There's a chance that the heroes and villains in the games of Fall 2016 are going to sound a lot less familiar.

SAG-AFTRA, the nation's largest acting and performance union, announced tonight that the union's members have authorized the guild's National Board to declare a strike on behalf of performers in interactive media. The support for the referendum was overwhelming, with 96.52% of members voting in favor. This vote comes in response to two failed bargaining sessions earlier this year, and almost a year after the previous Interactive Media Agreement expired last December.

The union is quick to point out that this does not mean that there is currently a voice actors strike. Instead, this vote has authorized the National Board to declare a strike, which gives the guild's Negotiating Committee an additional tool to bring out while bargaining for what SAG-AFTRA calls "a fair resolution on behalf of performers working in video games."

There has been a lot of debate over what, exactly, a "fair resolution" is. An info page provided by SAG-AFTRA lays out their demands. In brief, the union is asking for:

• More transparency about the roles and games for which actors will be recording lines.
• Stunt pay for especially stressful or demanding recording session
• Stunt coordination on motion capture shoots
• Most contentiously, royalties from games that move over 2 million units. Per the current agreement, this would be a payment of $825.50 at every 2M unit mark, with a total cap at $3,300.

Many voice actors have come out to support these demands, with some of them writing impassioned pleas and expansive arguments for why they support this measure (Wil Wheaton's is definitely worth reading if you have the time).

Others, however, have pushed back against these demands. A blog post by Fryda Wolff (the voice of Civilization: Beyond Earth's narrator) makes the case that residual payments are an unrealistic goal, and that the real problem is a too-low base salary that reflects the age of the current Interactive Media Agreement, which was put into place in 1995. Her post also includes a number of anonymous quotes from developers who critique SAG-AFTRA's demands. One common refrain is that SAG-AFTRA doesn't have the expertise of the games industry necessary to understand what demands they should be making. Another common claim among SAG-AFTRA detractors is that voice actors don't have it any worse than any other worker in the industry.

If you're curious about the position of myself and some of the other editors on the site, check out these recent episodes of the Giant Beastcast and the Giant Bombcast, where members of the east and west coasts (respectively) talk about the complexity of this situation... and maybe do a little "stunt" voice acting ourselves.

Speaking only for myself: I believe that the labor conditions in the video game industry are a long way from fair, and I hope that this can be a catalyst for addressing the larger concerns. The artists, programmers, producers, designers, and everyone else in the game dev trenches definitely do have it as hard as the voice actors, but stating that fact does little to convince me that SAG-AFTRA shouldn't negotiate for a more lucrative deal. If anything, it's a reminder that we should be critical of labor conditions throughout the industry.

I don't know that every demand that SAG-AFTRA is making is the best move for the industry (or even for performers). I don't suspect they'll win each demand (or even that they expect to). But I do believe that talking openly about issues of pay, expectations, work environment, and fairness is good, and that workers organizing to make demands is a way to address those concerns. There is (as always) room for nuance: Yes, small studios are different than AAA publishers, and the needs and capabilities of both need to be addressed with precision and care. Yes, there are issues of practicality to be discussed when it comes to residual payments and the currently ascendant studio system. But we cannot forget that "impractical" is not the same as "impossible," and now and then it's worth it to pursue something that will take a lot of effort and time.

I've seen "practicality" used again as a defense against undertaking difficult change for years, and it is a shield that is starting to wear thin. I've heard us say that video games are a boundless medium that can tackle just about anything, and they can. I've heard us say that the the folks in this industry are incredible, passionate, hard-working people, and they are. We say that games and the people who make them, they can do anything... except address the long running, systemic issues of game development. That wouldn't be practical.

I reject this wholesale. When practicality is raised as an issue in a discussion about improving the games industry, that shouldn't be the end of the conversation. It should be an invitation to talk through the conditions that have made the improvement desired impractical. It is complicated, and there are old, structural problems that are hard to pin down. But however deep-rooted the causes of the game industry's ills, they are not natural, they're man-made. To paraphrase Ursula K. Le Guin's fantastic 2014 National Book Award speech: The current state of labor in the games industry seems inescapable, well, so did the divine right of kings.

With highly acclaimed, award-winning voice actors like Wil Wheaton behind this? There's no way it can fail!

Nah, but in all seriousness, I really hope this will make some headway because video game voice actors definitely deserve better working conditions/pay (as do the people making the games themselves!), but I have no idea why Wil Wheaton has so constantly been one of the "hot names" mentioned on all gaming news sites in regards to the potential VO strike.

Then again, I have no idea who actually cares about Wil Wheaton in general, so maybe I'm not the best guy to ask?

Don't worry. Indie jobs are mostly non union work. And even if they do union the role is tiny (look at how much voice work was done in Armikrog haha).

But ya. I support whatever is best. Unfortunately I'm not union, and don't know what good for them is, so I'm staying out of it. It's not my place to say.

I like that finishing note. Video game development could definitely use better labour conditions across the board and I also completely reject the notion that it cant' change even though there is far less demand than there are positions in game development.

(I wonder if Freddie Mercury's estate is going to give them problems because of that logo.)

Good read @austin_walker, I hadn't heard the last bit on "practicallity" but your stance seems sound to me. I have to say that I lean towards the VA's side in this but also understand the concerns of smaller dev's. That said, I really do hope that this is catalyst to change the working conditions of everyone in the game dev industry. It'd be nice to not hear about Konami-esque working conditions and pay tied to review scores, so if this ultimately leads to the elimination of those types of situations, I'm all for it.

I want to know how this will effect consumers down the line if SAG-AFTRA gets their way with this; if it leads to devs getting better conditions and pay too. Would I pay more for games so that devs and VAs get paid more? My initial reaction is yes I would... but not that much more. (Cuz I'm tight with money, I buy most games on sale already anyways)

I realize this would be years in the making if it happens at all.

So what you're saying is ... Persona 5 U.S. release delayed to 2017. Got it.

I have to agree with that Nolan North quote on the Bombcast as far as this issue (devs first) but I mean conditions need to improve somewhere first so I can't really argue against the change. That just seems like a bigger issue.

You're knocking on the door of a much larger issue when you expand the discussion to artists and programmers. Game dev (at least in the US) is run like everything else in the tech industry. Everyone's on salary and everyone's expected to work as much as is needed to get the job done. There is no overtime and there certainly are no unions.

Applying the union model to tech is an epic culture clash waiting to happen. If organized labor actually takes hold in the games industry, things will get... uh... "interesting".

The problem with wanting better conditions for artists, programmers, producers, designers, and everyone else in the game dev trenches is that for guys on the software side of things don't have a union in place at all. It would also take YEARS for them to even get one started much more to even be in a position to start making demands. Voice actors had it relatively easily by piggy backing on SAG. Computer professional in many instances can't even get overtime pay due to federal law (IIRC).

I can pretty much support everyone except the large AAA publishers in this fight.

3300 for 2mil copies? That seems kinda reasonable.

If it comes to a strike, I hope a voice actor strike means I won't have to hear the same handful of voice actors all the time. Hopefully, it will give new voice actors/actresses who aren't SAG a shot. I gotta say, most of the demands seem reasonable but most people seem to agree that the residuals for VO are ridiculous. No one buys a game because Nolan North is in it. Furthermore, as GB mentioned, once a shop goes SAG, all the VAs go SAG, right? Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that mean the every VA would get residuals (after the 2 mil mark), including small characters and NPCs? Wouldn't that encourage the producers to include as few VAs as possible to reduce residuals? In my opinion, that demand didn't increase their bargaining power, it decreased it because it seems like the public support isn't with them on that. I have to imagine the studios won't Kowtow on the residuals though, it would open the floodgates for the people who seem to actually deserve it like the producers, artists, programmers, and so on. Maybe in that way it would be best if the residuals would happen to open the door for more demands from arguably more deserving groups. But something about the people that have the smallest time investment getting in first doesn't stick right with me.

Since I mostly play Japanese games, thank god for dual audio. Although, jokingly, I would love to hear an all scab voice cast for Persona 5.

I can't think of anyone in the process of making a game that are easier to replace than the voice actors. I'd bet there are a bunch of really great out of work actors.

Not that I don't think the demands arn't reasonable. Except the royalties demand, if the devs who work all year round don't get royalties for their hard work, its hard to care about the VA.

I have VA actors that I like, but I don't know anyone who would buy a game just because they are in it. They're not movie stars, they dont push sales.

@austin_walker One too many "This" in "The union is quick to point out that this this does not..."

I'm definitely torn on this. I agree labor conditions/pay/job security in the industry is terrible all around, and I'm generally in favor of organizing and people from all segments of the industry making demands for things to be better. But I also think there are a lot of issues with voice actors and SAG being the tip of the spear in this effort.

I think most would rank voice acting below designers, programmers, artists, animators, writers and a ton of other groups in terms of impact on the quality of a game, and even further down if we're talking about driving sales. The amount of games where voice acting makes a difference are far and few between, and even in those games you'd be hard pressed to say that an actor's name or likeness actually factored into marketing or sales. Good voice acting matters, but it's not going to carry a work the same way a good movie actor could, and you can count the amount of truly in demand voice actors on your fingers. To make matters worse, SAG brings in their notions and baggage from TV/movie acting, where actors are front and center in the work and a driving force for demand, likely resulting in demands that are going to be completely out of whack for the industry. The end result seems like it's going to be a disaster.

And comparatively, voice actors have issues that are far below and distinct from those faced in the rest of the industry. Voice actors work on contract in a limited basis. They don't go through the cycle of crunch, layoffs, and chronic poor working environments, nor are they forced to pack up and move from studio to studio for a couple years at a time. Plus they're backed by a union with a ton of clout and already well-organized. That's not to say they don't have legitimate complaints, but it's unlikely that this will be the blueprint from which the rest of the industry solves their labor issues.

If anything, any deal will likely make the increasing budgetary disaster of major studio game development even worse, with effects likely to ripple down to other workers and the consumer. It's not like studios are drowning in profits from AAA game development that they're just refusing to share with the workers, or that a 2 million+ seller is a huge success that's making a profit that should then flow down to the actors.

If this affects Persona 5, so help me god....

@monkeyman04: Thanks!

@devil240z: Nope, $3,300 for 8M copies. $825.50 for every 2M increase. Edited for clarity!

"Yes, small studios are different than AAA publishers"

Genuine question: How many indies are doing mo-cap or work that would require stunt pay?

It could mean I the cons would stop outweighing the pros for me to work in that industry so I'm game with even forcing such a change and seeing where it goes.

$3,300 for a game that sells 8 million copies, and $825.50 for every 2 million sounds like an entirely reasonable demand by a well organized union like SAG.

@technician: yup... That's pretty much all I've been thinking ever since this issue first came to light a few weeks ago...

Honestly, I have to wonder if it would have any affect at all, as Atlus USA often uses mostly non-union actors. I believe it was one of the reasons P4's cast got gradually replaced, as several of the actors went union in the interim between P4's original release and Golden/Arena.

I'm sure it's probably an unfair comparison, but strikes to me have always seemed obnoxious, like a child crying in a grocery store because their parent won't buy them sweets.
I would hope the world we live in is reasonable enough to allow change when things are going especially shitty without resulting to such nonsense.

@blackout62: Very few, but one issue that I've seen brought up often from small devs is that while they can occasionally afford to pay for one "big name" VA, they can't afford to go full union on a production (which SAG would require). This isn't an issue that is insurmountable, but it's tough to address when the people in the negotiating room are there representing Activision and EA and not small and mid-sized devs, you know?

3300$ is loose change.

EA 2014 Annual Report: $4.02 billion in non-GAAP net revenue
Activision 2014 Annual Report: $4,81 billon non-GAAP revenues
Ubisoft 2014/15 Annual Report:€1,46 billion in sales

Eh, I'm sure publishers would just hire non-union/indie voice actors.

This does not bode well for games like skyrim that have so many NPC's and Voice Actors.

It means there will be incentive to either have less people, less talking or more characters voiced by the same people.

In the perfect world it wouldn't be an issue, but money men and companies only see the bottom line.

@blackout62: I can only think of one off the top of my head, Cliff Bleszinski's new game Lawbreakers, if that is considered indie.

In reference to Will Wheaton's article, I just feel like many other people involved in game development can create a much more substantial piece about what they do to create a game and more convincingly justify why they would need residuals. In that Double Fine documentary, Tim Schaffer filled up 5 A4 sheets of paper just to come up with the name of his game (Grim Fandango).

Their most convincing complaint to me is that they may only be able to work as a voice actor for a small period of their lives since they are prone to physical damage to their voices. This sounds similar to why professional sports people have to be paid large amounts, because they are expendable, and that is all they know and the greatest ones can only do it until their 30-40 years old. They need those residuals to support them for when they are no longer able to voice-act.

They should also fight for benefits for everyone involved in game development. I think this is the best way for them to convince people that they are not saying they are more important than the programmers, animators, writers, etc. Even if it's a royalty payment of $1, if they say that they deserve that more than everyone else, that can't be a good look.

Good voice actors can make or break a game for me, especially if it's a story heavy one. Persona 4 is a good example of this for me. Every time they replaced one of the original voice actors I got more and more bummed out and it legitimately impacted my enjoyment of all those spin-offs and remakes. In fact, a major reason I didn't enjoy Golden as much as I wanted is because I didn't like most of the replacements. In many regards, I would say that is one of the hardest parts of a game to replace, as it is one of the most obvious front and center elements of a game for a consumer. Nobody is going to notice if a programmer gets replaced, but people will notice if your main character gets a new voice actor. Especially if they aren't as good in the role. They may not beas important a lead developer or lead artist, but they are not just some random cog that anyone can fill their place. Even if they don't sell games on name alone they can affect your lasting opinion of a game.

And really, there aren't actually that many legitimately great english voice actors out there. At least not so many that you could remove all the notable voice actors and suitable replacements on your doorstep. There's a reason people like Nolan North and Troy Baker get used so often, because people do recognize they are good at their job and the developers know that having a good voice actor does make a difference. I certainly don't want to go back to the early PS1 era of voice acting where your voice cast is just people on your development team or random people off the street that can't act worth a damn. There's a reason English voice acting was derided for so many years, it's because they didn't think it mattered as much as it does.

My first impression a week ago on this was "Residuals?! Guess again!" Then, of course, it turns out the residuals are 825.50 per 2mil copies sold with the 3300 cap and suddenly it seems pretty reasonable and there's some room for negotiation here... Especially since this should mean a compromise on the front end fee.

This is a misnomer. The actors that drive demand in film and TV negotiate their own terms way above and beyond SAG minimums. Contract negotiations like these have no effect on them. It's the unknowns, the ones playing lesser guest roles and incidental characters that really benefit from things like residuals and better working conditions.

Just because the production is non-union, doesn't mean all the cast is. A number of union actors moonlight in non-union productions, either under fake names or by not being credited at all, because SAG hasn't been policing this all that closely. That changed during previous strike authorizations, and they started sending out letters to anyone suspected of doing non-union work, making it clear that scabbing would not be tolerated.

@blacklagoon: Well I think that kinda reaffirms my point. Uncredited non-union actors are not as common as they once were and Atlus USA seems to be moving more and more toward using only non-union actors. (At least that's my perception. I don't know every actor's union status.) It's possible a big game like Persona 5 would be different, but it's also possible they would have no plans to use union actors in the first place.

It sounds like none of my business, I have no influence over the matter and scarcely have a stake on either side. If it were any industry other than games, it likely would have passed me by entirely.

It wasn't until years after when people began discussing why that James Bond movie wasn't so hot, I learned there had been a writers strike at some point XD

I hope they don't get tied up with the idea of residuals, because their positions on stunt pay, transparency, and the like are very reasonable. I doubt publishers will budge on residuals, either because developers would be pissed or demand the same (or both).

Having said that, I would love to see voice actors and developers both earn a little extra when a game does super well and would love to see game devs organize to protect their own interests as these voice actors are doing. This sort of discussion about labour practices in the gaming industry is needed and incredibly healthy.

A rising tide lifts all ships, duders.

(Here's hoping they don't have to strike. I really don't want six months of shit voice acting in games).

I really want this strike to happen so the people in the game dev trenches can point to it and fight for their rights. I want a fair, unionized and safe game industry that I don't feel disgusted to be a consumer of.

Then again, no ethical consumption under capitalism.

Also, I hope that if triple-a companies try to skirt this by hiring scabs and non-union people to do VO, that they are forced into the spotlight and we can judge them for their actions.

@austin_walker: "I don't suspect that they'll win each demand (or even that they expect to). But I do believe that talking openly about issues of pay, expectations, work environment, and fairness is good, and that workers organizing to make demands is a way to address those concerns."

Hopping in for some (hopefully) fair critique here Austin. The underlined "that" words are a bit superfluous. I use to have a problem with them until someone started pointing them out to me.

@etpc: Why do non union voice actors not deserve work?

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: Both of those are accurate edits, but the second changes what I was trying to say a little. In that second sentence, my intention is: "I believe that talking openly about..., and [I also believe] that workers...," not to "I believe that talking openly..., and workers organizing...").

In effect, by using "that" twice, I'm trying to bring "I believe" back into the second clause. I do that because I'm using "I believe" as a qualifier to signal a softer position here, partially as a rhetorical technique and partially because I actually do think it's worth taking a soft and nuanced approach. Reminding the reader that this is what "I believe" or "I think" isn't necessary (because of course this is what I think or believe, I'm the author!) but it's a way to make clear that I don't think I'm speaking from a position of infallibility or perfect knowledge! (Leaving it unedited because I like showing the behind the scenes on some of my writing choices!)

First one is dead on though!

@austin_walker: that doesn't sound unreasonable. Am I missing something? Hell aaa game companies should offer that to all their employees.

For me, as someone who is currently studying Games Design and Development at university in Australia, I can't help but feel angry that SAG is demanding royalties. For most games VA is only a small part of the experience, an important one yes, but still generally small. If Programmers, artists, designers and everyone else making games was getting royalties then absolutely VA's should be getting it too. Everyone who helps to create a game should be given royalties if what they have created and worked overtime for sells well. But if the people who are actually making the game aren't getting royalties then VA's should definitely not be. In my mind they should be the last on the list to be given royalties.

Has Uncharted 4 finished recording sessions?

That would be the major release I could potentially being significantly affected by a potential strike given how central Nolan North and co are to that property.

@austin_walker: Ouch. One would think of how independent films pay for A-listers but most of the time it's that those same A-listers put money into the project which is a problem because this whole strike is because the VAs aren't paid enough.

@zeik: I don't think Atlus has made any change in which actors they use, they simply hire a company to record the voices at non-uinon rates and it's between the casting director and the actors who wants to audition. And their games typically don't credit any voice actors, whether they're trying to hide their name or not.

But you may be right in that in that there are more of these actors doing non-union work who aren't trying to hide, and even confirm their roles on social media. But that seems more these actors joining SAG and going "financial core", which is an old legal precedent that enables a union member to become a "dues paying non-member" that can work on union productions without being bound by their rules. Some of these actors (who generally come from anime dubbing) have gone on to become very successful in video games, which leads to the interesting situation where a few of the voice acting super stars often mentioned in relation to this story are probably not proper SAG members. In theory they'd be free to work as much as they'd want even if the strike happens... But that would undoubtedly not go down well with their fellow actors.

That can't be right, the main cast was mostly, if not entirely, already well-established guild VAs. Troy Baker, Laura Bailey, Johnny Yong Bosh, Yuri Lowenthal, etc

@sor_eddie: Well, in 2007/2008, these actors were mostly established as anime dub actors, and dubs are largely non-union. Beyond that, read my post above about "financial core".

The people that _can_ goes on strike not the people that _needs_ it. Hopefully this will put an end to sore throats in gaming. What a beutiful world.

@austin_walker: The doctor has spoken! Thanks for the great insight into your writing technique! This'll definitely help me use the word better in the future!

^ This. Once one group gets a bigger piece of the pie everyone is going to want one and its going to make the cost of video game development skyrocket.