042nrogera2 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 http://videogames.yahoo.com/events/playbac...back-31/1287413 Unbelievable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonrock Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 He shouldn't have been bitchin. 100,000 is just fine. I would have done it for 100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtaHitmanStrikesBack Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 He shouldn't have been bitchin. 100,000 is just fine. I would have done it for 100. yeh put 100000 in the bank and you get good interest what was he wanting I guess he wanted 100 billion dollars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:Alex:. Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Ah well. So much for giving Niko more character development than usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defuser Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I quite like the fact that they finished the report with a Niko suicide. Cheeky. Here's the source of that 'hell no' quote, by the way... http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/01/23/...ost-and-damned/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysniper Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 considering how much the game made, what hollick got was nothing, i think he deserved to get a little bit more than what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBullBunny Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) f*ck YOU ROCKSTAR STUPID GREEDY MOTHER f*ckERS that just proves they just want money, idc i love rockstar to death and grand theft auto, that is really greedy, the game made so much money and they only paid him 100k? he deserves up to a quarter million or more for his work, he was the main voice actor throughout the whole game, i bet a f*cking janitor made more then him Edited February 8, 2009 by madbullbunny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defuser Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Couple of points: Hollick knew what he was getting when he went in. Knowing Rockstar's pedigree, he also knew they were likely to make a lot of money that he wouldn't see. Until conditions for actors in video games improve, it is impossible to expect Rockstar to give him more money than they feel they have to. Hollick knew this right from the start as subsequent royalties were dismissed as impossible. Hollick's decision to take the job was likely offset against the exposure he would receive, and the subsequent jobs that are sure to come forward as a result. He hasn't done as badly out of this as you'd think. Plus, don't ever think that $100K is a small amount of money. Even in today's climate, it's enough to ensure a comfortable lifestyle. It's just that in comparison to a blockbuster salary, it seems paltry. Hollick himself doesn't blame Rockstar - he says so, specifically, in this NY Times article (the one that generated all the heat in the first place) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/21/arts/tel...21gta.html?_r=1 - the sad truth is that if he'd have kept his mouth shut, the door would probably have been kept open. I struggle to understand what the benefit of that article would have been for Hollick. He states that negotiations are ongoing with the union, that probably will be finalised this summer, about actor's pay in video games and the question of royalties, something that would have been unaffected by his approaching the press. Although at pains to shield Rockstar from any negativity, he inevitably made them look ruthless and unfair by denying him what he feels is his due by making comparisons to other media. It also gives him a reputation as someone willing to approach the press if he feels he has been treated unfairly despite the terms being laid out well in advance. I think he deserves more money, to be honest, but this was not a smart move on his part. I suspect it was perhaps to keep his profile up, as is so important for actors. Sack your agent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glumok Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who is voicing Johnny Klebitz ? Do you think he will act the same as Hollick ? I wonder how much the guy who voiced CJ in San Andreas (or even Tommy in Vice City) was paid and how he haves reacted, in comparaison. I guess the guy who voiced Claude in GTA III didn't get any money from his work, ho ho. I hope the career of Hollick is not dead after that, because he is a pretty talented actor, after all. I agree with the poster above : "Until conditions for actors in video games improve, it is impossible to expect Rockstar to give him more money than they feel they have to." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullet_Chris Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Well... Hollick probably would have got $40-30,00 for doing new lines in The Lost and Damned, if he didn't bitch to the New York times, but I still respect him. I do also understand him. The game is still earning money each day, while R* is earning millions. Hollick, nothing. Compared to the sales of GTA IV Your point is what exactly?That Hollick should get a share of their company, or what? He didnt play in a f*cking movie, did he?He should have known that this game is the best of the best and ask for more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gta 4 gamer Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 What I didn't want to happen. I read that piece of sh*t on yahoo like 15 minutes ago. Why oh why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dotseoem Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 This is Old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TT1987 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 The same thing happened to Ray Liotta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rucke Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 For voiceing a video game character he earned alot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93Sean93 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who is voicing Johnny Klebitz ? Do you think he will act the same as Hollick ? Scott Hill. And let's hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Hollick is a bitch for this, f*ck him. And half of the time, his poor performance takes me out of the game and ruins my immersion, other times he shines though. He knew, as all voice actors and fill in musicians know, that when you go for a One Shot contract, you get a One Shot sum. He agreed, and now he is complaining? Complain your bloody heart out, you signed a paper, now live by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrel Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 sad news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capricornus Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I just watched this on Yahoo about 5 minutes ago. I was laughing my ass off at that "Hell No" bit by R*. Michael Hollick was a damn good voice actor. To bad we won't see any more of him. I can understand where MH is coming from, he used a great amount of time to do the voiceover work for Niko, which was a near perfect job. On top of that, the game took a lot longer to beat than it would take any movie to end, if that counts for anything. MH should have been satisfied with his pay though. A lot can be done with 100K. Yeah, R* made hundreds of millions from GTA IV that Hollick didn't even see, but the need the money for other projects. Ahh well, maybe someone else will pick him up. I personally would have loved to get the 100K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlweathersarm Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 GTA3 sold millions of copies with a mute lead character. Hollick is not the talent in GTA the programmers are and they are the ones that deserve royalties. GTA4 would have sold the same amount regardless if Hollick is doing the voicework or if it had been some other unknown actor in the lead role. Giving actors royalties for every game sold would change the profit models for game companies and the result would be a less proftable product with less quality. He should be happy with the exposure he got from the game and consider that his royalties. Chorizombie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 GTA3 sold millions of copies with a mute lead character. Hollick is not the talent in GTA the programmers are and they are the ones that deserve royalties. Exactly. These people are all hired for one shot recordings - this man should know better than to try this just because of how successful the game has become. Before IV came out, it was anyone's guess, there was a load of gamble in this title. It is one of the reasons the voice work and music was so low budget. Either way, you go to the studio, you sign a paper, you do a one shot recording, you get paid, your job and involvement is done. I'm sure he was paid to be at those conventions too. He's a joke, and if anything, this has hurt his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LitoBX Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 He looks like a prick, not surprising he is lol. Seriously, one hundred thousand is a great amount for being a voice voice actor for a video game. How much do you think the voice actor for Tommy from Vice City made? He was most likely payed less and he was in Good Fellas. Hollick needs to lighten up, or not. It's not like we'll hear his voice ever again, lmao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LitoBX Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 f*ck YOU ROCKSTAR STUPID GREEDY MOTHER f*ckERS that just proves they just want money, idc i love rockstar to death and grand theft auto, that is really greedy, the game made so much money and they only paid him 100k? he deserves up to a quarter million or more for his work, he was the main voice actor throughout the whole game, i bet a f*cking janitor made more then him Use your brain. You know how many people they pulled in the works for GTA IV? It's a new engine, they most likely paid over five hundred people. Yes, the game made half a billion but I bet Rockstar only saw a few million of that billion. Listen for over five hundred people getting a hundred g's for just being a voice actor in a video game is a pretty good deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QwertyAAA Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who is voicing Johnny Klebitz ? Do you think he will act the same as Hollick ?I wonder how much the guy who voiced CJ in San Andreas (or even Tommy in Vice City) was paid and how he haves reacted, in comparaison. I guess the guy who voiced Claude in GTA III didn't get any money from his work, ho ho. I hope the career of Hollick is not dead after that, because he is a pretty talented actor, after all. I agree with the poster above : "Until conditions for actors in video games improve, it is impossible to expect Rockstar to give him more money than they feel they have to." Haha, actually, this was exactly what happened with Ray Liotta after Vice City came out. OT: Inconcievable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 considering how much the game made, what hollick got was nothing, i think he deserved to get a little bit more than what he did. What's sadly amusing is putting it in perspective with the other actor, Ray Liotta and his wanting of more funds to do it.... and DJ Lazlow Jones, who says in print It's the greatest job he ever had, both from a career move, and the fun factor. I could see it being as such. Sam said he's more interested investing the money into the technicals of the game, not paying the actors who contribute. In working with film actors, they can take pride in their films IF they stand the test of time, we know their work will out-live them! BUT, gaming also presents a very interesting medium, being that it's interactive... It has a life all it's own that passes from generation to generation. It's interesting to see how as a game gets really dated, the acting/voicing work will live on and it will feel fresh to those playing it because of the inter-active medium. The only thing that unflinchingly dates is subject matter and graphics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LitoBX Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who is voicing Johnny Klebitz ? Do you think he will act the same as Hollick ?I wonder how much the guy who voiced CJ in San Andreas (or even Tommy in Vice City) was paid and how he haves reacted, in comparaison. I guess the guy who voiced Claude in GTA III didn't get any money from his work, ho ho. I hope the career of Hollick is not dead after that, because he is a pretty talented actor, after all. I agree with the poster above : "Until conditions for actors in video games improve, it is impossible to expect Rockstar to give him more money than they feel they have to." Haha, actually, this was exactly what happened with Ray Liotta after Vice City came out. OT: Inconcievable! Only difference is Ray is awesome and they should have paid him a little more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 From both Ray and Michael's perspective, they'd no real interest or involvement with gaming before. They are not gamers. They don't have the same keen interest in it that we do, and we can appreciate their acting work as well, but from an artists' perspective work is different. A number of years ago Entertainment Tonight had Sylvester Stallone on talking about taking points for a picture, that same practice in the video game world would allow talant to get proceeds based on the eventual outcome, rather then agreed upon fees up front. That practice is NOT used in the gaming world to my knowledge...but so you know, points have been in place for film actors for a good number of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley001 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who is voicing Johnny Klebitz ? Do you think he will act the same as Hollick ?I wonder how much the guy who voiced CJ in San Andreas (or even Tommy in Vice City) was paid and how he haves reacted, in comparaison. I guess the guy who voiced Claude in GTA III didn't get any money from his work, ho ho. I hope the career of Hollick is not dead after that, because he is a pretty talented actor, after all. I agree with the poster above : "Until conditions for actors in video games improve, it is impossible to expect Rockstar to give him more money than they feel they have to." Haha, actually, this was exactly what happened with Ray Liotta after Vice City came out. OT: Inconcievable! Only difference is Ray is awesome and they should have paid him a little more. But wasn't Ray Liotta actualy paid that extra cash? I mean R* complained that Ray Liotta kept wanting more money, so didn't R* inevitably pay him up since Ray finally did the voice for Tommy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zee Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 he shouldve been smart and kept his mouth shut they might have used him again and gotten more money but he blew it and now theres no chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Hollick's issue is why should the same work pay less if it's used in a high-budget game than in a high-budget movie or TV show? Business practices in games are the wild west compared to film and TV and he used the attention of GTA IV to make people aware of that. Even though Hollick didn't attack Rockstar specifically, he called attention to an issue that will make actors more expensive for game companies if actors get their way, so naturally game companies are unhappy about that. I basically agree with his point. Game companies need to accept that treating workers worse than other industries is not a fair way to be more profitable than other industries. If Hollick does not get paid for his old recordings being re-used in the DLC, that is another example of the game industry not following what is done in film and TV, where you can't reuse stuff without paying the actor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrel Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 oice actor throughout the whole game, i bet a f*cking janitor made more then him Use your brain. You know how many people they pulled in the works for GTA IV? It's a new engine, they most likely paid over five hundred people. Yes, the game made half a billion but I bet Rockstar only saw a few million of that billion. Listen for over five hundred people getting a hundred g's for just being a voice actor in a video game is a pretty good deal. They definitely seen a lot more than a few million, that's for sure. But still, i'm not saying they should of payed him more, because he knew what the contract was. He must of known how big the sales would of been if he done his history on previous games sales and knowing this was the most anticipated game like ever. Also, you said something about Michael, but seriously he really seems like a nice guy, from the interviews and pod-casts I've heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now