“Caution light sensitivity” discussion

1356789

Comments

  • The_Sentry06The_Sentry06 Posts: 5,872 ★★★★★
    I personally feel we should have graphics optimisation and customisation available. As the game advances, more of these animations will be found and thus, the problem will get worse for those with seizures,etc. Kabam could also knock two birds off with one stone as it would also help mid-range android users and sort with their already lazy experience.
  • The_Sentry06The_Sentry06 Posts: 5,872 ★★★★★

    I personally feel we should have graphics optimisation and customisation available. As the game advances, more of these animations will be found and thus, the problem will get worse for those with seizures,etc. Kabam could also knock two birds off with one stone as it would also help mid-range android users and sort with their already lazy experience.

    Damn you auto-correct, meant 'laggy experience'.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 27,376 ★★★★★
    H3t3r said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    Zaosafler 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.
    Schools, public transportation, and parking are everyday necessities. We're talking about a video game. One that uses lights and images that flash.
  • H3t3rH3t3r Posts: 1,653 ★★★★★

    H3t3r said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    Zaosafler 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.
    Schools, public transportation, and parking are everyday necessities. We're talking about a video game. One that uses lights and images that flash.
    What if that video game is an "escape" for someone from the real world? After finishing my schoolwork, I find it enjoyable to just go play a game, like MCOC, to think about something other than school. If someone who loves Marvel characters but can't play because of epilepsy or light sensitivity, there should be something in the settings to adjust that to make it fair for all players. You're telling me you're gonna stop people from playing a game because it doesn't suit your animations agenda? Pathetic.
    Right. Why should someone forcibly have to stop playing a portion of the game when changes can be made where everyone can play it.
  • Another_NameAnother_Name Posts: 174
    Zaosafler 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 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 alliance mentioned having headaches after playing Psycho-Man.

    So tuning those effects down is a good idea, just from customer service and business perspectives.
    I just got some church lady vibes reading that. Long live dana carvey
  • MasterpuffMasterpuff Posts: 5,635 ★★★★★
    Jaded said:

    Very interesting.

    How do you feel about blue light glasses for users? Or any suggestions to help our eyes if kabam can’t?

    Jaded said:

    Very interesting.

    How do you feel about blue light glasses for users? Or any suggestions to help our eyes if kabam can’t?

    I have those to help with headaches, i didnt use them for mcoc until more recently tho.
  • PulyamanPulyaman Posts: 1,918 ★★★★★
    edited February 5

    Pulyaman said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    Zaosafler 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.
    I feel that you love to argue and take a opposite position. Its a no brainer. Game advancement depends on a lot of things, not only flashy graphics. Just because Psycho man was introduced does not make the game better this month than it was last month.
    No. I'm not just arguing for the sake of it. It's not even about him. It's about limiting where the game can go.
    But it doesn't though. The mechanics are what makes this game so fun, I agree the graphics are a nice addition, but its like asking people to choose between 2k and 4k screen on a mobile. 99% of the people can't tell the difference.
  • Lucasjones98Lucasjones98 Posts: 313 ★★
    Thank you guys, that means a lot. Yeah I mean he looks awesome and it’s not the game designers fault whatsoever, it’s their job. I just think, it would’ve been better to have the warning to begin with. Just a shame that it took everyone to tell them I guess, however it’s great they’ve added it as that will hopefully protect other players!
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 27,376 ★★★★★
    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    Zaosafler 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.
    I feel that you love to argue and take a opposite position. Its a no brainer. Game advancement depends on a lot of things, not only flashy graphics. Just because Psycho man was introduced does not make the game better this month than it was last month.
    No. I'm not just arguing for the sake of it. It's not even about him. It's about limiting where the game can go.
    But it doesn't though. The mechanics are what makes this game so fun, I agree the graphics are a nice addition, but its like asking people to choose between 2k and 4k screen on a mobile. 99% of the people can't tell the difference. Toning down the game so that everyone can enjoy it will not diminish the experience in any meaningful way.
    Actually it's all part of the experience. Not just the mechanics. People wouldn't have played this long if the game was the same as when I started 5 years ago. As the entire experience grows, so does the game. It's not just mindless tapping. It all goes into the total experience.
  • 007md92007md92 Posts: 1,182 ★★★★
    My head hurts everytime i play Nightcrawler.
    That flashy evade is very disturbing for me. Atleast.
    May be cz i have minus power.
  • Sarvanga1_Sarvanga1_ Posts: 3,898 ★★★★★
    Nice write up OP. Hope Kabam listens to this and does something for the affected people.
  • QacobQacob Posts: 1,781 ★★★★★

    H3t3r said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    ItsDamien said:

    Zaosafler 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.
    Schools, public transportation, and parking are everyday necessities. We're talking about a video game. One that uses lights and images that flash.

    But it's not like the entire game centres around flashing lights, it's not a core theme like in a game such as Geometry Dash. If that was the case I'd agree with all your points. It's one champion that is giving people issues. That's an easy and small alteration that would, let's not lie, make absolutely no difference to the majority of us yet a great difference to some.
This discussion has been closed.