contractor. Employer gets the profits. Employees get a paycheck. Contractors generally get a bigger paycheck. The farce is that people believe that Employees have better job security than Contractors, but job security doesn't exist anymore. Game companies are Contractors. Almost all are bought out or hired by Employers like EA, who get the profits, and are let go when the job is done. Others that are independent have been going under waiting for the next big contract, or license. Unfortunately, game companies are NOT treated like contractors, and paid like Employees. This is the problem, especially since large groups of people work on the same project, and finish at the same time, versus a 'normal' working job, in which projects are scattered about, ending at different times. Because of all of this, I understand the complaints of game programmers. Even though I would love to work for a game company, I understand they work long hours, and get paid crap, so I choose not to work for one.
Water is wet.
Fire burns.
and everyone, everywhere, wants more money.
Pretty Pictures!
YOU are replaceable.
Performers are very, very replaceable. In fact they often can be replaced by mere mortals of other professions.
Examples:
Victoria voiceover in Thief 2.
Videos for C&C.
Hamalaya (98% of "actors" there vere simply tibetian people).
Pi.
The list could go on forever.
Tree
You never had your car.
Well, apparently those guys are making much better money than those of us who leave our porches at home attached to the house, so maybe we aren't as bright as we think ourselves to be.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The CEO of our company tried to get us to work more hours, we just laughed, and continued to work just over 40/week.
You got your way as a result of collective action. You already have a de facto union. Thats all trades unionism is. Lucky you, but some people aren't in that position. Some companies run things to deliberately isolate and divide employees so that situation could never happen (c.f. Walmart). The problem arises when the boss hints he's looking to "free up" a dozen or so positions. All it takes is a few worried family men to comply and thats that. What are you going to do then?
Plays violent online games as: Nerfherder76
And pay (out of the gross) your most creative people to do your accounting.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Actually, you're wrong. If any employer says programmers aint worth jack and fires them willy nilly, the product they produce will be crap and then we won't buy it. Therefore, we determine the value of programmers. Same with voice actors.
How we know is more important than what we know.
As a game programmer, i can only say YES! Give me plz the same amount of money like programmers in other area do get. Or 1000$ less per month than those - that would still be an improvement. Or paid overhours - gosh(!) that would be great. Maybe it's different here in Europa, but i think you don't realize that you get a lot less money as gameprogrammer than in most other programming jobs.
Look, a buisness doesn't come crashing down with the loss of a single individual. Sure there's differences in individual abilities, but in the end these don't really matter as each individual contributes only a small amount to the entire whole. The ream is bigger than any individual.
The idea of a single indespensible uber-coder is a myth. (Conviently, everyone thinks of themselves as that uber-coder.) It always has been, and it always will be.
If I worked in the game industry, I'd be looking elsewhere really damn fast. There is no reason to believe that Indian or Chinese coders can't write quality game software just as rarely as American, British, or Aussie coders do, and they can produce the buggy, barely playable crap far cheaper.
Complaining that you want more money is only going to make the slide to outsourcing that much faster. You chose to work in this industry, you knew all the bullshit that game companies do to their employees. The kind of ridiculous hours for comparatively crap pay that you would be forced to do. You knew all of it and you signed on the dotted line because you were blinded by the fantasy of making games being the coolest thing ever. Why in the world should I feel sympathy for you?
Most people in any software project - including games - are just code monkeys. Most of them are not the guys making the creative decisions.
In many cases, this is exactly the reason why software sucks. Because management refuses to listen even IF the developers know what they are talking about. Which leaves the developers with exactly two options:
1) Find another job
2) Knuckle under and implement the stupid decisions from above
Of course, if this goes on for long enough, the company may find itself outmaneuvered by another, smarter company. Which will leave both managers and code monkeys out of work.
C - the footgun of programming languages
"Programmers are easy to replace. People whose job requires creativity and who can do it successfully are a bit harder to come by."
The irony of this story is that it counters the "it's all about doing it for the love" argument, and "you're a bad person if you do it for the money".
Guess when push comes to shove and reality sets in, it is "all about the money"!
Considering the money a sucessful consultant brings home, turning contractor is indeed quite tempting.
An important disadvantage, however, is that you have to be your own marketing department all of the time. This is not easy for everybody, and for me this is the main reason I have not jumped ship yet.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Why?
Because when I am in a game, I don't want to be distracted by such things as "Hey, that sounds like Christopher Walken!".
That's true to some extent even in movies.
For example, when I first saw Patrick Stewart in X-Men, I thought "Captain Picard", and it took me out of the movie.
(Fortunately, Patrick Stewart is a good enough actor that the distraction was short-lived.)
A counter-example was the voice of the Joker in the animated Batman series.
Even though I knew that Mark Hamill did the voice, I didn't think "Luke Skywalker" when I heard it because it was so different, i.e., it didn't sounce like Mark Hamill/Luke Skywalker.
What matters is that the voice fits the character, and that it not sound like the actor doing the voice.
So, Christopher Walken, if you are going to
Thank you.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
"sounce" --> "sound"
Look, I've worked for companies like Origin and Digital Anvil, multimedia outfits, and even "normal" companies like IBM, and anyone who thinks that game programmers are easily replaceable -- that aside from a few John Carmack-types, the rest of us are just chaff -- well, I'm sorry, but you're deluded.
Carmack produces maybe one game every couple of years, and even then he's not the sole programmer on the title. So what about the team who did "Halo 2"? I doubt many of you could name any one of the programmers/engineers off the top of your head. Could they have been easily replaced with outsourced labor? And not just them, but all the artists, writers, and designers who also worked on the title? Or how about the programming team that did "Wipeout Pure"? Or "Deus Ex"?
Not every programmer is a rock star who gets profiles printed up in mainstream magazines, but that doesn't mean there's not some great talent out there that doesn't go by the name Carmack, Cliffy B, or Will Wright. And as someone who has had to hire for programming positions, they are a damn sight hard to find, so let's not minimize their contributions to games, even if they might not be a household name.
And sure, good voice talent is important to the overall gaming experience, but the idea that an actor who worked on a title for a handful of hours is more deserving of profit sharing than the people who actually _made the game_ by investing years worth of effort is patently ludicrous. Get a sense of perspective.
Skilled developers who can code a game into something FUN are.
You don't get that from offshoring to India.
You make some excellent points sir.
But please use paragraphs next time, makes it easier to read.
Only getting 4 jobs a year? Hasnt it occured to you will that there might be reasons for that? Or did you sleep through economics 101.
Its simply supply and demand. There is way to much supply but the rate charged for the service limits the demand.
This is union protectionism. The union wont adapt to market forces so instead they want to extrot more money for the companies that can still afford them.
Unions are good up to a point. That point doesnt include bullying non-union voice actors into a union or extorting thier clients because they dont want to accept market forces.
In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
Agh. Yeah - I know. I orignally just posted under anon. because I didn't have a /. account but I didn't realize that my comment wouldn't show up that way. I registered an account and cut/pasted my previous post but somehow lost the formatting.
Sorry about that - I should have done the preview thing, but figured it would keep the original formatting.
Not to sound TOO sarcastic, but part of the problem with the game industry right now is that it takes millions of dollars to start a game company.
Increasingly, this just isn't an option.
Further, most folks coming from "working" backgrounds have seen the effects of unions on industries like the Automotive industry. The companies simply move production to another country, unions be damned.
The problems in the game industry would be far better addressed through the creation and use of common assets, such as "stock textures" or "stock level wireframes". There needs to be a technological "field leveling" technology as well. The camcorder or other cheap cameras are good examples in film - they allowed students to create low-budget films (and drastically changed the accessibility of the pornography industry, making it a huge money maker).
Eh, it's just a guess, but from what I see, it's similar to publishing. Before the Web, you couldn't just make a magazine (and expect millions of people to read it). It took tons of money, distribution channels, etc etc etc. It was a huge risk. Now it's a bit different, lots more variety.
Video Game News, FAQs, etc
There are two names who stick out with me when I think of actors in games.. not anyone you would have ever heard of. The first was David Warner (Jon Irenicus in Baldurs Gate II) The second was Kane from Command & Conquer. You know what he was? He was a programmer or some other worker bee that made the game. Get a clue actors, you do not have the monopoly on your craft.
I was working there when this happened. So this is a personal account from my own recollection. I don't remember any press about it at the time. WC4 had a film shoot with all the actors on real sets (as opposed to the green screen of WC3) in Hollywood. The union found out and got the studio hands to walk off and unionize (or shut down the production in some way until union workers could be invovled... I wasn't involved in the particulars). That turned WC4 into a "union" production and, as such, the entire work was protected. Voiceover work was done back in Austin by the regular playtesters, programmers, artists, designers; etc. Whomever wanted to do it and then got listed in the credits. Afterwards, the union sent letters to those who did the voiceovers basically stating they had gotten a "freebie" for doing voiceover work on a union project and that if they ever wanted to do that again, they'd have to join the union.
Clearly you've never played Kotor 2 which not only features Kelly Hu, but also British stage actress Sara Kestelman.
And they're obnoxious as hell.