Anti-epilepsy filter?

[brando]

Originally Posted by Herra Tohtori

My earlier comments still hold true: This type of blanket policy from Ubisoft is silly, there is virtually no chance of litigation anyway if the seizure risk is clearly announced in the product. Optional filter to reduce the thing would be laudable. There is also no way to safeguard against photosensitive epileptic seizures completely, so probably somewhere, at some time, will suffer a seizure anyway looking at the filtered game, so I don't know what protects Ubi from litigation there.

However, like some in this thread have pointed out, we have only heard the developer's version of the events so far. While I want to give them the benefit of doubt considering they are the ones with most intimate knowledge of their game, I would wait to hear back from Ubisoft as well on this issue.

I'm not cancelling my order, at least not at this point. I'm fairly confident that at some point the game will run smoothly on a modern PC. What I am more concerned of is that the anti-epileptic measures will disfigure the realistic graphics - things like propeller effects and the like, which tend to be flickery in real life (making them nonflickery and "epileptic-safe" would make them look worse). Even then, simply an option to switch that off to achieve better looking results would be preferred option.



Oh and by the way, games and videos don't cause the sensitivity to epileptic seizures. They simply act as a trigger for people who have that sensitivity. Blaming them for causing seizures is foolish, much like blaming peanuts for peanut allergy.

In fact, instead of screening games and video for their tendency to cause epileptic seizures, it would be better to screen people for their tendency to suffer photosensitive epileptic seizures. What better way to find out than expose them to situations that can trigger it - in safe environment rather than wait until they get a car and drive along a road with trees on the side and the sun shining from the side, flickering on and off between the trees, causing them to get an absentia seizure and veering to the opposite side of the road or hitting pedestrians or whatever?

Or, as one of my friends pointed out, if they're walking on the street, see an ambulance with flashing blue lights, collapse on the street and get run down by a truck?

There are much more dangerous spots to find out you're susceptible to photosensitive epileptic seizures than while playing a video game. In that light, the fixation to video games and their risks seems disproportionate.

Oh and much like epileptic seizures, oversensitivity to something like peanuts can develop sort of silently, and then when a person is exposed to peanuts, they go into anaphylactic shock and can die seemingly out of nowhere.

That doesn't mean removing peanuts from all products is necessary. It is a good reason to keep track on where peanuts are used, and mark not only products that contain peanuts, but those manufactured on lines where peanuts are also used. This is a standard in food industry, and it's sufficient for them to put a small label in food products that might have traces of peanuts.

So, if Ubisoft's policy really is a blanket statement to refuse releasing any games that fail some arbitrary epilepsy screening, I find that utterly ridiculous.

Waiting to hear back from Ubi via Ms.Kleaneasy, and hoping that a sensible solution can be achieved despite how unlikely it's looking just now.

Thank you for providing a rational overview of the situation. I would also like to see a sensible solution for this latest barrier to the new game.