I think regardless of whether someone cares about voice acting in games, to ignore the reality that popular, well-loved games: A. Use voice-acting and B. Treat their voice actors in a way that is sometimes less than acceptable Is foolish. I get Scott's point (Ra ra ra those games are crappy and repetitive and the industry is stuck in a rut), and to some extent there are things he's saying that are right. But saying that a positive outcome would be less AAA games being made that try to "improperly use voice acting" when they should "just focus on the gameplay" shuns a massive number of people who like to play games that aren't Scott.
And it ignores that these voice actors will keep working on these games because it's a huge industry and literally nothing is changing that, so we should probably treat them well.
shuns a massive number of people who like to play games that aren't Scott.
Those people don't like to play games. They like to watch them.
This is a value judgment you have imposed on those people. They don't enjoy (necessarily) watching others play these games. They don't like just watching LPs. They want to play the games. Everyone I know who is aware of modern games is aware of LPs and their prominence. We know lots of people do watch the cutscenes for games online to save money. And yet, tons of people *also* buy the games and play and enjoy them. Either they've all induced a lie into themselves to force themselves to spend money, or they enjoy playing a game that you find boring. What this says about them? I dunno.
Voice actors do deserve better working conditions. And it is extremely difficult to have a game with both great narrative and great gameplay. Thus, very few such games exist. Where you see one, the other isn't. And you know what? That's okay. Don't get your knickers in a twist over it.
And that's really the crux of the issue. Scott, right now, is making the same argument as the people going "Well, Ahmed didn't INVENT the clock, he just put it in a new case", albeit without the blatant racism.
Be that as it may(or more likely, may not) be, that's not the fucking issue here. Why are we even trying to argue with him about it?
The issue is that Voice actors are getting treated far worse than they deserve. This is something that should be corrected, no matter your opinion on individual titles, or entire genres - it doesn't fucking matter what you think of the things they're in, they deserve better pay and conditions. That's the issue.
Scott's allowed to have his opinion, even if we think it's fucking stupid. And he's no less entitled to it, even if it really is genuinely fucking stupid. Smart people are allowed to be dumb sometimes, even about things we like. Christ's sake, people, he propably hasn't even played 90% of the games you're complaining about him putting shit on, why are you even taking his opinion seriously enough to argue with it?
I feel like John Harper would get a kick out of this.
Also, your writing style is excellent.
Most of it is copied line-for-line from Lasers & Feelings, but it is of the style I generally try to emulate in my original stuff. Part of my goal was to try to get it as close as possible to the layout and presentation of the original (with appropriate fonts and graphics, of course.)
I encountered the business world and it's perception of technology and programming is equivalent to made up abbreviations and a poor understanding of the capability of devices or what is new or has been present for years.
Basically whoever says the most bull shit adjectives in front of an idea or pitch wins, regardless of if the idea has any merit.
I'm not going to start up my War on Children crusade, so let's set aside the question of age of majority and just look at how dangerous different privileges are and their relative minimum ages. Cars are some of the deadliest things in the country, resulting in around 36,000 deaths annually (only looking at the last ten years, tho driving for some reason got way safer in the last five), and we as a society are okay with sixteen year olds operating these machines. Guns are slightly more complicated by the ease of access as well as being less ubiquitous, but bottom line is that they kill slightly less than cars, clocking in around 30,000 deaths annually, which is why only 18 year olds and older can get them. Alcohol is, on the other hand, is more ubiquitous than firearms, and only kills around 2000 people every year. This is why we restrict it so that only 21 year olds can drink it.
I don't actually have an agenda here. I just think it's weird.
As an aside, safety wise I trust myself more shooting a gun than driving a car.
Its also worth noting that annual homicides with guns in the US seem to be around 9000 and dropping a little each year, its just that there are a good 20k+ of suicides with guns which is terrible in its own right.
Comments
A. Use voice-acting
and
B. Treat their voice actors in a way that is sometimes less than acceptable
Is foolish. I get Scott's point (Ra ra ra those games are crappy and repetitive and the industry is stuck in a rut), and to some extent there are things he's saying that are right. But saying that a positive outcome would be less AAA games being made that try to "improperly use voice acting" when they should "just focus on the gameplay" shuns a massive number of people who like to play games that aren't Scott.
And it ignores that these voice actors will keep working on these games because it's a huge industry and literally nothing is changing that, so we should probably treat them well.
Be that as it may(or more likely, may not) be, that's not the fucking issue here. Why are we even trying to argue with him about it?
The issue is that Voice actors are getting treated far worse than they deserve. This is something that should be corrected, no matter your opinion on individual titles, or entire genres - it doesn't fucking matter what you think of the things they're in, they deserve better pay and conditions. That's the issue.
Scott's allowed to have his opinion, even if we think it's fucking stupid. And he's no less entitled to it, even if it really is genuinely fucking stupid. Smart people are allowed to be dumb sometimes, even about things we like. Christ's sake, people, he propably hasn't even played 90% of the games you're complaining about him putting shit on, why are you even taking his opinion seriously enough to argue with it?
Also, your writing style is excellent.
Basically whoever says the most bull shit adjectives in front of an idea or pitch wins, regardless of if the idea has any merit.
Also, /k/ would probably get a kick out of it.
I don't actually have an agenda here. I just think it's weird.
Its also worth noting that annual homicides with guns in the US seem to be around 9000 and dropping a little each year, its just that there are a good 20k+ of suicides with guns which is terrible in its own right.