Why is Michael Hollick (voice of Niko Bellic) Unhappy?

The actor who did the voice of Niko Bellic in GTA IV is a bit peeved that he won't be getting any residual money from the game. The man was paid $100K over 15 months, but believes voice actors who use their voice to help market and promote the games should get some kind of residual money from the sales of the game. What do you gamers think about this? Should voice actors in games like GTA, Assassin's Creed, Kane & Lynch and Stranglehold get residual checks or are they paid enough already?

It's a long read, but pretty interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/21/arts/television/21gta.html?_r=3&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&oref=slogin&oref=slogin/&oref=slogin#

He should have read his contract.bobaban

Agreed. It's his own fault for not reading it. Now he's just playing cry baby. No one likes a cry baby. Good luck getting hired now you wanker.... $100k in 15 months for talking into a microphone.....

Well, I'd say they deserve some royalties.

I mean, come on, 100k for fifteen months of work? Compared to the money the game is making?

I don't think it unreasonable that he should at least make a million for bringing the main character to life for a game as large as GTAIV.

Not to mention, the more money voice actors recieve for their work, people will take voice acting more seriously, and we can have more professional, higher quality voice actors in this industry as well as others.

Well, I'd say they deserve some royalties.

I mean, come on, 100k for fifteen months of work? Compared to the money the game is making?

I don't think it unreasonable that he should at least make a million for bringing the main character to life for a game as large as GTAIV.

Not to mention, the more money voice actors recieve for their work, people will take voice acting more seriously, and we can have more professional, higher quality voice actors in this industry as well as others.

Thompsonwhore

no, he did 2 days of work. He's getting paid for 15 months, and now he wants millions more. The own creators of the game don't get royalties, and they spent years of their time on it. It'll be a slap in the face to all those that worked on the game if he gets what he wants.

If he wanted residuals then he should have included a stipulation in his contract.

As for whether or not voice actors deserve residuals....No. I wouldn't say that it's make sense to have residuals for voice actors.

Hollick has no contractual ties to 2K beyond his work on one of the games that's apart of a franchise not his own. He parroted the words and story provided by Rockstar; they weren't his intellectual property.

If he had actually written the script that he read, then it would be reasonable to give him residuals.

If starring actors get small residuals in any of their other roles, why should they not get them for videogames?

Even a tiny fraction of a percent of profits is worth something. It's more of a union issue than a Rockstar issue, but you'd expect payment sorts of things to be relatively constant across media.

Niko Bellic's voice acting sucked... if anything, he should be paying 2K for allowing him to be in such a good game...Stumpt25

I need to know what happened! Give me that!

STOP!

Niko Bellic's voice acting sucked... if anything, he should be paying 2K for allowing him to be in such a good game...Stumpt25

Looking at your Avatar, I see a very good voice actor :D

PS: The person in my Avatar beat up the person in your Avatar :P

For you guys saying he should've read his contract or requested more. He didnt know he was voicing a role for GTA4 until a long time into development, listen to the radio interview about it on gametrailers.

He said Rockstar didnt tell him ANYthing, he thought it was some other company, with a different name and wasnt GTA. He only knew up to when they started doing the motion capture stuff.

I dont get why you guys are hating on him so much

[QUOTE="bobaban"]He should have read his contract.CPM_basic

Agreed. It's his own fault for not reading it. Now he's just playing cry baby. No one likes a cry baby. Good luck getting hired now you wanker.... $100k in 15 months for talking into a microphone.....

It's a lot more complicated then just talking into a microphone, listen to the interview on GT.

For you guys saying he should've read his contract or requested more. He didnt know he was voicing a role for GTA4 until a long time into development, listen to the radio interview about it on gametrailers.shadyd1717

Whether it turned out to be for GTA or some obscure radio show, it doesn't make a difference. He doesn't own the property; he was paid to read it off.

He should have read his contract.bobaban

Seriously, they don't have to pay him a cent more, and I don't think they should.

I think he should have gotten paid more. Voice actors for 2 hour long movies (animated) could get 10 Million plus. He did way more than that for a game that would rake in money and all he gets is 100K?! Also, the devs always get less, just like movie animators. That's just custom, probably because you don't directly see or hear the animator/dev. Sad, though, but it's true.WINDWAKER1

Are you kidding me? 100K for two days worth of voice work. That's more than what the Simpsons voice actors make after two days.

[QUOTE="shadyd1717"]

For you guys saying he should've read his contract or requested more. He didnt know he was voicing a role for GTA4 until a long time into development, listen to the radio interview about it on gametrailers.Pariah_001

Whether it turned out to be for GTA or some obscure radio show, it doesn't make a difference. He doesn't own the property; he was paid to read it off.

Exactly what im saying, if its for some obscure radio show you'd be HAPPY to get 100 grand for that and you'd take it. Then picture later on you find out its GTA4 but you already signed the contract, now its making 600 million $ and you cant get anymore money, you wouldnt be mad? cmon =/

I know that 100,000$ is a lot of money and technically he shouldnt be complaining because most of us dont make money like that, but i'd still be mad if i knew the game was making 600 million$ and companies were getting the profit more then the voice actors and developers.

Exactly what im saying, if its for some obscure radio show you'd be HAPPY to get 100 grand for that and you'd take it. Then picture later on you find out its GTA4 but you already signed the contract, now its making 600 million $ and you cant get anymore money, you wouldnt be mad? cmon =/

I know that 100,000$ is a lot of money and technically he shouldnt be complaining because most of us dont make money like that, but i'd still be mad if i knew the game was making 600 million$ and companies were getting the profit more then the voice actors and developers.

shadyd1717

You missed my point. I said it doesn't matter if the voice work is done for either GTA or an obscure radio show, the work load is comparable either way and he doesn't own the material he's reading. Therefore, the price and option of residuals should be left up to the discretion of his employer.

Many of you have missed the point. He isn't complaining because he's greedy (he's not even blaming Rockstar), his problem is that the actor's union doesn't have the same contracts in place for games as they do for film and TV. So for example, if he had worked on a movie, TV show or even a commercial Hollick would recieve residuals, but because he was a voice actor for a game, he doesn't. PBSnipes

Well, that's because their talent is the main talent involved in those cases. Here, he's already getting paid more for 15 months than a bulk of the people on the development team, and he only had to do a couple days of recording. Now tell the people that just spent 2 years or more of their life slaving away at a computer working on this game that this guy that is already making more than you gets royalties too. You have to take into account that in comparison, that guys work isn't **** compared to the work that goes on behind the scenes.

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]Many of you have missed the point. He isn't complaining because he's greedy (he's not even blaming Rockstar), his problem is that the actor's union doesn't have the same contracts in place for games as they do for film and TV. So for example, if he had worked on a movie, TV show or even a commercial Hollick would recieve residuals, but because he was a voice actor for a game, he doesn't. -Wheels-

Well, that's because their talent is the main talent involved in those cases. Here, he's already getting paid more for 15 months than a bulk of the people on the development team, and he only had to do a couple days of recording. Now tell the people that just spent 2 years or more of their life slaving away at a computer working on this game that this guy that is already making more than you gets royalties too. You have to take into account that in comparison, that guys work isn't **** compared to the work that goes on behind the scenes.

That man deserves every penny for being such a badass.stephant_6

That's like saying a camera man deserves residuals because they're more important to the process (you can't make a movie without a camera). Sure the programmers, designers and other "behind the scenes" workers deserve credit, but GTA 4 isn't half the game it is without Hollick's work.
PBSnipes

The problem with this is that this is medium the camermen work with. They're participation is dependent on the IP's execution, not the other way around.

If they'd actually had a hand in the product conception, then your analogy would be more solid, but that's not so here.

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]That's like saying a camera man deserves residuals because they're more important to the process (you can't make a movie without a camera). Sure the programmers, designers and other "behind the scenes" workers deserve credit, but GTA 4 isn't half the game it is without Hollick's work.
Pariah_001

The problem with this is that this is medium the camermen work with. They're participation is dependent on the IP's execution, not the other way around.

If they'd actually had a hand in the product conception, then your analogy would be more solid, but that's not so here.

As for your second point, I suppose that depends on who you consider a "behind the scenes" worker. How does a 3D artist's work differ from that of a cameraman or someone doing CGI work in a movie?

[QUOTE="-Wheels-"]

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]Many of you have missed the point. He isn't complaining because he's greedy (he's not even blaming Rockstar), his problem is that the actor's union doesn't have the same contracts in place for games as they do for film and TV. So for example, if he had worked on a movie, TV show or even a commercial Hollick would recieve residuals, but because he was a voice actor for a game, he doesn't. PBSnipes

Well, that's because their talent is the main talent involved in those cases. Here, he's already getting paid more for 15 months than a bulk of the people on the development team, and he only had to do a couple days of recording. Now tell the people that just spent 2 years or more of their life slaving away at a computer working on this game that this guy that is already making more than you gets royalties too. You have to take into account that in comparison, that guys work isn't **** compared to the work that goes on behind the scenes.

I really don't think you understand the work that goes into making games. Hollick's measily 2 days worth of work means nothing to the hours that people spend every day putting this game together. Comparing developers to the camera man is such disgrace its not even funny. That camera man doesn't spend 60 hours a week for 2 years so that the actor can do his job. That guy just waltzes in and says what he's told to say, he doesn't deserve another penny extra.

So you're saying a ****ty cameraman wouldn't have an effect on the IP's execution? Or that a great one that gets the perfect shot doesn't improve it?PBSnipes

Obviously, the ineptitude of a camerman can ruin the end result of the product, however he/she was not responsible for the media's production. That's at the behest of the person funding the operation. The camerman is simply the medium.

As for your second point, I suppose that depends on who you consider a "behind the scenes" worker. How does a 3D artist's work differ from that of a cameraman or someone doing CGI work in a movie?PBSnipes

That all depends on whether or not the CGI worker helped design the layout for what he's putting together. The artists and writers send the creative concepts to the developers to actually develop them Assuming that the developers didn't have any say in the design of what they're crafting, I suppose that would put the bulk of them on the level of cameraman. However, because the developers are more often than not responsible for the design as well as the build (see also: Kojima, Barlog, Itagaki), one can accurately generalize all the developers as creative tenents.

I really don't think you understand the work that goes into making games. Hollick's measily 2 days worth of work means nothing to the hours that people spend every day putting this game together. Comparing developers to the camera man is such disgrace its not even funny. That camera man doesn't spend 60 hours a week for 2 years so that the actor can do his job. That guy just waltzes in and says what he's told to say, he doesn't deserve another penny extra.

-Wheels-

As for what Hollick has to do, more power to him if he can waltz in and lay down all those lines in 2 days. I've only had experience acting from some high-school drama classes, but making sure you get the lines right is a suprisingly tough job. I know I couldn't record the quantity of lines Hollick would have in that short a timeframe.

I could just as easily say you don't understand how much work a cameraman puts in. I mean, what does a programmer do? Sit in a chair and type? Whereas a cameraman is constantly adjusting to movements, trying to catch the perfect shot, and can work 8+ hours a day. See, I can grossly oversimplify things too.PBSnipes

That's the most ridiculous comparison I've ever heard. I know you're trying to make a point about over-simplification, but in this case, there is an exact answer as to which job description requires more of a workload. Programmers with projects the size of GTA invariably have a much more complicated job than camermen.

As for what Hollick has to do, more power to him if he can waltz in and lay down all those lines in 2 days. I've only had experience acting from some high-school drama classes, but making sure you get the lines right is a suprisingly tough job. I know I couldn't record the quantity of lines Hollick would have in that short a timeframe.PBSnipes

This doesn't even qualify as simplification. It's more like over-estimation. I'm sure voice-acting has its complications, but trying to compare it to either of the previous occupations mentioned is ludicrous.

[QUOTE="bobaban"]He should have read his contract.CPM_basic

Agreed. It's his own fault for not reading it. Now he's just playing cry baby. No one likes a cry baby. Good luck getting hired now you wanker.... $100k in 15 months for talking into a microphone.....

in any of you knew anything about doing acting and voicework you'd know it's your union's job to look after those details. unfortunately the unions let them down with residuals.

apart from that he shouldn't be unhappy, now everyone knows who he is - worth far more than he knows right now.

[QUOTE="-Wheels-"]

I really don't think you understand the work that goes into making games. Hollick's measily 2 days worth of work means nothing to the hours that people spend every day putting this game together. Comparing developers to the camera man is such disgrace its not even funny. That camera man doesn't spend 60 hours a week for 2 years so that the actor can do his job. That guy just waltzes in and says what he's told to say, he doesn't deserve another penny extra.

PBSnipes

As for what Hollick has to do, more power to him if he can waltz in and lay down all those lines in 2 days. I've only had experience acting from some high-school drama classes, but making sure you get the lines right is a suprisingly tough job. I know I couldn't record the quantity of lines Hollick would have in that short a timeframe.

All I can say is wow, you knew less than I thought. Programming for games is one of the most mentally challenging jobs out there. Plus you have the artists which have to be very technical when dealing with the 3d tools they have. I am a character animator, so I know what goes behind this. Adjusting a camera is nothing in terms of actually creating a game. Let me break this down for you. You have the guys that program the engine (an entire team), then you have some guys that model in 3d the environments and characters, then some more artists that texture everything, then you have rigging artists which set up the bone system and animation interface for the animators, then you have the animators (that's my job) which make everything come to life. There are thousands of objects to create, there are thousands of animations to do, there are millions of lines of code to write. This takes YEARS of time to put together. Comparing this to shooting film just blows my mind. Really, the work isn't comparable.

I don't think it's them who are underpaid, I think it's the other actors (most popular movies actors) that are too well paid.

Pariah, the point I'm trying to make isn't whether or not cameramen deserve royalties, or whether or not they do the same amount of work as programmers/designers/artists, but that in the grand scheme of things those "behind the scenes" workers, regardless of industry, are going to be ignored because their contribution to the project isn't readily apparent. Just like how you're never going to watch a movie and say "Wow! Check out that camerawork!" you're never going to play a game and say "Wow, look at that coding!" And on that note, where do you draw the line? Does the 3D artist who suggested Character X's pants be black instead of blue deserve royalties? Does the intern who said "hey, Y is a pretty cool name" deserve a check for every copy sold? It's a slippery slope.

However, just like how great acting (both on-screen and voice) can make a movie, great voice acting can make a game. So on that note I think Hollick has a legitimate issue -- how is recording the voice of Niko Bellic any different than Eddie Murphy recording the voice of Donkey in Shrek? How is it any different than Kiefer Sutherland recording his voice for Ford commercials? As far as I can tell it isn't, yet unlike Hollick Eddie and Kiefer are getting royalties for their work.

Niko Bellic's voice acting sucked... if anything, he should be paying 2K for allowing him to be in such a good game...Stumpt25

Pariah, the point I'm trying to make isn't whether or not cameramen deserve royalties, or whether or not they do the same amount of work as programmers/designers/artists, but that in the grand scheme of things those "behind the scenes" workers, regardless of industry, are going to be ignored because their contribution to the project isn't readily apparent. Just like how you're never going to watch a movie and say "Wow! Check out that camerawork!" you're never going to play a game and say "Wow, look at that coding!"PBSnipes

I'm not particularly sure how that became an issue. As far as I can tell it's not much of a correlary to the subject at hand. I guess it happened when you tried to use them as an analogy.

In any event: In most respects, it's neither the skill nor the ineptitude of the camermen that add to or subtract from the end-product, but rather the person directing its construction. A good director could have a bad crew and he would still be able to craft a masterpiece since he always has the final say on the editing. The camermen are just there to capture angles; the director actually picks them.

And on that note, where do you draw the line? Does the 3D artist who suggested Character X's pants be black instead of blue deserve royalties? Does the intern who said "hey, Y is a pretty cool name" deserve a check for every copy sold? It's a slippery slope.PBSnipes

Since they all work on a salary basis, the question is irrelevant. I haven't suggested that anyone get royalties aside from the publisher who continues to fund the programming and development operation. I was simply expanding on your logic that followed your original analogy in regards to who would deserve residuals according to Wheels' reasoning.

In the end, I suppose my point was that if anyone should be getting residuals, the programming directors are more deserving than Hollick.

However, just like how great acting (both on-screen and voice) can make a movie, great voice acting can make a game. So on that note I think Hollick has a legitimate issue -- how is recording the voice of Niko Bellic any different than Eddie Murphy recording the voice of Donkey in Shrek? How is it any different than Kiefer Sutherland recording his voice for Ford commercials? As far as I can tell it isn't, yet unlike Hollick Eddie and Kiefer are getting royalties for their work.PBSnipes

All this means is that actors unions are just as unreasonable as Hollick is being. It's like someone in this thread said earlier: It's not so much that Hollick isn't being paid enough as it is that the other actors out there are being paid too much.

Again, I don't particularly have a problem with the actors' agents working out individual contracts with the people they're working for, but that doesn't mean I have to acknowledge whatever sums they arrive to an agreement with are fair.

I don't get how actors (Hollywood especially) want to profit from each and every sale on top of their already giganormous paychecks. Does a burger flipper get profit from each burger he makes? Does a teacher get profit from each student? Does a quick-lube mechanic get money for each car he tends? No, they get paid, shut up and do their job. I hate greedy people.br0kenrabbit

Right on. I agree. I guess the more money you make, the more money you want. Just goes to show that money never buys happiness. As long as you can afford to put food on your families table, thats all most people care about. This guy got $100K for 2 days work, and hes still complaining? lol.

Since they all work on a salary basis, the question is irrelevant. I haven't suggested that anyone get royalties aside from the publisher who continues to fund the programming and development operation. I was simply expanding on your logic that followed your original analogy in regards to who would deserve residuals according to Wheels' reasoning.Pariah_001

All this means is that actors unions are just as unreasonable as Hollick is being. It's like someone in this thread said earlier: It's not so much that Hollick isn't being paid enough as it is that the other actors out there are being paid too much.

Again, I don't particularly have a problem with the actors' agents working out individual contracts with the people they're working for, but that doesn't mean I have to acknowledge whatever sums they arrive to an agreement with are fair. Pariah_001

Voice actors are members of SAG by contractual agreements. They know the terms of the contracts when they sign them.

That said, he did an excellent job in GTA. Easily the best GTA protagonist to date.

Well, I'd say they deserve some royalties.

I mean, come on, 100k for fifteen months of work? Compared to the money the game is making?

I don't think it unreasonable that he should at least make a million for bringing the main character to life for a game as large as GTAIV.

Not to mention, the more money voice actors recieve for their work, people will take voice acting more seriously, and we can have more professional, higher quality voice actors in this industry as well as others.

Thompsonwhore

JUst to be clear, other fine people at Rockstar wrote the story , created Niko's dialouge, etc. Micheal just did voice work and some motion capture. 100k is plent of cash for a part-time, super fun job. He wasnt this much of a wuss in the game......Oh, thats right........he was ACTING like a badass.

no and they need to stop being greedybayareahusla

This is the attitude that the MPAA took with the SWG. A major industry can't contuine to make insane amounts of money and not pay there talent. If they are not cover by the SAG voice actors need to join together and get more of the pie.

Niko Bellic's voice acting sucked... if anything, he should be paying 2K for allowing him to be in such a good game...Stumpt25

thank you. his voice was whiney and annoying.