Anti-epilepsy filter?

[mazex]

Originally Posted by Cowboy10uk

Ummm well no, as its a 16+ game, Hes too young for it anyway. Im sorry your son has epilepsy, But to expect everyone else to have to put up with some draconian filter is out of order.

There is no draconian filter. All other titles from Ubisoft and Sony pass these tests and have to make corrections to comply with them, and the thing is that my son does not have epilepsy now. He had those problems his first year and the doctors think that he is now fine and that i MAY have been low vitamine B12 causing it - but they do not know. So should I let him play computer games or not, for the rest of his life? A woman at work had never had any problems with epilepsy and then bang, one day after experiencing a lot of stress and strong light she got a seizure, and IF you push beyond the limit, the brain gets kind of a snowball effect. Now she is on medication, probably for the rest of her life. So this screening is presumably just as much for me and you, as we don't know if we could get a seizure tomorrow. I have been playing computer games since 1981, but tomorrow with a lot of other factors I cound get it...

Anyway, I am all for making it optional - but the drama here with "this is all Ubisofts fault" was naturally just expected...

[Codex]

Originally Posted by Tacoma74

Question is, will it be authorized to legally be made optional, or must we all suffer with this crap forever, or until it is effectively fixed? I shouldn't have to drop an extra lump sum of cash to be able to play this smoothly. Period.

According to the article referred to by Tree, there IS NO legal requirement to implement such a filter. The only legal requirement in all this is:

"On the statutory safeguards, the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 make it compulsory for producers to place warnings and instructions on all consumer products, including video games."

Now this is for the UK, not sure what it will be for other countries. But we've all seen the warning label in the manual's of games, legally that is enough. Also remember that UBI VOLUNTARILY decided to implement "photosensitive epilepsy" screening policy according to that article.

I smell a rat.

Originally Posted by Codex

According to the article referred to by Tree, there IS NO legal requirement to implement such a filter. The only legal requirement in all this is:

"On the statutory safeguards, the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 make it compulsory for producers to place warnings and instructions on all consumer products, including video games."

Now this is for the UK, not sure what it will be for other countries. But we've all seen the warning label in the manual's of games, legally that is enough. Also remember that UBI VOLUNTARILY decided to implement "photosensitive epilepsy" screening policy according to that article.

I smell a rat.

I smell one too.

[Tacoma74]

Originally Posted by mazex

I have no problem at all with making it optional, and I think that is how it should be done too. But as this is to comply with laws and government recommendations there may be some problem there unfortunately. Somehow all other Ubisoft titles have managed to do it without losing FPS... How about Assasins Creed : Brotherhood - that game has passed the same tests and has an average user score of 9.1 over at Gamespot now (released March 2011). They sure had to do some compromises to make it pass as there are a lot of gameplay involving going from dark rooms to sun bathing desert there... Hear a lot of people whining about how bad it looks and how it stutters all the time? Do you hear the devs blaming Ubisoft for making the implement the features that will make the game more friendly to people with these serious problems?

We're not talking about Assassins Creed. The fact of the matter is that this game IS experiencing issues with this filter. While it has good purpose, it isn't meshing well with the games code that was already set in place before this was ever implemented. Newer games that are implementing this feature build their code around it making it much more stable. This game has been in development for around 5-6 years and hasn't had the opportunity to do so. The only solutions I can think of are to patch the XXXX out of it and make it less of a handicap, or to make it completely optional. That is all I have to say about it. Not going to waste another keystroke about this today.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by mazex

The ignorance shown in this thread is really depressing.

Look, buddy - I'm sorry for your son but I can't change it.
It's you job to teach him what he can or what he can't do.
Our society does actually care about disabled people, and does the best to make their life as comfortable as possible.

What you can't expect it the society to adapt to them.


Options: Nice to have.

[Untamo]

Originally Posted by bw_wolverine

This is like forcing me to ride my bike with training wheels on it because some people have inner ear infections.

Well said.

IL-2 CoD cannot be called a "combat flight simulator" anymore, it should be called "combat flight game" since they have now ripped the simulator part off, by ripping the realistic flashes etc. stuff that might cause epileptic shocks. Sorry epileptics, but guns make flashes, propellers whirl etc. Without them CoD isn't simulating reality, but a mystical world where these things don't exist.

Way to go Ubi. Let's put a knife in the eye of 99% of people to please the 1%. Some credit should also go to the crazy Ameerikan legal system for allowing ridiculous legal cases.

Will still buy the game, but NOT HAPPY about this.

-Untamo

[Tiger27]

Tree you do this stuff well, drop a few guesses disguised as legitimate info around and before you know it other people are quoting you as there source (sort of like wikki).

You all may be right about the conspiracy stuff but still, the game is not released yet in the West, wouldn't this be better if brought up when you know what you will get, all these comments are ensuring, is that a lot of people wont purchase this game, which will most likely see the end of any fixes we may have received, look at the state ROF was in when released, yet now it is a damn good flight sim, I just don't understand what anyone is hoping to achieve?

Obviously Tree, you would like someone from up high to tell you that you've been right all along, well that will be nice but at the end of the day all that will really be achieved is that we may never see another realistic WW2 FS again

[Upthair]

Originally Posted by T}{OR

What boggles the mind (not in this case where Ubi is involved) is why it must not be optional. This just goes along with the well known phrase by A. Einstein:

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

... provided that the feature and above report is true.

EDIT: Can we have the link to the thread/post luthier made at Sukhoi.ru forum? Thnx.

Nice quote LOL

[Rodney]

If this epilepsy filter causes slower frame rates for me when I get CoD and that makes me angry, and I end up hurting myself (e.g. by punching a wall) or someone else then I am absolutely going to SUE YOU UBI, thats right I am going to SUE YOU and BANKRUPT you UBI because of the harm your over the top anti-epilepsy filter does to my state of mind!!!

Originally Posted by Tiger27

Tree you do this stuff well, drop a few guesses disguised as legitimate info around and before you know it other people are quoting you as there source (sort of like wikki).

You all may be right about the conspiracy stuff but still, the game is not released yet in the West, wouldn't this be better if brought up when you know what you will get, all these comments are ensuring, is that a lot of people wont purchase this game, which will most likely see the end of any fixes we may have received, look at the state ROF was in when released, yet now it is a damn good flight sim, I just don't understand what anyone is hoping to achieve?

Obviously Tree, you would like someone from up high to tell you that you've been right all along, well that will be nice but at the end of the day all that will really be achieved is that we may never see another realistic WW2 FS again

Actually I would much rather someone tell me Ive been wrong all along and have a great sim to fly. It would be no loss to me, im a man and can acceppt when i have got things wrong, i often do. Its not like i have to face you everyday is it?