Jimbo

@milkman: It wasn't intended as a defence, it was an attack on the blatant hypocrisy of most of those employing phoney outrage to bash Trump. The reason there was no outrage when Obama did the same thing was because the outrage is motivated by politicism, not on the compassionate grounds purported.

Personally I have no problem with the actions taken by either President on this issue. Obama was right to halt it when he did and Trump just won an election with this as one of his campaign promises. As Obama said: "Elections have consequences..."

@bojackhorseman: Does Band of Brothers even remotely touch on the pre-war era? I'm not seeing how anything you saw on that show reminded you of what is currently happening. Conflating an ostensibly temporary immigration ban with mechanized warfare on a global scale seems to me to be rooted in hysteria. Concluding one might lead to the other seems incredibly tenuous.

No doubt trade helps, but I'd argue the vastly diminished position of european nations on the world stage and two superpowers pointing nuclear weapons over our heads had far more to do with ensuring we behaved than increasing trade did. The EU certainly could have remained a limited force for peace if it had restricted itself to simply being a trade organisation between sovereign nations, but it didn't so here we are.

Was it against everything America stands for when Obama did it? Or only when Trump does it? Just curious whether this is coherent outrage on compassionate grounds or selective outrage on political grounds. I suspect the latter.

Yeah, almost. They're effectively saying "if they don't want to [pay] the terms on offer then don't and go and earn a living without us". Which is totally fine. And the companies are saying "Ok then we will". Which is also totally fine.

Clearly the reality is that more than enough people are prepared to perform the 'stressful' job of voice acting -and to a standard required by the industry- that those currently doing it are in no position to be making extravagant demands beyond what they are worth. There are a zillion other jobs they could choose to go and do instead, but of course the reality is that most of the ones they will be qualified for are massively more difficult and stressful than voice acting.

It's not a matter of being 100% irreplaceable, it's a matter of developing a skillset which is more in demand than supply and therefore would be costly or difficult to replace. The handful of very top voice actors with some name recognition probably can demand good compensation for their time. Replacing Nolan North or Jen Hale with someone roughly equally talented would be difficult or impossible so of course they can demand more. Mediocre voice actors are not remotely important to the project and can be easily replaced, so of course they can't demand or expect extravagant compensation.

If you want to see a real race to the bottom then start over-rewarding mediocrity and disincentivising excellence.

If certain voice actors are in high enough demand that they can ask for residuals and get them then good luck to them. If not, maybe they should be more realistic about how replaceable they are.

If they don't wanna work for the terms on offer then don't and go earn a living some other way, simple.

SkiFree.

Hidden & Dangerous 2 (the start) is the one that comes to mind for me. It does it very, very well.

More recently I'd say Far Cry Primal.

The industry having no idea what would work and what wouldn't.

08 - 12/13ish.

The post-Crysis period where PC gaming was no longer capable of driving the industry forward and console gaming didn't seem to want to. The era of endless Gears and CoD4 knock-offs.

Inquisiton plays like an offline MMO. It's trash.