My cousin had a epileptic episode from macro flashlights
Comments
-
Points 1~3 I still stand by.
5 was regarding this OP.
Point 6, You're the one being mixed up here. The first point was regarding BHVR and their warning signs, the second point was regarding the OP and his reaction.
Regardless of what you say, epileptic people should NOT be near any video games that even mildly reacts their nerves.
The cousin took the risk and look what happened...
7 -
You need to be trolling or grossly uneducated on epilepsy as a whole.
2 -
Lol, coming from someone who literally sounds like a 12 year old (or has comprehension skill of one) telling me I'm uninformed on epilepsy?
Listen, buddy. Just because you have an epileptic family member, doesn't make you king of all knowledge. Some other user commented on having a partner who was epileptic too and they AGREED with me.
So you do you and have a great day.
7 -
An epileptic family member who I care for almost every day. You've done no research on epilepsy and your end suggestion was "Make all epileptics never see a screen." As if thats even possible in todays digital society💀
2 -
Hmmmm, is putting words in other people's mouths something that comes with taking care of an epileptic? or is that just part of your character? Where on earth have I stated that "all epileptics should NEVER see a screen"? Lol, someone has their panties in a twist.
And if you are really caretaking someone with epilepsy, I sincerely hope you do a better job at looking out for him/her than the OP.
And by the by, I have researched about epilepsy before. It started when I came across the porygon pokemon episode that happened decades ago, thus why the epileptic partner agreed with me being an actual epileptic patient him/herself.
So I have an approval of an actual epileptic and a disapproval from a caretaker of one who claims to know all about the symptoms. Go figure.
5 -
This thread will be closed soon I can tell.
3 -
Hopefully. Fingers crossed.
4 -
devs will never remove it because they think it is an integral part of the gaming experience. People will come up with any excuse they can as to why it needs to remain in despite serving nothing but to harm others. Only way it's getting removed is if a lawsuit crops up due to them not addressing this.
3 -
It's moot...like mooo like a cows opinion
Forum Brother it basically means the point is redundant
Moot...mooo....hehehe
Signed
HexyDevotedTricksterMainExtrordinare
Post edited by ImHexyAndINoed on3 -
Forum brother I have missed you!!!
1 -
"That's like me, bringing my cousin to play a clown game when I know he has Coulrophobia and being surprised when I see him foam at the mouth." Here we are downplaying the severity of the situation and treating it as if its just a little fear or not a big deal.
(am gonna just talk about this point because otherwise Voodoo has explained themselves well already)
talking about downplaying something, you are saying that a Phobia is ‚just a little fear‘? Like.. are you serious? They can be pretty severe and actually can on rare cases result in physical harm..
i really hope it gets closed at this point. Preferably with a message saying the issue is known and acknowledged and the team is working on something in this regard.
1 -
Nah, I don't believe it. Too extreme. Post for some attention.
Be smarter guys, don't fell for everything online strangers said in forums, like c mon.
3 -
This website lists a couple of precautions (to play "video games with epilepsy safely"):
- Talk to your epilepsy doctor about your concerns
- Get a photosensitive epilepsy test
- Check the video game packaging and reviews
- Wear an eye patch
- Change the settings
- Minimize the amount of time playing video games
Did you or your cousin implement those precautions?
4 -
Even if OP has just written this for attention (which is very much possible as this issue has been brought up in the forums very often and they are relatively active here…) it is still an actual issue that can affect people that are suffering from epilepsy
1 -
Im my opinion if the guy who wrote the post knew his little cousin ( i suppose is a child and I suppose he is an adult ) have epileptic attacks and he let him play the game definetely have some fault specially if he knows about flashlights and those behaviours.
Not knowing about a issue is not a reason to exempt him from the fault.If you dont know you search about it or ask in forums for example.
The child cant be responsible of his own health but the guy who wrote this can do it. if you dont know just dont play videogames with him and be responsible and cautious.
On the other side, behaviour should had put a text to people with epileptic attacks refrain from playing this game or play it by your own volition.
We know that if they add photosensivity the next day we will have a bunch of post saying photosensivity benefit killers without photosensivity as the day they released colorblindness...Also im pretty sure that photosensivity is gonna come "in the futureTM" so the easiest option is to put a warn when you are on the menu and then an options to quit the warning if you arent susceptible to these issues.
0 -
Hello, get well soon !!! But with all due respect, people who suffer from epilepsy should generally not play games like DBD and other games. I think that is irresponsible !
2 -
No, because people with epilepsy have no business in computer games in my opinion, because it is just too dangerous, sry
2 -
There is 0 downside in removing the flashlight strobing.
And yes, they have a business. As long as the game can maintain a trigger-free experience, there is no reason not to play.
5 -
There are steps which can be taken to mitigate/eliminate the risks, and if BHVR isn't going to directly implement changes themselves, then the least they can do is add an epilepsy/seizure warning to the game.
If someone with epilepsy sees said warning then they can make the conscious decision ahead of time to not play the game knowing that it could cause problems for them.
Having said that, there is virtually zero reason to not just remove flashlight macros. They don't serve any in-game purpose whatsoever.
6 -
But Dead by Daylight does have triggers. All these weird sounds and effects.
2 -
And that's why I said they should get rid of these worthless triggers.
5 -
Brother I missed you too! Teunited!! Let us wreck havoc!!!
Signed Hexy, DevotedTricksterMainExtraordinare
1 -
TIL devs only care if survivors have seizures.
Breaking news: Devs planning the genocide of killer mains, more at 8.
1 -
On PlayStation they warn you when you turn the system on.
I'm pretty sure something like this is on all platforms.
It sucks what happen but you're blaming the wrong people.
1 -
My cousin has fully recovered and returned home as of today. My cousin was in the hospital after that incident. Anyway, he's doing fine.
I can see some comments here with made up stories and a lot of assumptions. Big ######### yikes. I guess that's Dead by Daylight forums for ya.
9 -
I'm not epileptic or anything triggered by lights flashing but I just had a game as blight and there were 3 survivors doing it to me all game at the corner of my FOV and in front of me with the perks which increased their usability and my head started to feel all funny like I was drunk I had to keep shutting my eyes tight for about five seconds to stop it.
I also was having my ears messed up by their clicking macros.
The devs clearly don't care about this it gives survivors joy messing with people's bodily health so they won't fix it.
They can simply killswitch flashlights and do it but they won't.
3 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
I'm glad your cousin recovered.
You could open a support ticket with BHVR and tell them what happened. This gives them a chance to do something in private.
I think if you can afford to, maybe get a lawyer and potentially sue for damages. Or maybe reach out to a YouTube lawyer like LegalEagle to see if you might have a case for negligence on BHVR part. Could be an interesting video and the publicity of the issue might be enough for BHVR to do something.
Might also be worth reaching out to Gameinformer and see if they can tweet a PSA about the issue. It might also gain some traction.
https://www.gameinformer.com/2021/03/03/an-epileptics-guide-to-gaming
3 -
Actually it would be more like you bringing your cousin to disneyland. He has a heart condition. You go on a ride with no additional warnings on it and the park allows you on the ride. They have put up no indications of increased risk and give no warnings that the ride is more prone to causing heart issues than any other ride in the park. However, they are aware of these risks, they just don't inform the guest of it. You go on and your cousin has some sort of heart issue as a result.
In this case, Disney is legally culpable for anything that happens. They were aware of the increased dangers but took no actions to inform guests of the risk and actively ignored it, depriving the guest of necessary information to make their own decision on their health. I don't see the difference here, really. It is a very similar issue. The only way it really, to me, could be argued to be totally different, is if behavior didn't know of this issue. But that means you have to believe they have ignored every thread, message, question etc regarding these issues, which is unlikely.
Also, you are required to give reasonable accomadation for people. Don't want to? Go do business in a different country. It's not even like they have to remove survivors holy flashlight clicking. A simple very clear warning on start up would be enough to legally protect them. Also, not all things cause equal issues in photosensitive people. Most photosensitive people can play most games fine. This game causing such issues is not a normal thing found across all games. It's a DBD issue. And as far as I am concerned, behavior (the company itself) is legally responsible for whatever happens. If someone has a seizure directly caused by this game, which has no additional warnings it may cause seizures, then the company is 100% responsible for whatever happens and can be sued for damages. And when real life stuff is happening causing possible physical harm to others, you can no longer rely on the law ignoring it because "video games." Don't treat peoples health and safety like a bug you can ignore for 3 years. "But this PS4 warns you" isn't going to cut it. I sure get no warning from the game when I boot it on my PC. I also do not think possibly putting a warning in a tiny document I have to cross Mount Doom to see, will be considered sufficient warnings to those at risk.
Your initial post only works if we accept the idea all games equally cause the same sort of issues in all photosensitive people. Which is objectively false. If a photo sensitive person can play other games but NOT DBD, then it's the games issue and sufficient warnings are legally required, at least by my country. I think a simple extra warning on start up would be a better outcome than a possible lawsuit.
3 -
Sigh... This again?
Actually it would be more like you bringing your cousin to disneyland. He has a heart condition.Let's talk about this premise.
The kid has a heart condition. Okay, then why in the flying duck is that cousin going to an amusement park to ride dangerous rides that could cause his condition to get worse in the first place?
Remember now, the cousin knew he had epilepsy and the OP was aware of this also.
Terrible analogy that has no relevance to this very situation. Your argument will only work if nobody was aware of the condition.
In this case, Disney is legally culpable for anything that happens.Yes, they will be and I wholeheartedly agree that DBD is in the wrong for not putting a sign that warns people of epilepsy.
BUT, DBD itself does not inherently cause epilepsy. Third party programs that exploit a feature using a Macro that was never meant to flicker that fast is what causes them, so in BHVR's case, it's a little different from your Disneyland example.
Also, you are required to give reasonable accomadation for people.Accommodation? For what?
You do realize that people who have preexisting knowledge of their illness don't get much compensation nor appeal in courts right?
They actually criticize you for making a poor decision.
In fact, compensations are only given to those who didn't have knowledge of their illnesses. His cousin knew. Once again, your example only pertains to those who have 0 knowledge of their health issues and were ignorant about them.
Your initial post only works if we accept the idea all games equally cause the same sort of issues in all photosensitive people.Yes and that's exactly my point.
All games DO affect photosensitive people to a certain extent. That's why nearly ALL doctors will advise them to be VERY careful or even stay away from games all together due to this very reason.
However, DEAD BY DAYLIGHT is a horror game, with a darker screen, flashlights that shines light to the player, etc. Playing a few games can clearly prove this point.
I iterate once more:
- If you know you are epileptic, be careful of what you play.
- If you are going to take a risk playing a game that clearly seems like it could cause an episode, that's on you. No one else to blame.
- Unless you were NEVER diagnosed with an illness before, you cannot be proven completely innocent and not all the public will stand with you on your case.
That's all I have to say.
10 -
"Yes, they will be and I wholeheartedly agree that DBD is in the wrong for not putting a sign that warns people of epilepsy.
BUT, DBD itself does not inherently cause epilepsy. Third party programs that exploit a feature using a Macro that was never meant to flicker that fast is what causes them, so in BHVR's case, it's a little different from your Disneyland example."
I do take issue with that statement. This implies that BHVR is not aware that there are macro's for flashlights. I find this very difficult to believe. For a real world example, if a car manufacturer unknowingly sells a car with faulty brakes and you get in an accident, that doesn't mean they are "off the hook" so to speak. Negligence about an issue doesn't get rid of culpability.
As an aside, I do not like how quick you are to blame the OP. OP did not specify what happened to prompt their cousin to play DBD. There are any number of scenario's in which this is not their fault. Instead, you chose to assume that it was OP's fault and blamed them, when in reality, it is far more likely that they were unaware of their cousin's choices. Perhaps it's a personal opinion, but blaming someone (without ANY proof) who just went through a likely traumatic and terrifying event is extremely distasteful, to say the least.
3 -
I'll try to respond in the most logical way possible.
What I'm emphasizing is that there are two separate faults taking place here. For example, on September 11th 2002, we all know that terrorists hijacked an American Airlines plane.
Negligence about an issue doesn't get rid of culpability.Now, I do blame American Airlines (in this case, BHVR) for having terrible security that couldn't even prevent MULTIPLE terrorists from boarding their planes. BUT, at the same time, I can't blame American Airlines for the terrorists' atrocities as it was out of their hands at the point.
It is BHVR's fault for having terrible hacking prevention system, but the real perpetrators (i.e. survivors who exploit the game using macros and hacks) are not and should not be clumped together with the company regarding this issue. They should be handled separately.
I do not like how quick you are to blame the OPI have heard this before and I still cannot agree with it.
The OP is a DBD player who has played the game for a LONG time (his posts alone can prove this). He would most likely be more experienced and even be more familiar with the game than the cousin (otherwise either that cousin never had a seizure before all this time or he was just REALLY unlucky here, but I doubt this is the case).
The epileptic episode clearly took place in close proximity with the OP (cuz he recounts seeing the whole thing and being absolutely terrified) and states he even knew of the preexisting condition his cousin had.
So to sum it up, the experienced OP had a cousin who also played the same game he plays for a long time (and is quite passionate about) and even witnessed his very episode in the very same premise.
But we are to assume he never knew and that he had no knowledge of this at all in the first place? I doubt it.
6 -
I do not think your example fits.
Whereas the terrorists KNEW what they were doing and what consequences it would cause, the Survivors macro'ing their flashlights did not. Ergo, it fits better with my example, where an oversight caused serious harm.
Likewise, nowhere does the OP state they were with their cousin. I took it as the OP walked in on their cousin having a seizure and took appropriate measures to get them help. If they were not, you are essentially accusing the OP of being a psychopath who intended to cause harm to their family members. Sagan Standard, if you are going to make extraordinary claims, you need extraordinary evidence.
You have assumed without any supporting evidence and have accused the OP of being negligent at worst and intentionally causing harm at worst. I think you should carefully consider that.
5 -
Whereas the terrorists KNEW what they were doing and what consequences it would cause, the Survivors macro'ing their flashlights did not. Ergo, it fits better with my example, where an oversight caused serious harm.That example was to prove that BHVR had nothing to do with causing the epileptic seizure itself. That's what the survivors did.
So like how I iterated, this issue lies with the survivors (i.e. terrorists) than BHVR (American Airlines).
I took it as the OP walked in on their cousin having a seizure and took appropriate measures to get them help.Quite a specific premise you are setting for the OP.
Instead of thinking that the OP was literally next to the cousin when all this happened, you are here to tell me that we should assume that the OP just happened to walk into the room at the EXACT TIME the cousin was foaming at the mouth while playing the game he also happens to passionately play? Does that make any common sense to you?
Have you ever witness an actual epileptic seizure before, Pulsar? They don't scream or even make a loud noise, meaning it's not that cliche. It's highly unlikely that the OP "walked in" the room while his cousin was on the ground foaming at the mouth while having an epileptic seizure.
I think you should carefully consider that.I did and I still stand by my conclusion.
4 -
I have never witnessed one, no.
From my understanding, the OP is not describing a "mild" seizure. To quote St. John's NZ First Responder's Group, "A full-scale epileptic seizure involves violent jerking of the limbs, facial twitching, and foaming at the mouth due to saliva being blown through clenched teeth."
This is consistent with what little information the OP described. Likewise, "violent jerking of the limbs" seems like it would be fairly loud if they were seated at a desk.
I am merely saying it is more reasonable to think that OP found their cousin rather than assuming they knowingly allowed a serious harm to come to them. That's not something normal people do. To be clear, are you accusing OP of being showing psychopathic tendencies and intending to harm their cousin?
3 -
Glad we're on the same page regarding the seriousness of the seizure.
To be clear, are you accusing OP of being showing psychopathic tendencies and intending to harm their cousin?And since it's your first time contributing to this thread here, I'm going to let you slide with that accusation.
The answer is no.
I have said this over a dozen times now. I blame the OP and BHVR for their negligence.
BHVR KNOWS the possibilities of creating seizures and they have yet to add any warning signs (better yet a fix to the whole fiasco) despite multiple accounts describing of going through something similar.
The OP is also not off the hook since it's HIGHLY LIKELY (I'd say close to 95+%) that he knew his cousin was playing DBD since he's a family member and DBD is also one of his passionate games. However, the OP also KNEW that his cousin had epilepsy and despite knowing the prerequisites of going into a seizure, the OP didn't consult his cousin from playing a dangerous game.
And yet, he has the AUDACITY to come on to the forums and swear/blame the players and BHVR for HIS short thinking and has yet to own up to his own mistake of not being able to prevent this problem and in effect, save his cousin from going into a seizure and having a traumatic experience in the first place.
THAT's what I'm criticizing.
8 -
The saga continues.
2 -
The guy should explain it from the begining how was it exactly.Becuz if he let the cousin playing with the pc and he was in front of it all the time he surely have fault.
1 -
I know, for crying out loud.
It sucks having to reiterate all my talking points, but nobody is going to read an entire 9 pages worth of bickering now would they? 😂
3 -
It doesn't even have to a PC tbh. It could be a wide screen TV and it'll still have the same effect.
And it doesn't make any logical and scientific sense that they were not in close proximity with each other.
3 -
Perhaps that is exactly what we need.
@FriendlyBubba if it wouldn't upset you too much to do so, could you give us some more context on the situation?
1 -
you want the devs to continue ignoring flashlight clicking and the problems it creates?
3 -
I think the reasoning behind that post was regarding my now tired ass having to reiterate every single god damn talking point I had to pass on 9 pages in a row.
6 -
are you comparing flashlight clicking to 9/11?
Also, out of topic but you cant necessarily hold American Airlines as the ppl who messed up as much as you can the TSA.
You can blame BHVR for not putting an epilepsy warning on their game.
8 -
Really doesn't matter what you think, honestly. Courts will inevitably decide and there is really no precedent for behavior to win if it goes to that. Sorry. Behavior is objectively at fault. Your entire logic relies on this idea people with epilepsy cannot play any game at all, which is a lie. Why is this game different from every other game? Because the devs cannot program? The game objectively causes more issues for epilepsy than any other game and must legally have a warning, as any ride would. I'd just put the warning rather than risk my rinky dink game company going to court and also getting dragged through the mud in media.
"HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IT WOULD GIVE HIM A SEIZURE BECAUSE ALL GAMES GIVE PEOPLE WITH PHOTO SENSITIVITY SEIZURES!" You have given zero logic as to why a person would assume DBD has worse photo sensitive issues than any other game. Your entire argument relies on the idea photo sensitive people cannot play games and should not and should know that when that isn't true. I have no idea why you speak so passionately about a condition you clearly have no understanding of at all. If you don't want to reiterate, then don't come back to the thread. It's clear most people disagree with you and aren't going to agree, and you're just digging this hole deeper and deeper. And yes, you get accomodation for neglect which this objectively is.
5 -
This content has been removed.
-
You know what? I wasn't the one who commented first. YOU decided to tag me in and quote my post in the first place, so I don't know why you're telling ME to back off first.
And regarding DBD being more dangerous for photosensitive people, I have said before that the game itself is darker than most other games, and even small hints of light could stimulate, not to mention irritate the nerves of a photosensitive person who's peripheral vision would be heavily focused on the screen. This in turn creates a bigger chance of creating a bigger seizure than normal lighting as the cornea is scarce of light that could help eleviate the severity. I have iterated this before and a fellow epileptic person agreed with my statement, so I have official approval from an actual patient who suffers from epilepsy who probably is knowledgeable in regards to the illness he personally suffers from.
And I repeat, they can play games. They can go watch movies at a theatre too. They can also go to a laser tag establishment for all I care. I'm not here to take away their ability to do something. What I am saying is that with risks comes consequences and we (as in the public) are not responsible for any outcomes that come along with taking said risk. Just like those kids who ate Tidepods, knowing it'll be bad for them. Just like those kids who took selfies in a raging storm and drowned. Just like those kids who go to dangerous places and get lost. It's their freedom to do whatever, but don't come asking for sympathy if something bad happens. There's a saying, hindsight is 20/20.
That's all I've got to say regarding this matter. I won't be replying to anyone any more since this entire forum gets too invested in pity parties instead of focusing on what's real and what really matters.
FYI: If you really do care about the cousin, you should be teaching him life valuable lessons that could save his life in the future like me instead of telling him to get better and some generic ######### like that.
7 -
Voodoo has stated very concretely that they want BHVR to fix the problem with flashlight clicking and at least put in a warning…
The 9/11 comparison was really faulty and out of scope.
but Voodoo did not say they don’t blame BHVR at all.
0 -
i dont wanna be negative about the situation and i hope your cousin recovers but my family has a history of epilepsy and by my guesses, he has photosensitive which means he shouldnt really be infront of a tv especially on chaotic games.
0
