The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Games designers - got too much money kicking around? Want to get rid of it and get pretty much nothing in return? Then why not hire well known TV or movie actors to provide voice overs for your game? That'll get rid of your vast piles of money in no time at all. Okay, maybe I'm being just a teensy bit sarcastic there, but I still can't see why games companies bother hiring 'famous' or at least well known actors to act in their games, when there are plenty of perfectly good lesser known actors out there.
Maybe it's publicity, perhaps? It's true that a game might get a few extra column inches because it stars a well known actor, but it's unlikely to help sales figures much. Certainly, the few extra copies it might shift likely won't cover the cost of actually hiring the actor. After all, just how many people bought Vice City on the strength of Ray Liotta providing the voice over? Not too many, I suspect. People who were going to to buy it would have bought it regardless.
And this trend could even count against a game. Take the full motion video from the upcoming Command and Conquer 3. This features several actors including Michael Ironside and the bloke who plays Sawyer on Lost. Which the exact same hairstyle and demeanour. Now, Michael Ironside has been a fair few movies, but Sawyer? People are just going to be going 'Hey, it's that guy off Lost!' which is the only thing he's been in. Rather than actually paying any attention to the story. In fact, I thought FMV had died a death a few years ago, but that's another rant entirely.
Games companies can't continue to complain about having to raise game prices when they're chucking money down the drain like this. I'm half tempted to become a shareholder in one of these companies and try and get access to the actual detailed budget for a game. Because as value for money goes, hiring people soley based on their visibility isn't good business sense.
Maybe it's publicity, perhaps? It's true that a game might get a few extra column inches because it stars a well known actor, but it's unlikely to help sales figures much. Certainly, the few extra copies it might shift likely won't cover the cost of actually hiring the actor. After all, just how many people bought Vice City on the strength of Ray Liotta providing the voice over? Not too many, I suspect. People who were going to to buy it would have bought it regardless.
And this trend could even count against a game. Take the full motion video from the upcoming Command and Conquer 3. This features several actors including Michael Ironside and the bloke who plays Sawyer on Lost. Which the exact same hairstyle and demeanour. Now, Michael Ironside has been a fair few movies, but Sawyer? People are just going to be going 'Hey, it's that guy off Lost!' which is the only thing he's been in. Rather than actually paying any attention to the story. In fact, I thought FMV had died a death a few years ago, but that's another rant entirely.
Games companies can't continue to complain about having to raise game prices when they're chucking money down the drain like this. I'm half tempted to become a shareholder in one of these companies and try and get access to the actual detailed budget for a game. Because as value for money goes, hiring people soley based on their visibility isn't good business sense.
Bruce Campbell's one-liners were pretty much the only reason to buy the Evil Dead games and Brad Dourif did a good job In GUN.
Apparently Duchovny 'phoned it in' for Area 51, altohugh Manson's performance in the same game was said to be ok.
I highly enjoyed the small bits Christopher Walken did for True Crime, "Schmuck!"
Mark Hamill in Wing Commander: Whatever was quite funny.
Sometimes the actors can really lend a lot to the game, LOTR: The Third Age was greatly improved by the voiceover and heavy loading of extras which just leant to the immersion and added to the fun.
The trouble is that when companies like EA start kicking these names about as if they're somesort of 'seal of quality' that the games going to be absolutely amazing that it starts to become rather farcical.
Some games are totally saved by the actors involved, "24: The Game" was apparently absolutely dire but the involvement of the show's actors really raised the overall product quality so that it atleast become entertaining and just about playable.
Now some film titles really do seem to need the input of the original actors I haven't got round to playing The Godfather or Star Trek: Legacy but I'm sure a lot of the purchasers of those two titles did indeed care that several of each franchises associated actors were present and accounted for.
Well-known actors in games: It's a mixed bag but at the end of the day it's the developer's money and if it sometimes turns out to be a worthwhile expense then that's probably a good thing. Thankfully the level of quality in these sorts of offerings is going up but a company like EA will still throw out some horrible hashes based upon official licences (Superman Returns anyone?)
Apparently Duchovny 'phoned it in' for Area 51, altohugh Manson's performance in the same game was said to be ok.
I highly enjoyed the small bits Christopher Walken did for True Crime, "Schmuck!"
Mark Hamill in Wing Commander: Whatever was quite funny.
Sometimes the actors can really lend a lot to the game, LOTR: The Third Age was greatly improved by the voiceover and heavy loading of extras which just leant to the immersion and added to the fun.
The trouble is that when companies like EA start kicking these names about as if they're somesort of 'seal of quality' that the games going to be absolutely amazing that it starts to become rather farcical.
Some games are totally saved by the actors involved, "24: The Game" was apparently absolutely dire but the involvement of the show's actors really raised the overall product quality so that it atleast become entertaining and just about playable.
Now some film titles really do seem to need the input of the original actors I haven't got round to playing The Godfather or Star Trek: Legacy but I'm sure a lot of the purchasers of those two titles did indeed care that several of each franchises associated actors were present and accounted for.
Well-known actors in games: It's a mixed bag but at the end of the day it's the developer's money and if it sometimes turns out to be a worthwhile expense then that's probably a good thing. Thankfully the level of quality in these sorts of offerings is going up but a company like EA will still throw out some horrible hashes based upon official licences (Superman Returns anyone?)
Please tell me you're kidding.
Oh god, you're not. Also featuring Gary Oldman as Ignitus. Bloody hell, it's even worse than I thought.
Oh god, you're not. Also featuring Gary Oldman as Ignitus. Bloody hell, it's even worse than I thought.
Haha, Elijah Wood as Spyro.
Games designers - got too much money kicking around? Want to get rid of it and get pretty much nothing in return? Then why not hire well known TV or movie actors to provide voice overs for your game? That'll get rid of your vast piles of money in no time at all. Okay, maybe I'm being just a teensy bit sarcastic there, but I still can't see why games companies bother hiring 'famous' or at least well known actors to act in their games, when there are plenty of perfectly good lesser known actors out there.
Maybe it's publicity, perhaps? It's true that a game might get a few extra column inches because it stars a well known actor, but it's unlikely to help sales figures much. Certainly, the few extra copies it might shift likely won't cover the cost of actually hiring the actor. After all, just how many people bought Vice City on the strength of Ray Liotta providing the voice over? Not too many, I suspect. People who were going to to buy it would have bought it regardless.
And this trend could even count against a game. Take the full motion video from the upcoming Command and Conquer 3. This features several actors including Michael Ironside and the bloke who plays Sawyer on Lost. Which the exact same hairstyle and demeanour. Now, Michael Ironside has been a fair few movies, but Sawyer? People are just going to be going 'Hey, it's that guy off Lost!' which is the only thing he's been in. Rather than actually paying any attention to the story. In fact, I thought FMV had died a death a few years ago, but that's another rant entirely.
Games companies can't continue to complain about having to raise game prices when they're chucking money down the drain like this. I'm half tempted to become a shareholder in one of these companies and try and get access to the actual detailed budget for a game. Because as value for money goes, hiring people soley based on their visibility isn't good business sense.
Maybe it's publicity, perhaps? It's true that a game might get a few extra column inches because it stars a well known actor, but it's unlikely to help sales figures much. Certainly, the few extra copies it might shift likely won't cover the cost of actually hiring the actor. After all, just how many people bought Vice City on the strength of Ray Liotta providing the voice over? Not too many, I suspect. People who were going to to buy it would have bought it regardless.
And this trend could even count against a game. Take the full motion video from the upcoming Command and Conquer 3. This features several actors including Michael Ironside and the bloke who plays Sawyer on Lost. Which the exact same hairstyle and demeanour. Now, Michael Ironside has been a fair few movies, but Sawyer? People are just going to be going 'Hey, it's that guy off Lost!' which is the only thing he's been in. Rather than actually paying any attention to the story. In fact, I thought FMV had died a death a few years ago, but that's another rant entirely.
Games companies can't continue to complain about having to raise game prices when they're chucking money down the drain like this. I'm half tempted to become a shareholder in one of these companies and try and get access to the actual detailed budget for a game. Because as value for money goes, hiring people soley based on their visibility isn't good business sense.