Bethesda isn't handing out early review copies
So Bethesda has unleashed a surprisingly vocal F-you to the general public by suggesting that it won't be giving out any early review copies. It will continue to give out copies to youtubers to make the game look nice in their let's plays (something they didn't exactly mention specifically, but are doing so anyway), but no more review copies. This even includes rediculously enough, the Skyrim remaster. Why? To make sure everyone gets the same experience... except certain video coverage of people playing or showing off the game. Obviously the excuse isn't good enough, and people aren't happy with this. If you'll remember, I also already covered how this messed with perception around Doom. However I never expected this to start to apply for all games, and sadly 2K has supposedly fell to the same deal. This looks like it might become just a common thing, with the courtesy of getting the review copies out early fading.
The weird thing is, this isn't something I'd normally expect of a company with such promising material, so the normal argument of "they just want to hide their bad games!" doesn't carry a lot of weight to it. I mean yes they certain can hide crap, and they've also published disappointments via Brink, Rage, and some other weird game I can't even remember. However that's very rare for them. We're talking about a line-up of some of the best FPS and RPG games to come out among their years, and a line-up of games that in some way challenge the market place for the better. Even if you choose to call them mediocre, or cry about how disappointed you were with Fallout 4, none of those complaints were things you'd typically see addressed in reviews. The only guys who'd give that type of critical coverage, are youtubers who can still hit the same marks in just first impressions alone. I'm not saying don't be any less angry or alarmed about this decision, but I'm just commenting that it's a weird and unnecessary one. I'd almost be willing to say they're more accurate in their statement about achieving player parity, and that they really want everyone to be on the same page so they can continue to rush out games in need of big day 1 patches instead of merely producing terrible games.
However in the end, this is still another stupid move from AAA gaming that doesn't consider that maybe the nice way is a little better. By resorting to this dumb scheme, you've not only opened the gates to encourage a widespread effect, but also made people second guess or hold back on your games, risk rushed reviews that can be damaging in either direction, and it's just a downright cowardly move that nobody really appreciates. I don't see a winner in this situation, just a confused attempt to try and exploit your abilities on the market, and it's a move that won't play out in a desired way. As I stated back when this occurred with Doom, set your expectations accordingly. There's rentals, waiting, or if you really feel like you love everything you see, go ahead and dive in. However now I'll almost feel guilty if I just dive into a pre-order, because I don't want Bethesda to think I'm rewarding this stupid move with anything. This is a lot of cowardice coming out of an ironically bold announcement to make, but being bold enough to say something stupid isn't necessarily a good kind of bold.
Vague thoughts on the voice actor strike...
So voice actors have officially gone on strike, and various games and studious are effected. Trying to handle the situation and look into things, I've only realized just how out of touch I am with this side of work routine and the politics lurking around it. Trying to dig through the documents and claims, seem to be grasping either at things I don't understand, or back and forth talks that don't seem to line up right with the reality of the situation. I think a lot of my ignorance comes from just not knowing the voice acting environment, and such a big union run place like California.
I don't work in a very union happy state and from what I hear of them, that's a pretty good thing. However they clearly have some benefits otherwise they wouldn't be around, and so I'm not going to sit and pretend like they're villains... nor the companies. In having come from this side of things, I'm also not the type of person to fall into this trap of thinking the companies are all evil super villains, and the unions are exclusively there for the heart and well-being of the people. If you are truly in this for the right reasons and can let go of "sides", you'll find a good amount of the "we're super good guys for the safety and fairness" people have some skeletons in their closets, and you should hear out others for a reasonable conclusion. That's why these deals made in the end are often considered compromises, both sides have something to do here. If we just tripled the minimum wage, it sounds happy to say all us hard workers get more money, but it could have some seriously devastating consequences including mass layoffs and higher product prices to compensate. Of course nobody advocates for that extreme, but nobody will admit it when they try to trickle it up and deflect any criticism with "Oh, so you just care about greedy companies instead of the people!" So just please bare in mind reasoning over feelings, because its terrifying when people let their feelings get ahead of this stuff. That being said, I'm a horrible example or rationalizing this subject because of my confessed ignorance on how to even interpret the information that's out there. Do some research yourself instead of taking everything I say at face value, especially if you've had more experience with these kind of situations or even just union agreements in general.
Okay so, honestly I can't go too far into the technicalities for reasons stated above, but some key points came to my mind with certain things I read.
- Some actors are asking for royalties on games, citing movies as their source. Specifically, GTAV actor suggested that his work behind a game that went on to sell billions should have given him more money. I... just can't bring myself to agree with this, simply off of opinion that I don't think the voice actor is as deserving of the revenue as people who are continually supporting the game. Royalties should go towards the actual makers, and a voice actor should get what they put into the game for their time and work. Besides, with all the minor voices that go into the game, where would we draw the line? At what point does a successful game mean bigger payouts for what actor? Why is an actor entitled to the success of such games anyway? Their importance varies, unlike that of a movie where the actors and acting is one of the biggest core points, whereas the voices could be tossed out the window almost entirely for a game like COD that gets its success more on multiplayer. I don't think the guy who does "OBJECTIVE TAKEN!" needs an extra payment for every 1'000 copies sold, nor the star of a mode only 20% of the players played. Now the guy that voice Stanley parable is a whole different story. Meanwhile if we talk Uncharted, we're basically using actors for a movie at this point with mo-cap and all. See what I mean, this is highly inconsistent, and you can't just point to movies and cry "it isn't fair!" These guys are being paid $200+ an hour, and I'm not seeing the problem with just putting in some good time as the star, and walking home with the time you put into it. If this does get passed, I'll be very curious about how the finer details work.
- There's potential safety issues at stake if one claim was right. Some have spoken out against this idea of... well, speaking out too much and too harshly in one sitting. If it's really true that people are essentially doing dying screams for up to an hour or more, that might be a concerning. I think they need to be put on more of a system of variety, able to work in normal or idle dialogue, and then do the death parts. On that note as well, how many death parts are they really doing? I mean, having just been through Rise of The Tomb Raider and dying plenty, the majority of deaths were almost sound effects of stuff like just falling over dead, collapsing with a smack on the ground, or even a snap. Very few actual screams, so... devs/directors/whatever, how about you don't push them too hard on this? It's for your own sake to, as you don't want to hurt their voices. On the other hand, some things have come to light bringing this claim down a peg or two. The union seems to have lost interest according to some document interpretations I've read, and if they were up some are asking for "hazard pay", which is just stupid. Don't sit there and cry about doing your work, instead ask for safe conditions FIRST. The idea of a hazard pay for voice actors to do their job of voice acting is both ridiculous, and exploitable.
- The idea of more pay in general is likely on the table, and I'm not sure how to feel about this. On one hand it's $205 or so per hour on average, and that's a lot. On the other hand, places like California are very expensive, and I don't know how much this kind of job's payout will end in general. Maybe they only stay in around 4 hours per game (I seriously doubt it, but just hypothetical) and need each hour to go far. ...or maybe these guys are making a killing, and their unions are just trying to get more money out of them by pointing to other things like movies. I don't want them asking for more money just because Tom Hanks or whoever makes more. Now that being said, I'm curious as to how much has changed over the course with the mainstream use of Mo-cap animations. I know actors like Nolan North go into this stuff, and I certainly hope they're paid more than just the dude who's yelling in a microphone for several hours. At the point of serious mo-cap stuff, they're practically real actors, just being edited and enhanced into the digital world later rather than being given it through pure camera.
- Transparency, because apparently game devs aren't even letting their own workers know what the hell is within a game. Look, I get that you don't want your game leaked out (especially if you show it to them, and they just walk out uninterested but with full knowledge), but you have to compromise with the very people you work with and give them some good details. There's NDAs, and you can add sueing or whatever to it if possible. There, happy? Because what's worse than a game being leaked with.... very little actual consequences and more way to leak than just actors, is having a team that isn't sure what they're even doing! I'm entirely for the voice actors on this part.
 |
| Give Dr.Nefarious whatever he wants though |
Finally, I'd like to conclude this with one... probably unpopular opinion. Actually I'm surprised and impressed with the others I've heard suggesting similar. I'd like to perhaps see some replacements and new blood come into play here, and perhaps a continuation of just more random people. I know our medium has been evolving, and getting more attached to high paid and good actors, and some really good performances. However at some point you need to draw a line at what's necessary, and some of these games are going way too overboard. Far Cry Primal has at least two big name actors, and they don't even speak freakin' english with all their talent. Why!? By contrast a role like putting JK Simmons in Portal 2 has basically made that game that much more of a legend, with his quotes being pulled all the time, shouted out by fans, merchandised, and I'm even among some people who know that actor from that game itself and into his other work. It's hard not to find people either equate him to Peter Parker's boss, or Caveman Johnson, and that's kind of awesome. ...but then we go back to Primal, we keep hearing about how Advanced Warfare got Kevin Spacey like it was some big deal, and then there's people like Nolan North and Troy Baker who just show up in everything. We don't always need that kind of stuff. Stop, step back for a minute, and really think about what your game needs and go accordingly. Not everything needs to go big and go broke, that's a part of why we're in this situation now where AAA gaming is getting hard to be a sustainable business.
You want to know who my favorite voice actor was in gaming this whole year so far? A guy called Darin De Paul. Among his small time work in voices, doing stuff like the fairy tale Geico commercials, advertising a big mac, and being one of thousands of voices lost among those behind skylanders, he's also the badass Samuel Hayden from this year's Doom (*insert random jab at Bethesda here from the last topic*). He runs a humble little business website for contact, and seems to be just a smaller freelance sort of guy you just call up for smaller roles. But he was incredible when put to the task, and could easily become a staple guy with the right performances, and if the right games continue to contact him. That's the kind of little guy stuff I'm used to seeing. A life-time favorite of mine is the guy who voice Dr.Nefarious, who is most famous for voicing a guy in Star Trek... and practically nothing else. He also does Andrew Ryan, and was a villain for one episode in the live action The Tick, but aside from that I haven't seen any of his work. He's a fairly humble guy, but with a big presentation when he brings out his character. I'm used to voice actors of that scope still getting the job done. Oh and Dust: An Elysian tale is full of amazing voice actors doing either small time work, or even being animators at heart. By contrast, the voice swap with Snake for MGSV was just stupid honestly, and I'd sooner have the older voice back than accept the idea of some expensive TV taking his place. Gaming essentially came from more humble or even in-studio type performances, and I don't think it'd be a crime to stick with that except for where serious talent is needed. So while I do in fact still want things like a safe working environment, and transparency, I wouldn't want teams bending over backwards just to get Nolan North into his 55th game, or so they can reach for big hollywood names. Keep getting fresh blood in the system, don't overreach just for some trivial big name a few people might recognize, and... well, just do what's right for the game in question. It's okay to be fun, and have a cheesy voice again, instead of always going after serious stuff.
 |
| Excellent performance Mr.Paul. |
No comments:
Post a Comment