Quote:
Originally Posted by mazex
Well, for some weird reason I brought a real world example into a thread that is about anti-epilepsy protection. I think that is on topic? I can only guess that swiss and micro have no kids - or at least they have not been staying at a hospital for months not knowing if you kid has serious brain damage... And in this case the example fits perfectly as this is what it is all about. Every time my kid play a game I do feel a bit anxious about if it could cause some problem that has been "sleeping" for years to wake up. And I will continue to have that anxiety for the rest of my life I guess. So when Ubisoft and many other publishers are forced to listen to lobbyists and government recommendations and that is mocked here I do feel a bit concerned...
And then being called pathetic just makes me little tiny bit disappointed...
|
Much as I sympathize with you, I can't help but point out that there's almost no common denominator between congenital epilepsy of a newborn child and photosensitive epileptic seizures triggered by a video game.
I don't expect people with serious sensitivity to visually triggered seizures to be able to play many video games at all, regardless of what measures are taken to prevent the induction seizures by the game. If they do play a video game while aware of the associated health issues, it becomes their responsibility (or their parents', in case of minor person).
I'm not trying to say that an epileptic person shouldn't or can't enjoy a gaming experience, as every person's brain is different. What I am saying is that handicapping the game because of a limited gain to a very limited demographics is both logically and economically senseless.
The demographic that would most benefit of this kind of thing are the people who have a dormant sensitivity to seizures, being unaware of it. In that case, sure, introducing anti-epileptic measures might postpone the manifestation of the problem or, with good luck, prevent it - but the sensitivity will be there, known or unknown, and some factor could activate it at a much worse time than while playing a video game.
Know thyself, as the Pythagorans are reputed to have said.
After all is said and done, the video game is no more culpable of the seizure than the person who's having it. Blaming the video game is a symptom of profound misunderstanding of the problem - games and videos can't trigger a seizure if the exposed person doesn't already have the sensitivity for it (either genetic or acquired*), and conversely no filtering can
prevent seizures in people who are heavily sensitive to such a thing.
Like said before, I'd be completely fine with anti-epileptic measures, if it weren't for the alleged loss of performance and visual quality.
As it stands, though, it seems like a big loss for limited or no gain, and like has been pointed out in the thread, the stuttering and low FPS in general could possibly be even
worse for people with PES... and sure as hell detrimental to the enjoyment factor for
everyone who plays the game.
But, I'm going to adapt a wait and see approach. 34.90 euros isn't that big a money, and assuming the game will be patched into playable condition, it'll eventually be worth it.
I doubt my computer could run it very well at this point anyway, so the problem isn't critical for me especially, but I bet people with brand new SLI/Crossfire setups are going to be bummed beyond belief.
*by acquired I mean changes to brain as a result of physical injury, illness, narcotics or other factors such as a
proton beam through head. Sensory stimulation alone can hardly account for the neural changes that are associated with epileptic symptoms.