BHVR Has to stop ignoring the INSANE Seizure Hazard that this game is right now.
Comments
-
Well it's the DbD forums. Sympathy and Empathy is nonexistent. People legitimately dont care about making the game more accessible despite it being better for the game since it would boost sales.
1 -
I know this may come as a shock, but not every game is meant for every person to play it. There's a warning about epilepsy at the beginning now. If you suffer from seizures, perhaps you should play something else.
5 -
Explain why changes shouldn't be implemented to make the game more accessible.
What are the downsides?
🦆🦂
3 -
Now imagine someone has invested lots of time and energy into the game before it was given a photosensitivity warning. Doctor was a rare enough occurance that despite the danger it was manageable. Hell, they may not have even faced a Doctor before putting in time and money, because he's so rare. The devs even seemed like they cared after removing mori spamming due to both the ability to hold people hostage and the photosensitivity dangers.
And then they come out with new Haddonfield, Sadako, don't fix LOD issues, and slap on a warning and call it a day.
All the time and money has now been completely wasted.
Accessibility is all about making sure as many people as possible can play a game. This needs, you guessed it, the developers to change things.
3 -
At this point I'm convinced people just aren't going to understand. Most of the these issues could be fixed and they wouldn't even notice, but they'd rather tell players who have been playing the game for years with little to no issue to just stop playing it. One of the worst events in the game for anyone with photosensitivity is flashlight macros, so it makes the posts admonishing people for having reactions ignorant at best, dubious at worst. Everything else can easily be fixed by just changing the overlays that can cause issues, or even just having an alternate that can be toggled locally. Its really not a difficult or invasive thing to accommodate, unlike the portable harding tests players can carry around because the devs refuse to put a sanity check on even their flashlights.
4 -
Literally
Just give us client-sided options like colourblind mode. An optional photosensitivity mode would do wonders for the experience of photosensitive people.
Hard of hearing features have, thankfully, been confirmed after the whole Spine Chill debauchle, so I'm interested to see how they'll be implemented. Hopefully a similar vein of DBD mobile.
People are so against option accessibility features with the feat of it granting an "advantage" or being "unnecessary" without realising it wouldn't impact them at all while helping to not only improve the playerbase but the reputation of BHVR as a whole
1 -
This is a community where both killers and survivors could get equal buffs, but they would sooner complain about their opponent getting a buff than appreciate their own. If something doesn't reward them personally, they don't want it to happen. Its kinda sad if I'm honest, we're just crabs in a bucket.
2 -
Oh okay so we should be able to mod DBD to remove the photosensitive bits then? Great, glad we've come to a solution.
Calling people with disabilities stuck up and entitled because they want to be able to experience the same things as everybody else is able to is... well it's an odd hill to die on to say the least. How dare they want to stand a chance at having a normal life where they can experience things the same way as able bodied people! How self-centered of a concept to not want to be alienated because of a gentic trait you cannot control.
It's definitely a hill you've chosen to die on. Not exactly the best one though.
Oh and for the record, the stance you've chosen to take is also known as being "against accessibility".
2 -
My point is that you shouldn't expect a stranger you've never met, that lives in a place you've never been to, to do something for free just because you asked them on the internet. It's the definition of entitled, thinking that you "deserve" something in exchange for nothing. A stranger you have never met owes you nothing.
Being able to play one specific video game is not "a chance at having a normal life." There's many, many, MANY video games other than Dead by Daylight. Not to mention that there are many massively popular board and card games that don't need a TV or monitor to play, meaning there is a 0% chance that they can trigger someone's photosensitivity issues.
For a better example of what I mean, I get frequent cluster migraines (a type of migraine painful enough that you can't even open your eyes until it's gone). They're usually caused by certain kinds of music, by dogs barking, or by people shouting. Do I demand that people stop making the kind of music that gives me migraines? Do I demand people to put down their dogs so I can go on nature walks without getting headaches? Do I demand that people having fun with their friends be quiet and go home?
No. I suck it up and deal with it. I can just go somewhere else or put in earplugs. This Earth does not bend to my whim, the people on it are simply living their best lives. What right do I have to tell others to change how they live, merely because I am different? None whatsoever, is the answer. I don't expect people to give me special treatment just because I lost the genetic lottery, and have minor brain damage from motor accidents (cluster migraines are hereditary, and become more common if you have high testosterone and brain damage).
You can't claim the moral high ground in this argument against me. I'm the kind of person that accessibility features are for.
If you have a problem, you're the one that needs to solve it. DbD can give someone seizures? Then they shouldn't play it. Simple as. Expecting someone else to put in the work to change something because you think you're special is just most "I have the brain of a 2 year old" thing I can imagine. Am I going to listen to dubstep and then tell Skrillex to stop making dubstep songs with frequent tempo changes and high pitched noises? No, I'm going to listen to something else.
1 -
You understand the lights didn't always flicker this intensely and this can literally kill people who are caught unaware, right?
People potentially dying to play a game of any kind is not good. No one "needs" the intense rapid flickering, even if you aren't dealing with epilepsy.
It's incredibly frustrating when people bring forth concerns like this and someone says, "But it's intended that some people will just have seizures and shouldn't play the game!" Valuing an alleged "horror aesthetic" over people getting to play, or play comfortably is really wild.
Having the game be more accessible is a good thing, I promise! Telling disabled people they just shouldn't play is extremely terrible and shouldn't be a thing that is ever considered an option. On a long enough timeline, everyone becomes disabled. Have a little foresight and compassion.
While it's great they added a warning, I'm hopeful they just fix the rapid flickering. As it stands, I cannot play Haddonfield much, because I can only safely risk doing the outdoor gens. Most of the flickering in this game isn't that rapid or intense--so suddenly for just this one map, I am a detriment to my team in a game that is otherwise okay and safe for me to play as a person with epilepsy. It's a bummer.
Hearing people say I shouldn't play a game I really love because one map has a flickering problem is really off-putting from a community I love.
4 -
Good post!
0 -
I’m amazed at how many people there are trying to argue against this.
Making a game more accessible isn’t a bad thing in the slightest. I’m lucky enough that I don’t have seizures, but I do have sensory issues and the flashing lights just add to that. If I get the wrong matches I’m left with a huge headache and pretty much can’t function for a while. Not to mention that I’m hard of hearing and can’t always make out when the Killer is coming to me unless I use Spine Chill.
BHVR needs to do better in regards to the game’s accessibility. And before someone tries to say something, it’s not selfish to ask for better accessibility. If I wanted to be selfish, I’d demand BHVR remove the Plague because of emetophobia, or remove the spider imagery because I love spiders and don’t like them being villainised.
4 -
people love being ableist 💅
4 -
I mean calling disabled people selfish for wanting to experience the same things able-bodied people do is in fact an incorrect thing to say because it is not a fact
4 -
I wish people would educate themselves before establishing strong feelings & opinions about a particular topic…
2 -
"no other company does anyway"
You know just because it's done or not done by giant capitalistic entities looking for profit doesn't mean it's good.
But hey if you want to shill for companies AND be ableist,pop off king, good luck with that.
Also the "me changing to fix my problems". Bro,go and find a cure for photosensitivity. I'll wait. A whole lotta talk from you,still no sense.
4 -
"My problem is the sheer entitlement. Accessibility features are great, but acting like you deserve them just for existing"
God I just noticed how big of a dogwhistle your post is. Tons of homophobes and transphobes use this exact rhetoric of "I don't hate x,I just don't like how entitled they're acting", telling queer people how they should advocate for their rights.
If you're not affected by these issues,but feel like you're entitled to the right to complain about how we advocate for accessibility - you're not. You're just entitled because you're in a position of privilege. Go away.
4 -
Hear that @kizuati you don't have epilepsy anymore
2 -
And this thread has devolved into a whole lot of nothing
2 -
As you know this things are also there to distract both killer and survivors, so survivors might think there was a movement of the killer, or the killer being distracted by flickering lights so he overlooks a survivor.
So you cant just turn them off without changing small but important parts of the balancing.
So what do you propose to replace those effects with, so the distraction is still there, yet its not a problem with photosensitivity?
I am just curious and dont know much about photosensitivity, thats why i ask.
1 -
Can you please change your tone?
I understand you feel strongly about this topic—may even be personally effected by it—but Ben’s comments have been devoid of emotional bias.
You’re attacking his character when you should be bringing constructive criticism to the table.
You can’t “win” an argument against a rational thinker by challenging their ethos.
You’re villainizing yourself by demonizing him, even if he appears apathetic to your problems.
I don’t have enough knowledge about photosensitivity to have a dog in this fight, but as a third party reading this conversation, it feels like you’re Sandra Bullock and this is the Blind Side.
5 -
The issue I have with this though is that you can't prove that they don't have photosensitivity/aren't disabled, and it's not impossible for allies to fight for something simply because they don't have it. In the same way a cishet person can fight for LGBTQ+ rights, an able-bodied person can advocate for people who are disabled. Honestly, it tends to take those people standing up for something to get people to listen because companies tend to not listen to minorities themselves.
I know the DBD community can be bad sometimes, every community can, but this isn't a bad cause to be a bit pushy for considering how many people it affects. Like, yeah, if people came together and demanded something silly and was being very loud and vocal about it like making PH's butt big again I'd understand thinking people are entitled because it's something small. This is a legitimate concern though, and kinda needs to be addressed. Disabled people shouldn't just be left out because they're disabled.
4 -
No,not really.
They're trying to pass off me advocating for accessibility in a game I love as entitlement. They're not rational. They're just trying to look rational while they're just being either plain entitled or even ableist
I'm not going to engage in bad faith debates. I'm not gonna debate transphobes on why I should have rights. Same here. If a person thinks I'm entitled for wanting accessibility options, they're acting in bad faith and I won't engage in a debate with them.
Post edited by EQWashu on5 -
Again, perfectly reasonable.
Like I said, accessibility options would be great. For example, I would personally love an option to turn off the in-game music, since it gives me headaches sometimes.
I just dislike the attitude of the people advocating for the options. Why would BHVR be inclined to listen to someone about their disability issues when that someone is being an overly-aggressive bully about it? Why would making demands like you're picketing at a political speech change anyone's mind about anything? If anything, it just turns people off of the idea of making accessibility options, because you'd be letting the picketers into your community.
In my opinion, the ends DO NOT justify the means. There's no need for people to be rude and twist people's arms to get what they want. Being polite and rational is what gets you what you want in this world.
0 -
"because you'd be letting the picketers into your community." What does that even mean?
"THE WOKES ARE COMING INTO DBD OH NO" or what? I'm sorry,not sorry,but you coming here and telling me how to live my life and how to advocate for accessibility when you have no idea how polite and how helpful I and many other people were previously while advocating for this and how little that did is just you showing that you have no understanding on the topic and you just came here for conflict.
4 -
"Being polite and rational" oh you mean like going through the official steps to leave copious amounts of feedback and bug reports, only to be ignored time and time again and then finally simply brushed aside with a warning? Not even a promise of further developments.
Because going via the official process hasn't worked. Peoeple have been making proper forms of feedback since May 2017 and it hasn't worked. So that line of logic is a little flawed.
Nobody got anywhere by being passive. Sometimes you have to make yourself heard.
4 -
"I mean, every video game requires you to stare at a TV or monitor for multiple hours, which is basically staring at a big array of flashing lights for an extended time. If you are photosensitive, this is already a bad idea before we even get into which game you are playing in particular."
It's kind of nuts to think about all the light triggers that can set some people off. And this is where my problem lies. If BHVR can easily add an option for less light flicker, yes- do it, but what about other triggers like high contrasting colors or just length of play. Is this their responsibility? I don't know what BHVR can do for all the triggers.
But also, I don't want BHVR to be limited in creating maps, characters, effects, cosmetics, or whatever. They might have a really cool idea planned that, visually, may wow most everyone, but won't because they feel they shouldn't. I want BHVR to push the game as far as they can with as little restriction as possible.
3 -
I gotta agree with the others here. Being super passive doesn't really get you anywhere, especially when it's something people have been talking about for a while. Being more in your face to BHVR about this doesn't mean people are trying to be rude, and I have no clue why BHVR wouldn't do accessibility issues out of spite because people are asking for it in a less than passive manner. Historically, people have had to be loud in order to be heard and this isn't any different. Like, I'm sure if enough people brought it up, the devs would add a feature to mess around with in-game music. But if we don't bring this up and have a genuine conversation about it, BHVR will never listen and they won't even consider making any changes.
3 -
Historically even with BHVR,we had to be loud about colorblind options for the devs to go back on literally calling it stupid or whatever and actually implement that.
4 -
Oh yeah, I remember that. It took them way too long to add that, and I'm still blown away that people were trying to say they shouldn't add it because of "competitive advantages" or whatever bullcrap they were trying to say it would cause.
2 -
Do you honestly expect everyone to fall in line, when you make a call-to-action about a problem that has persisted in gaming for decades now?
If you want to make change, then it is on you to see that happen. You can’t stand for something and then hope everyone will stand next to you.
Sure, your friends will stand with you, and the people who already agree with you will stand with you. But the people who should matter most to you are the ones who disagree with you—they are what stand between you and the change you wish to see in the world.
Convince the people who stand against you why they should stand alongside you, and you can make change.
If you’re not able and/or willing to do that, then you’ll never see the world you want to live in.
Post edited by EQWashu on2 -
The people who stand against you aren't the ones you need to convince, it's the developers themselves. Look at the Bubba situation- people still disagree with that, and they always will, but it was resolved because the developers were convinced.
Post edited by EQWashu on3 -
Here's my last post in this thread:
You have probably read everything in this thread so far. Here's my stance:
Accessibility options are fantastic. I, for one, would benefit a great deal from having them due to having frequent headaches that are triggered by loud noises. However, being rude and overly-demanding does not get you anything. If anything, it pushes people against your cause to an extreme degree and it shows people your true character: the kind of person that thinks being horrible to others gets you what you want. You know what kind of person that is? A horrible person. (who would have thought?)
If you have photosensitive issues, no one is forcing you to play video games. You can do something else with your time that is not actively hazardous to your physical well-being. This is really not complicated, I'm not trying to be mean or belittle anyone. Just take care of your self, you only get one life and it's not worth losing it over something as frivolous as playing a video game.
It's absolutely my own fault for getting too into it, and I solemnly admit to that. But I still stand by this: Why play video games if it is dangerous for you to do so? Don't you love yourself? I would not let someone I love do something that could give them a seizure, and neither should you. There are many things to do with your spare time other than play video games. If you think any of this is some kind of controversial statement, I implore you, consider my motivations. I just want you to look after yourself and treat others with kindness.
Post edited by EQWashu on4 -
"These things have nothing to do with each other in any way" This just tells me you have zero understanding of the issue. Complete Zero.
Post edited by EQWashu on3 -
I don't think you need to fight to convince the opposition to agree with you. In this situation it's not the people who disagree who are the ones who can make the change, it's the devs. Trying to convince others to agree is just wasting energy and putting it to the wrong place because I doubt a few comments on a forum is going to make someone change their opinion.
Post edited by EQWashu on2 -
gotcha.
4 -
From a dev standpoint, you WANT your game to be more accessible because literally that means more people will play it. This isn't rocket science. Being thoughtful and making your game more welcoming to everyone is going to get you more sales.
People are being really super weird about making this game more accessible in this thread. Y'all okay?
5 -
omg hi i recognise you from twitter
0 -
The devs will always do what they believe to be in their best interest.
In your example @GoodBoyKaru, they could look at the greater socio-political climate to draw conclusions about what the “majority” of their players would like to see done about the situation.
They don’t have that same driving force here for accessibility. Even in developed countries, accessibility is almost always an after-thought.
It’s sad to say, but what @kizuati is asking for here is really trailblazing in the game industry.
So if we want to make it happen, we need numbers to prove to BHVR that it is a high priority problem
1 -
oh hey yeah i remember the reply too now
0 -
All these debate lords acting as if more accessibility would destroy DBD genuinely amuses me
2 -
it would be amusing if not saddening
3 -
I'm going to keep advocating for accessibility,as loudly as I need to. BHVR,still waiting for any response.
2 -
There's a bug with Freddy that makes the sky extremely bright if you use the alarm clock, here is a link to the video.
0 -
That video is not available
0 -
You can just search it up as the links aren't working for some reason.
0 -
There is a difference between best interest and what they appraise as their best interest. As multiple people have stated, accessability is almost always in best interest, especially if the cost for solution is less than the potential sales growth. Since fixes like this tend to cost little to nothing, they're generally slam dunks. You dont see them come up as issues very often because they get addressed before they even see the light of day. Photosensitivity issues in video games and cartoons has been a topic for literal decades, and there have been many "best practices" developed in their wake. This isn't "demanding some stranger change things for you personally," like that person kept claiming, Its industry standards being ignored by anything short of litigation. Having no warning in the game until recently is grounds for negligance, especially since it was brought to their attention and acknowledged well before that was introduced. None of the events that can cause reactions are particularly new (barring sadako's inclusion in the game months ago,) And most of them have been in the game for literal years without even having a lazy warning thrown up like they eventually settled on.
Then we get to the person's stance itself. The absolute ignorance is just baffling, especially in light of people trying to directly educate them. Its easy to understand why one side might get a bit more emotional in this case, considering they are being disparaged for a disability they have no control over. There are many people who play games at various levels who have photosensitivity issues and still can play almost any game with zero issue, and they are dilligent with "tests" for ones that are known to present risks. Controlled exposure is something that most people with any form of disability have to experience, which usually involves a session with a friend or loved one where they can make sure their reaction to the issues present is safe. Considering the offending issues could easily be overlooked with such dilligence, the onus has been on bhvr for a very, very long time to have a minimum of a warning, with the best practice being to either warn about each event that can cause a reaction, or preferably to rework those elements entirely.
There have been a good number of actors and singers who have had issues with epilepsy both before and even during their careers. If people like the beastie boys, lil wayne, and even Prince can have their performances adjusted in a way that doesn't cause photosensitivity bouts through their usage of effects during their live performances, its not asking much for BHVR to do better than how they've been handling the issue for years, and its pretty insulting when someone's armchair take is to forbid people from a medium that they are already putting plenty of effort into being safe through the negligence of developers.
Again, to reiterate, There are plenty of photosensitive people who have been playing video games for decades with little to no issue. This is mostly due to the standards and practices the industry has been developing over the years to be mindful of the condition. The way it is handled in this game is a big fail, and has been for a long time. The generic warning was the bare minimum, and it was only added after people reported direct reactions. If you want to see what kind of a PR nightmare that causes, just look at cyberpunk 2077.
4 -
I truly appreciate the honest discussion and concerns being brought up in this thread, and a thank you to those discussing it in a civil and respectful manner. However, between some people attacking others, and going off the rails multiple times, I am closing it here.
I absolutely understand the points brought up. Back in one of the old PTBs where Killers saw a red flash on the screen when blinded by a pallet, I couldn't even watch a streamer play Killer, let alone play Killer myself, as it instantly triggered migraines for me which would not go away until hours later, if at all. The feedback of myself and others about this visual issue was heard by the Team, and it was not brought into the game. And issues with Sadako in the PTB were brought up and taken to the team to address it, and the orange glyph disabled for visual issues. Feedback like this is important, and places like Feedback and Suggestions help bring these issues to the team (as such, I moved this to Feedback and Suggestions).
And as it was brought up, colorblind mode was in the works well before many were made aware of it, Mandy (who has mentioned being colorblind herself), has previously mentioned this many times here on the Forum.
1
