“Caution light sensitivity” discussion

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.

How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
People are responsible for their own conditions. Everything from people being prone to spending or gambling addictions, to people who can't put the game down and cause turmoil in their families and relationships. Let's be honest. Those who are aware that they have such conditions also know they're taking a risk by playing video games. I have yet to see someone be surprised by the issue. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.

Zaosafler · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

kconrad37 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
This is 120% the absolute worst take. You're telling me that if someone LOVED this game and suddenly couldn't play anymore because a NEW champions animations cause them to have disorientation, that's fine? Get out of here, have have consideration for your fellow players.

Games are supposed to be fun and enjoyable, if a game is going to include flashing lights that can cause discomfort and disorientation, it is the responsibility of the developers to make sure that they put things in place to ensure the game can be enjoyed by all.
If someone has health concerns that make them sensitive to lights, then video games are a well-known trigger. It's not a new thing. It's their responsibility to be aware of what they're doing. If I had Diabetes, I couldn't blame the candy bar company for my consumption. A warning is appropriate, but dumbing down the game is not a reasonable option for me. Do I sympathize? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it's the game's responsibility.

When I started playing this game, the effects weren’t an issue.

But in the past few months, they have been adding more strobe effects. Making the game less accessible to people who were actively playing it because this was one of the few games of its type without such effects initially. Things like the spinning star in Jubilee’s hand last month, whatever that thing is on Pman’s chest, and his energy blasts from the sp attacks.

I will guarantee that the alert was sent because someone was playing Psycho-Man, and triggered something. And realized the cause afterwards. Someone who never had an issue with the game previously.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:

kconrad37 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
This is 120% the absolute worst take. You're telling me that if someone LOVED this game and suddenly couldn't play anymore because a NEW champions animations cause them to have disorientation, that's fine? Get out of here, have have consideration for your fellow players.

Games are supposed to be fun and enjoyable, if a game is going to include flashing lights that can cause discomfort and disorientation, it is the responsibility of the developers to make sure that they put things in place to ensure the game can be enjoyed by all.
If someone has health concerns that make them sensitive to lights, then video games are a well-known trigger. It's not a new thing. It's their responsibility to be aware of what they're doing. If I had Diabetes, I couldn't blame the candy bar company for my consumption. A warning is appropriate, but dumbing down the game is not a reasonable option for me. Do I sympathize? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it's the game's responsibility.
When I started playing this game, the effects weren’t an issue.

But in the past few months, they have been adding more strobe effects. Making the game less accessible to people who were actively playing it because this was one of the few games of its type without such effects initially. Things like the spinning star in Jubilee’s hand last month, whatever that thing is on Pman’s chest, and his energy blasts from the sp attacks.

I will guarantee that the alert was sent because someone was playing Psycho-Man, and triggered something. And realized the cause afterwards. Someone who never had an issue with the game previously.

The solution is a warning. Not holding back on the advancement. People have to make their own choices for their own well-being.
I wasn't allowed to play any sports growing up because of a heart condition. It sucked, but I wasn't trying to change Hockey.

StaphMember · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.

Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term. This is a similar concept to movie ratings. It is a regulated warning of the content included and is provided clearly with the product.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?

ItsDamien · February 2021

Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

Nichj99 · February 2021

A video game reviewer for Cyberpunk ahead of its release had a seizure while playing, during an in game sequence. Rather than talk suing and liabilities she actually worked with and helped the game improve to avoid this happening to others.

I believe kabam can use this same example to better the game. They know there’s a problem, they can make the experience better in other ways which doesn’t equal strobing lights.

Cyberpunk added a patch that made the exact same sequence safe. It’s not about removing, deleting or toning down but the safety of its customer base. It’s certain frequencies and luminosities that can trigger it. This definitely won’t be hurting anyone’s experience of “cool graphics” so don’t worry they won’t miss out.

My other concern is for those that don’t yet know they have it, the warning implemented will do nothing for them. Most people don’t have it onset until much later in life. Myself, I was in my 20’s.

Everyone that has epilepsy has their own unique triggers, and for me it’s about knowing mine. If they line up, I won’t play video games - simple as that.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?

Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.

ItsDamien · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.

You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.

SgtPoliteness · February 2021

Changing Psycho Man's animations should be a no-brainer fix. It's not like there's a long storied history of Psycho Man in this game. Dude's been live for less than a week.

The diabetes analogue is terrible because the game was playable for five years before this character was added. People have invested thousands of dollars into their accounts, and the expectation is for them to just walk away from the game so that Grounded wisdom doesn't have to deal with animation changes to the 3* he's had for three days?

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.

Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.

ItsDamien · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.

Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.

H3t3r · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.

Literally most games I know have systems in place for epilepsy as well colorblindness. Why can't this game also have it.

StaphMember · February 2021

@GroundedWisdom if a one-off disclaimer was indeed sufficient as you claim, McDonald’s would not continue to print that their coffee is hot directly on the cup.

This message will be available for a limited time and only to those active during that time. If there remains an issue in the future, kabam will not be able to fall back on a message they sent to the players months or years after the message expired.

Duke_Silver · February 2021

SpideyFunko said:
King Groots sp3 is so stupid. Just make a cool design, not a bunch of flashing white light

Strongly disagree, I think it's the coolest sp3 in the game. Uses the horror technique of not showing the monster, leaving it up to your imagination, which will always be much more terrifying than anything they could portray on screen. That said, I do agree that King Groot's sp3 should fall under watch of this new initiative.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.

Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

StaphMember said:
@GroundedWisdom if a one-off disclaimer was indeed sufficient as you claim, McDonald’s would not continue to print that their coffee is hot directly on the cup.

This message will be available for a limited time and only to those active during that time. If there remains an issue in the future, kabam will not be able to fall back on a message they sent to the players months or years after the message expired.

That's not what I supported. I supported an warning at the start up of the game.

Nichj99 · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.

You’re not going to support changing the frequency and luminosity of the strobes? We’re not asking to take your candy bar from you - just give you a different one that looks and tastes exactly the same whilst being much healthier.

This in no way changes the advancement of the game so this argument is null and void.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

Nichj99 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
You’re not going to support changing the frequency and luminosity of the strobes? We’re not asking to take your candy bar from you - just give you a different one that looks and tastes exactly the same whilst being much healthier.

This in no way changes the advancement of the game so this argument is null and void.

It absolutely does. It places any and all future graphics at a limitation.

ItsDamien · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.

Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.

Piccolina · February 2021

As a player who suffered epilepsy as a child, it hits home hard. I did grow out of it but...its always there what if it starts again...

The most worrying part is...all of the objectives are more or less something to do with using this character...does that mean for someone like me I have to choose to lose most of the iso that I desperately need lols and rewards that comes from doing the objectives.

Then...kabam put this out after telling everyone to use the 3*

so I've also not jst lost the iso on on ranking the 3* to use in Battle, I've lost the objectives to. I think they need to really think how they correct this. They think it's just info they're putting out...its not it does effect some players.

1 good thing to come frm this is....at least i can make the decision now even if it hurts haha. Would be nice if they thought of a fix without me being punished for a mistake on their end...

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.

The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.

Nichj99 · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

Nichj99 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
You’re not going to support changing the frequency and luminosity of the strobes? We’re not asking to take your candy bar from you - just give you a different one that looks and tastes exactly the same whilst being much healthier.

This in no way changes the advancement of the game so this argument is null and void.
It absolutely does. It places any and all future graphics at a limitation.

You actually wouldn’t notice it, or enough to lose any sleep over. this response seems narrow minded about a solution that is what is common within the gaming industry already.

Why not implement what others already do - without complaint?

StaphMember · February 2021

@Prof_Hoff id like to get further opinions for if or how this issue might be addressed moving forward. I thought perhaps your platform was a good way to reach the community.

ItsDamien · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.
The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.

So you're ableist. Good to know that you're an awful person. You won't give up a tiny amount of almost unnoticeable visual effects that would improve the experience for others and prevent them from having to quit.

You've lost any semblance of respect I had for you as a person today. Good job.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

Nichj99 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Nichj99 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
You’re not going to support changing the frequency and luminosity of the strobes? We’re not asking to take your candy bar from you - just give you a different one that looks and tastes exactly the same whilst being much healthier.

This in no way changes the advancement of the game so this argument is null and void.
It absolutely does. It places any and all future graphics at a limitation.

You actually wouldn’t notice it, or enough to lose any sleep over. this response seems narrow minded about a solution that is what is common within the gaming industry already.

Why not implement what others already do - without complaint?

My response is consistent with the same onus anyone takes in picking the game up. Even back to the Gambling debates, I've been adamant that people are responsible for what they choose to do. I'm not narrow-minded at all. I have experience with both issues I've exampled.

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.
The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.
So you're ableist. Good to know that you're an awful person. You won't give up a tiny amount of almost unnoticeable visual effects that would improve the experience for others and prevent them from having to quit.

You've lost any semblance of respect I had for you as a person today. Good job.

It's the principle and the precedence of it. The second we start altering the gaming experience for individual situations and personal risks is dangerous. You begin to limit the experience of the whole because of the accommodations of some. That's my issue with it. Not that I don't care about people who suffer from the issues.

ItsDamien · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.
The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.
So you're ableist. Good to know that you're an awful person. You won't give up a tiny amount of almost unnoticeable visual effects that would improve the experience for others and prevent them from having to quit.

You've lost any semblance of respect I had for you as a person today. Good job.
It's the principle and the precedence of it. The second we start altering the gaming experience for individual situations and personal risks is dangerous. You begin to limit the experience of the whole because of the accommodations of some. That's my issue with it. Not that I don't care about people who suffer from the issues.

You will not notice any change. Shall I tell you why? It's an old engine. Over 6 years old at this point. This game won't get much better than the stage we're at due to the limitations of what the engine can do. Doesn't matter if the hardware gets better, the software engine is limited. I can run my steam copy of the original FF7, but my RTX graphics card doesn't increase the graphics of the game because the engine doesn't allow it.

Your minor inconvenience isn't worth any of the enjoyment of any person affected by this, ever.

Right now your attitude is ableist, and gatekeeping. And I know, that you know what it feels like to be in a group that's been marginalised and persecuted for something that you didn't choose.

You should really think about others more often.

H3t3r · February 2021

For the people who are against this happening should honestly just quit since Clearly you guys won't sacrifice a tiny percentage of graphics for others enjoyment

GroundedWisdom · February 2021

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.
The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.
So you're ableist. Good to know that you're an awful person. You won't give up a tiny amount of almost unnoticeable visual effects that would improve the experience for others and prevent them from having to quit.

You've lost any semblance of respect I had for you as a person today. Good job.
It's the principle and the precedence of it. The second we start altering the gaming experience for individual situations and personal risks is dangerous. You begin to limit the experience of the whole because of the accommodations of some. That's my issue with it. Not that I don't care about people who suffer from the issues.
You will not notice any change. Shall I tell you why? It's an old engine. Over 6 years old at this point. This game won't get much better than the stage we're at due to the limitations of what the engine can do. Doesn't matter if the hardware gets better, the software engine is limited. I can run my steam copy of the original FF7, but my RTX graphics card doesn't increase the graphics of the game because the engine doesn't allow it.

Your minor inconvenience isn't worth any of the enjoyment of any person affected by this, ever.

Right now your attitude is ableist, and gatekeeping. And I know, that you know what it feels like to be in a group that's been marginalised and persecuted for something that you didn't choose.

You should really think about others more often.

Okay, you keep trying to guilt me about this, but I've already been abundantly clear about being sensitive to the issue. At this point, it's just shaming.
Caring isn't the issue. The issue is the game provides a product. One that is in the business of flashing images and lights. That's been a known fact for a long time. Psycho isn't the first example. He just happens to be a particularly strong one.
Where do we draw the line? How about Carpel Tunnel? Less clicking? How about PTSD? Some people are triggered by violence. Should we stop the fighting in the game? There are many, many conditions we can think of. All are valid issue, and all we can have compassion for. That still doesn't mean the game needs to accommodate to all personal situations. You can keep implying I don't care in some bleeding heart way, but that ignores the points I made. Caring is not the issue. Of course I care. I don't want anyone's health risked. However, when we start shifting the game to accommodate that, we ignore the responsibility people take on when they pick it up. We start adjusting the game because of things the game is not responsible for. That's my issue. You can't blame the game for people doing what's not healthy for them.

H3t3r · February 2021

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

ItsDamien said:

GroundedWisdom said:

StaphMember said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Zaosafler said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I'm not exactly in tandem with this. A warning is suitable, but I'm also not keen on altering the graphics. It's the responsibility of people with such issues to be aware of what they participate in. Games are widely known to have flashing lights and other triggers. The alternative is a somewhat watered-down experience.
Aren’t you special.

This game used to be fairly friendly regarding issues like light sensitivity. Which is made it a stand out. But they’ve introduced a couple of those backgrounds that those with visual impairments might find hard to see. Not so good.

And recently they are adding more, and fancier strobing effects. A real problem for people that have light sensitive issues. Which on the US, is about 30% of the adult population has something such as migraines or seizures that are triggered by strobing lights. So introducing those will cost them a large market segment. For instance, 4 people in my allaince mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho Man.

So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
1. How so? Reducing the quality of their product for a select group is a smart choice?
2. People are responsible for their own conditions.
3. The game isn't responsible for the health concerns of its users.
Response to 1: making accommodations for 30% of the adult population would potentially boost their market

2 and 3. The company producing the game is responsible for having a clear warning for any and all health concerns that a player may encounter at any time. A one off in game message is not sufficient to relieve them of liability long term.

Epilogue: “games are flashy, players should know the risks” would never hold up in court. Consider if you or a family member ended up in a coma due to strobe effects. Would this argument satisfy you?
Actually, that IS sufficient from a legal standpoint.
If the game contains flashing images and lights, they're obligated to indicate as much. They're not responsible thereafter.
ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.

ItsDamien said:
Not to derail too much.... but the diabetic analogy is really not a good comparison. Been a type 1 diabetic for 21 years, those labels aren't there for my benefit.

Also to keep it more on topic, my sister has had epilepsy for almost 21 years (yeah that was a rough one for my family, 2 of the kids with incurable chronic illnesses within months of each other), and her day to day enjoyment of things non epileptic people take for granted is hugely impacted. A little compassion for what others aren't able to do goes a real long way, instead of being a gatekeeper for an issue that was no ones fault. If Kabam needs to change something, so be it. If they need to add more accessibility options, so be it. Is it really going to affect your overall enjoyment of the game to the point of not wanting to play anymore if Kabam makes it a little less harmful to other people by toning down certain VFX?

Thats the real problem with the mentality of being completely against any VFX changes. Your slightly diminished enjoyment, or a small groups complete inability to enjoy and play for their health and safety. We have to give and take so everyone can enjoy it. If I have to sacrifice both my love of sugar so I can keep on playing and not dying, and some graphical effects so other people can keep on playing, so be it. It won't prevent me from playing, we shouldn't be against other people from being able to enjoy the game because of being decent humans and considering other people.
Compassion isn't the issue. I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer from it. That's not the same as a sound business model for a product. Where do you draw the line?
Someone is prone to Hypertension, so the Quests should be less stressful?
Someone has chronic migraines, so they should stop repetitive content?
The examples go on and on. You can't accommodate for everyone and still hope to progress the development of your product. It's a game. Not an essential product that must meet the health and guidelines of everyone who comes across it.
I have compassion. I just don't agree that the game is responsible for holding its graphic development back because some people have health risks.
You're right, but epilepsy is one of the few chronic illnesses that has been supported by the gaming industry for decades now. And the industry as a whole has made leaps and strides to make gaming more accessible to all those who need it. We're not in the 90s anymore where people have to suck it up and deal with it. Kabam needs to step up to the plate. If Microsoft can make a whole multi functioning and adaptable controller for the few who will use it, Kabam can adjust some VFX to prevent an easily avoidable situation for those with Epilepsy.

Our collectively slightly diminished experience is worth less than the entire experience of even a single epileptic person who will eventually have to quit because of a design choice.
Not every gaming experience will be for every person, and that's something all games are aware of from the start. There are many games that operate quite successfully and still use such graphics. Especially at a time when devices and capabilities have grown to the point that it has now. They can't all be Minecraft.
Many games that are also far less successful than Minecraft that accommodate for this.

Don't die on this hill. Don't be an ableist.
Not as many as you think.
Gaming is a risk for people with such concerns. That's the risk they take with playing games. If you're asking me to support lowering the graphics of the game because people take that risk, I'm sorry. I just don't support that. It risks something greater, and that's the advancement of the game.
Lowering Visual Effects doesn't mean all the graphics suddenly get worse. I've worked in the Games Industry for nearly 10 years, VFX can be adjusted without diminishing the graphical fidelity of textures.

And trust me, I can confidently say that I have played many, many, many more games than you have, and I can confidently say that 95% of the games I've played since 2007 have had options in some form or fashion that allows for people with epilepsy to play safely.

Visual Effects =/= Graphical Fidelity.
The end result is still a lower quality of what the vision is. Bottom line is they're not responsible for people who can't play the game. Whether you agree or not, that's the reality of it. I'm not willing to have a diminished experience because others have health concerns. I wouldn't expect the same if it was my health concern, so it's not one-sided. The game is not responsible for people who have Epilepsy. As much as I sympathize, and I do because of my own experiences with others who are Epileptic, it's not the game's responsibility to hold back on what it presents. They're responsible for stating the risks associated with game play. That's it. There are a majority of us who are enjoying the advancements being made.
So you're ableist. Good to know that you're an awful person. You won't give up a tiny amount of almost unnoticeable visual effects that would improve the experience for others and prevent them from having to quit.

You've lost any semblance of respect I had for you as a person today. Good job.
It's the principle and the precedence of it. The second we start altering the gaming experience for individual situations and personal risks is dangerous. You begin to limit the experience of the whole because of the accommodations of some. That's my issue with it. Not that I don't care about people who suffer from the issues.
You will not notice any change. Shall I tell you why? It's an old engine. Over 6 years old at this point. This game won't get much better than the stage we're at due to the limitations of what the engine can do. Doesn't matter if the hardware gets better, the software engine is limited. I can run my steam copy of the original FF7, but my RTX graphics card doesn't increase the graphics of the game because the engine doesn't allow it.

Your minor inconvenience isn't worth any of the enjoyment of any person affected by this, ever.

Right now your attitude is ableist, and gatekeeping. And I know, that you know what it feels like to be in a group that's been marginalised and persecuted for something that you didn't choose.

You should really think about others more often.
Okay, you keep trying to guilt me about this, but I've already been abundantly clear about being sensitive to the issue. At this point, it's just shaming.
Caring isn't the issue. The issue is the game provides a product. One that is in the business of flashing images and lights. That's been a known fact for a long time. Psycho isn't the first example. He just happens to be a particularly strong one.
Where do we draw the line? How about Carpel Tunnel? Less clicking? How about PTSD? Some people are triggered by violence. Should we stop the fighting in the game? There are many, many conditions we can think of. All are valid issue, and all we can have compassion for. That still doesn't mean the game needs to accommodate to all personal situations. You can keep implying I don't care in some bleeding heart way, but that ignores the points I made. Caring is not the issue. Of course I care. I don't want anyone's health risked. However, when we start shifting the game to accommodate that, we ignore the responsibility people take on when they pick it up. We start adjusting the game because of things the game is not responsible for. That's my issue. You can't blame the game for people doing what's not healthy for them.

If you actually cared you would be all for it. Why do you think schools have accommodations for people who have adhd and that. Or why public transport have handicap ramps. Or why there is handicap parking. All these examples inconvenience the "normal" person but no one gets upset because they help people. So why can't you accept that this is something that is needed and helpful.

“Caution light sensitivity” discussion

Comments