On Actors and Money Well Spent

Lindhorst wrote:I just hope they can bring in a "new school" producer of sorts that can bring FMV up to the quality of indie films made for $200k, that look great, has incredible acting, and a moving story.

How many $200,000 indie films would you really, honestly say that about? Napoleon Dynamite, maybe? Usually $200,000 films (even the very good ones, and I have certainly loved a few) look awful and have amateurish acting.

I'm not sure to what extent experienced character actors (Tex games have never had "big stars") are as replaceable as you feel. In fact the biggest problem with using them is, as you've said, they're usually only in it for what can be filmed in a single day so they can't use them in bigger parts.

That said, Chelsee is great and Suzanne isn't really a known actor. There are plenty of good actors out there who you've never heard of.

Well they didn't say big names so much as recognisable actors, and there is a fair difference budget-wise between the two.

I think they understood early on that what was needed for FMV was experienced and trained actors. Yes they brought in some respected names, but most importantly, those were actors who knew their craft extremely well, regardless of ''Hollywood success''. Kevin McCarthy was a work of wonder, really.

As others have expressed, the only thing I feel was missing before was a fresh, young energy. It's very hard of course to find young actors who know their craft and still have a rawness and wildness to them, let alone at an affordable price. It's still definitely doable however.

I think it's kind of a tradition to use big names. Aside from reprised roles like James Earl Jones, Tex really doesn't need big names. So I agree I think its one of the last things a budget should be used for.

In foresight it was strategic for a lot of big named characters to be killed off in game so you don't have to deal with renegotiating. I would rather have scaled down names so you can have recurring roles.

There are hundreds of very talented actors that just aren't "big names" and would certainly work on the cheap.

They'll already be making use of some lesser known or up-and-coming talented actors (like Chris' son! ). But it won't hurt to bring in 1 or 2 "very recognisable names" (as Chris Jones put it) in the industry either like in past games. Most of the cast of the previous ones were the original cast which are by now very comfortable and experienced in their roles.

As well as other lesser known but talented actors like that woman who played Wanda Peck (looking at her IMDB she hasnt done alot of big movie roles, but she was pretty stunning in Overseer). And well I could be wrong but I think Bill Bradshaw is similar or not as well known as some other actors, I mean when Chris and Aaron said he was coming up in a video they didnt use his actor name, just his character name, I guess because as an actor he isnt well known but as a character he is. But he is VERY talented too!

But the games also had a couple very well known actors and they were great to see. I loved Kevin McCarthy and Michael York. Barry Corbin made a GREAT villain etc. Overall it feels like it was all part of a package (or "traditional" as Bjyman put it): the original cast, the lesser known but very talented actors, and the very recognisable names. It'd be a shame to be missing that part which had become a trademark and stood out as unique above most other "FMV" games of the time and even today (since some came out more recently).

Lindhorst wrote:I mean Michael York was great, but Margot Kidder was barely in Overseer and that must have cost them a pretty penny when it was, IMHO, hardly worth it.

Margot Kidder was in Under A Killing Moon. As Adrian said Under A Killing Moon didn't really make good use of those actors they managed to grab. The filming was as he put it "stilted" with no interaction directly between Chris and Margot etc. It was from Pandora Directive onwards with his influence that those actors really got to shine. Don't just think of Michael York (I just mentioned that because that was one such name that jumped out to someone with little knowledge of the series) but also think of Kevin McCarthy, Barry Corbin etc. in Pandora Directive. Henry Darrow, Richard Norton and others in Overseer. They all got LOTS of screen time.

I think it was in the Skype interview Chris Jones said that the Tex Murphy games allowed those actors to really shine even moreso than in a film where they maybe get 20 minutes of screentime but in the games they got hours. After Adrian got onboard as Director to oversee things the Tex games made really good use of those very recognisable actors and I feel it was part of what made them stand above other FMV games of the 90s.

And honestly, who at this point would buy the game based solely on the name of an actor. Big name actors have sometimes lent their voices to games (though this is usually part of a franchise deal -- think movie-game tie-ins that are usually abysmal), but probably 95% of major games these days don't spend their money on big names to promote.

This isn't just voice actors though, unlike every other game on the shelf out there right now this will use live onscreen actors, which has a very bad reputation (even though I dont have a bad opinion of those games because I only played the good ones, but even around here I feel like mentioning the word FMV is a dirty word lol). Seeing some known talent on the list will likely impress them more and feel less inclined to think its another B-Movie game release. Bearing in mind these would be people who have no prior experience of past games, they only have the description to go by.

Back in the 90s I didn't buy Under A Killing Moon based on the actor names because I am not very good with names just faces, except for certain actors, but even today I have to go Google certain names and be reminded... so it doesn't apply to me lol. But some even on this forum who are now diehard fans said that initially they were impressed by the names on the box (in addition to the story description) or bought it based on the names which has now made them dedicated fans. That was back when live action actors in a game *didn't* have a bad reputation, so one can only think about how it would be now....

And with Tex Murphy, the name should speak for itself. I don't see why it has to rely on a crutch like having an actor's name splashed across the front.

Sadly Tex Murphy is not in the mainstream even if it deserves to be, the name definitely does not stand on its own. Those who know Tex Murphy and know it well, will be funding the game's production right now already. It's those who don't know anything of this "Tex Murphy" character that will be buying the game AFTER the Kickstarter and making a profit beyond the production costs...

I mean look at the recent debacle over at the Amazon Gaming thread and the amount of people going "Who the heck is Tex Murphy" and the only people to post on the thread in support were from the Kickstarter, whilst the rest figured it was 1 person making dupe accounts to promote this "unknown" series (if it had been a thread about Sonic the Hedgehog, 10 people coming to post about it in a matter of minutes likely wouldnt of raised alarm bells). It's not a series that is in the public eye right now or has been for 14 years.

Aaron, Chris, Adrian etc. all want to make *more* Tex Murphy games, they don't want this to just be a last hurrah. But if they only sell to those who know the series already that likely won't happen.

when that money could have gone towards making what it should be: A Great Game.

The +30% is not just for actors as far as I know, as I also asked them about the other stretch goals. So it should also be for the other things they mentioned. Which is more game content and more paths for a longer game and increasing the caliber even further in support of the already great writing that Aaron has ready. Everyone wants more of that right? Plus at that stage other stretch goals will of been obtained e.g. +20% for subtitiles in other languages to increase distribution. And then theres the other platform releases too. So its in everyones best interest I feel to push it further to +30% at least for a bigger, greater game with more distribution options.

Now that its going to be a game with onscreen stuff I would really love to see it rise to the level of the previous games. They do say on the Kickstarter they want to make it even more epic than the past 3 games and I think that even just 1 of the "very recognisable actors" on their contact list would be great for that epic cinema feel. Don't think of me of one of those people who go to see a film just *because* of a name though, I love Johnny Depp but I don't go to all his films. I don't love his "name", I love his acting in certain roles, so I have to have an interest in the role and story surrounding it. Also I watch indie films or obscure subtitled foreign language films with actors I probably can't pronounce the name of. But the Tex games stories and roles are up my street and I really would love to return to the mix of cast in previous games (original, unknown and known).

Plus Its not just me thinking this either since "will there be very recognisable actors" came up as questions in the retroNick and the recent Skype interview (it wasn't me who asked lol )

And then of course there is this thread (which ironically I havent posted in because I dont really have anyone in mind, maybe I'll think of someone to post eventually but at the end of the day it really depends on the roles the guys have in mind as to who might fit best. I may not of thought of Kevin McCarthy since I havem't seen a lot of his movies I think (Innerspace is cool but I actually forgot he was the same guy until someone mentioned on the Kickstarter comments lol), but he was awesome!):
http://www.unofficialtexmurphy.com/mess ... f=1&t=3831

Anyone who doesn't think name actors are worth what they cost should take a look at Republique's funding:

http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/486250 ... p-cone.png

On May 3 (Day 24), they announced Jennifer Hale and David Hayter would be in the game, and look what happened.

I think teasing a name actor or two as stretch goals would be a very good way to motivate pledges.

The $250,000 that did in the last 3 days is also why I think SpaceVenture will make it and why I'm not even worried about Tex making it. When it comes down to the wire, people make it happen.

lol Frogacuda nice chart.

Plus think about it, people were really pushing to get in touch with past "very recognisable" actors via Twitter etc. because they knew their endorsement would boost funding on Project Fedora's production. So getting more in future games would likely boost sales too. I am hoping the upcoming endorsement videos from Michael York, Barry Corbin etc. creates a buzz outside of existing fans and boosts pledges and backers.

I think teasing a name actor or two as stretch goals would be a very good way to motivate pledges.

I think they should make note on the main page what going past the goal and by how much would mean for them. Jane, Larry, Wasteland 2 and many others did this for their Kickstarters and it helped push things further and got people campaigning to not only reach the goal but smash through it. A lot of people may not be inclined to donate past the goal or encourage others to donate past it unless they know that money is going to go into the game and not just the devs pockets as overflow.

I'm going to backtrack on what I said a little. If big names can make the game sell significantly more copies then it could be worth the initial cost. However it kind of seems to me like a catch 22 since you have to pay them first, which takes away from the game's budget.

Bjyman wrote:I'm going to backtrack on what I said a little. If big names can make the game sell significantly more copies then it could be worth the initial cost. However it kind of seems to me like a catch 22 since you have to pay them first, which takes away from the game's budget.

If the aim is to surpass Pandora Directive and Overseer etc. (as stated on the page) then I feel there is no shame or harm in them being considered in the budget. Along with the original cast, and the unknown but talented actors, they also made those games "great". Aaron's script deserves it Plus I believe +30% is factoring the other stretch goals so it shouldn't be thought of as all that extra is going into an actors pocket. When I asked them about surpassing the goal I also mentioned the other stuff like longer game, more paths etc. and they simply said their expectation based on other Kickstarters is surpassing by 30% so that must mean thats the highest they were thinking of for everything. Here is what they said in the retroNick interview too:

What would exceeding the 450k goal mean for the game?
Firstly we'd like to create additional game content, expand it and make the game even longer. We have a basic storyline we are working with, but it is taking that and determining funds for the game which will determine how large this game will be. We focus on character and story driven games so we'd be keen to add some more paths (in addition to the already planned multiple endings). If we exceed our minimum goal we would like to bring up the overall calibre of the game in support of the writing that already exists as a base from Aaron Conners, great writing and great execution is important to us. It would also mean the opportunity to pull together an even greater cast, we have some contacts in the industry we could use to grab some real talent and very recognisable names depending on the funding.

So overall regardless of the actor debate getting to over 30% from the goal would make the game even greater

If anything, I hope Big Finish has gotten (does that word sound funny, Brits?) a couple of "recognizable names" to pledge involvement in the game that they can announce near the end of the push. That would be something that would make this thing skyrocket for sure. So much of the value in getting big talent to be involved is realized in the funding and marketing of the game, which with Kickstarter funding begins in earnest during the campaign, not just after it. I realize it would be staking a bold claim, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? Show potential backers that this isn't a casual daydream project, but they're in it to win it.

Thats a good idea. Though from the sounds of Chris responce to the question I posed it seemed that whilst they have a contact list theyre still undecided about who to go after as they said they couldn't name names. Maybe its like how they probably have a list of engines but not yet decided depending on how things pan out in development. From what they say the casting would largely depend on the funding past the goal, plus it may be that whilst they have the story pretty thought out they may still be fleshing out some roles. Maybe its something that occurs during production that they think "YES! Now I have this character solidly planned, that particular actor would be perfect!" similar to what Chris said about the title of the game being decided when they are a little bit into production.

Just hope we can get them to that 30% stretch goal so that when they do get to that stage in production they have the freedom to choose whoever they would like as the dream fit for the character. Like how they dreamed of having Leslie Nielsen play tex's father (so sad that can't happen now even though he was apparently available to them). I know that so long as they got the funding they could hook them so its up to us to make that happen!

All points read and mostly agreed with. I don't think I stressed what I imagined in my head was my main point. That is, with the money they will have, they will either have to call in favors to actors they personally know or spend a good deal of money on a bigger name. It's the second option that bothers me especially with the sub-$1,000,000 budget.

Yes, you guys are right in that having a big name will add to the marketing of the game, as well as the quality of the acting on a whole. I just worry that it will take up too much of the budget. Hopefully, I'm wrong and they can cash in some favors or good will from some benevolent actors (they DO exist I hear).

Lindhorst wrote:Yes, you guys are right in that having a big name will add to the marketing of the game, as well as the quality of the acting on a whole. I just worry that it will take up too much of the budget. Hopefully, I'm wrong and they can cash in some favors or good will from some benevolent actors (they DO exist I hear).

Considering who they got for previous games I think they have a knack for getting them in the door (like James Earl Jones son coaxing his dad!). They just need to have enough budget to do it freely and what they are asking for in terms of budget is surprising since as you say they are not asking for over a million. Chris specifically said in the RetroNick interview they had a "contact list" with "very recognisable names" on it and then Chris said their expectation is based on other Kickstarters is 30% over the goal to have more freedom in expanding the size of the game for more content, adding more paths, upping the caliber even further and casting names. So I feel they have people in mind (though they will not name names so as not to set anything in stone) and they don't seem to feel they need the earth to potentially get them either. We just need to get them to that 30% goal they mentioned I feel to have the whole package.

Lindhorst wrote:All points read and mostly agreed with. I don't think I stressed what I imagined in my head was my main point. That is, with the money they will have, they will either have to call in favors to actors they personally know or spend a good deal of money on a bigger name. It's the second option that bothers me especially with the sub-$1,000,000 budget.

Yes, you guys are right in that having a big name will add to the marketing of the game, as well as the quality of the acting on a whole. I just worry that it will take up too much of the budget. Hopefully, I'm wrong and they can cash in some favors or good will from some benevolent actors (they DO exist I hear).

Well my point is I do see a tradeoff between big names and gameplay. That's what the art of budgeting is. "How much of my limited money should I put into this part?" I wonder if Chris has an algorithm he uses.