|
It feels like you're more mad at this one journalist than the game studio that decided to put the epilepsy-inducer into their video game for funsies. That's weird.
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
I’m mad at them *and* her because trying to convince someone not to play a video game that could kill them for “games journalism”, and then waiting for them to find back online after they ignore all advice will stay with you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 00:53
|
|
|
I'm not sure if that's a good reason? I mean I don't know what was said but I would assume that they know their own condition better than anyone else, and even besides that - they're an adult; they aren't obligated to follow advice (even good advice!), from (presumably! Apologies if I'm wrong) internet strangers. And especially in hindsight when it resulted in something good - the epilepsy machine scene being changed.
Disproportionation fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Dec 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
We are into that zone again where epilepsy has multiple variants and you really don’t need to use yourself as a test subject, ever, because the triggers can be read off a list by anyone qualified to do so. A famous one was the movie Free Willy got its epilepsy warning because a doctor watching an early viewing went “hang on a second” and spoke to to Disney.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:20
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:I’m mad at them *and* her because trying to convince someone not to play a video game that could kill them for “games journalism”, and then waiting for them to find back online after they ignore all advice will stay with you. We've been trying to tell you, the videogame was designed to kill her. Somebody found an actual diagnostic pattern used by neurologists to trigger photoepileptic seizures in a clinical environment, thought "oh hey this would make a neat visual effect for that part of the game where you go into 'braindance' super-VR in first person", slapped it in there, and then Cyberpunk 2077 displayed it full-size in the game window. This wasn't some accident of background lighting or glitchy graphics. Cyberpunk 2077 was displaying a pattern of lights that was deliberately designed to trigger photoepileptic seizures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
It's hosed up to put strychnine in a plate of food. It's also hosed up to, on being told the food is full of strychnine, go "I'm gonna taste test the strychnine food, will report back later"
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:32
|
|
|
Oh gently caress off, I never said it wasn’t, I’ve never defended the designers and I’ve said over and over again that this game at release would potentially kill epileptics. It’s even in the post you quoted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:35
|
|
|
Dabir posted:It's hosed up to put strychnine in a plate of food. It's also hosed up to, on being told the food is full of strychnine, go "I'm gonna taste test the strychnine food, will report back later" The second thing didn't happen. Stop bearing false witness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:35
|
|
|
You’re arsey about them because they didn’t take your advice to not do something they felt comfortable doing. That’s a you problem, not a them problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:38
|
|
|
Yeh not wanting people to deliberately give themselves an epileptic fit is a me problem People who have zero experiences with Epilepsy are really sticking their hands in the air here with this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:42
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Alright, I'm going to jump on the grenade and ask at what point you think art gradates into entertainment and does have a responsibility to it's audience? You can't just say "everything is art and is therefore immune to the criticism that it's difficult to access." I'd agree that if Miyazaki truly believes that the purpose of his work is to let everyone experience the joy of overcoming hardship, then he's failed in his stated goal for exactly that reason. I think it would change the experience for others in the manner I mentioned elsewhere in that post (having a choice in how difficult a challenge is changes how a challenge feels), and I suspect that's the real reason one isn't included, but Miyazaki doesn't have an obligation to players who want not to have a choice, either, so if that's what he believes that he should put in adjustable difficulty. As to your first point, I think those two things are not the same thing. Something being immune to criticism is not the same as it having no responsibility to its audience. It's perfectly fair to criticise a game for not having [thing you wanted or needed to enjoy it]. And I think artists should listen to those criticisms, take them on board, and consider if in the light of those criticisms they should change their output to help their art achieve their goals. But an artist doesn't have a responsibility to respond to or preempt those criticisms by modifying their art to include [thing you wanted or needed to enjoy it]. For example, take this piece by Piet Mondrian:  This is an artwork that works on the contrast of the primary colours of red, blue and yellow. But if someone with achromatopsia views this image, the red and blue will appear almost the exact same shade of grey, removing that contrast. Someone with that condition quite possibly cannot engage with this artwork in the same way as someone with full or even partial colour vision, which sucks. It's perfectly fair for this person to criticise the work on the basis that the full appreciation of the work is inaccessible to them. But would Mondrian, if he had known that, had a responsibility to use different colours? I don't believe so. Mondrian was exploring reducing the painting to its core elements, lines and fields of colour, and those colours reduced to the absolute fundamental primary elements. He had a good reason to choose primary red and primary blue, and that these colours are near-indistinguishable to someone with achromatopsia is unfortunate but I don't think overrides Mondrian's right to explore those ideas in the way he chooses. Of course, most colourblind people aren't fully achromatopsic. But arguably for them, some of the impact of the pieces are lost--if you are dichromatic there are only two primary colours, and so rather than seeing the work as an experiment in only using primary colours, what instead you see is a work that either uses blue, yellow, and dark yellow (protanopic or duteranopic), or red, teal, and light red (tritanopic). An actual faithful translation of Mondrian's work for a dichromatic viewer would be a version which uses only two primary colours, If Mondrian had a responsibility to make his work accessible for the colourblind, I think you could argue that he had an obligation to produce versions of his art which featured only two of the primary colours, since anyone colour blind viewing the version made for trichromats is not actually getting the authentic experience. I realise that doesn't really answer the question, but I don't think I have an answer other than "I don't know". The trite answer is "when it stops being art", but if I could tell you exactly what is and isn't art I think I'd be a highly respected philosopher rather than just some chump with opinions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:46
|
|
|
Glazius posted:The second thing didn't happen. Stop bearing false witness. Keep trying, I'm sure you can come up with an even wankier way to say that if you work at it
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Yeh not wanting people to deliberately give themselves an epileptic fit is a me problem You aren’t their parent and they aren’t your child, they don’t have to do as you say despite how well intentioned and worried you might be. I have epileptic family members and have had to deal with them having seizures in some wild settings, but I’d never presume I get to tell them what they should and shouldn’t be looking at if they think they can handle something, because it’s their condition not mine and they’re grown adults who can make their own choices.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
Oh do bugger off you sanctimonious cockwomble of a robot man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:sanctimonious 
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 01:55
|
|
|
Between epileptic journalists and sanctimonious cockwombles in the UKMT, this has been a cromulent fucktrumpet of a day. learnincurve need drinky.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:00
|
|
|
I now have tea and a updated ignore list, also the snakes I have in quarantine are now aware of each other’s existences and are hunting each other only, the one who is a 8 inch noodle is blissfully unaware that Julius Squeezer is a 6ft boa constrictor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:05
|
|
|
not surprised goons didn't reach this conclusion but: surely the comparison for accessibility in games is accessibility in sport? which, as far as I know, the chosen solution has been not to adjust matches/contests of the existing sport but to make a similar-but-separate sport with the required accommodations
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:17
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:not surprised goons didn't reach this conclusion but: surely the comparison for accessibility in games is accessibility in sport? There's merit to that idea but a key difference is that sports are competitive, so the players have to be on an even keel. If an accessibility feature gave a sports player an unfair advantage, those without disability would feel that victory to be unfair. Much more commonly it can be impossible to design accessiblity features for sports that allow disabled players to compete against their non-disabled peers. Outside of PvP games I don't think either of those are actual concerns when it comes to accessibility in games. If a game has an easy mode and someone chooses to use it, it's not unfair if they had an easier time beating the game than I did (it's also probably not the case that they had an easier time at all, but that point is lost on a lot of the toxic gamer crowd). And it's easier to make adjustments to a game to give an authentic experience to disabled players when you don't need to deal with other humans with advantages of their own stomping all over them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Eh, the fun part of the AssCreed games isn't the assassination stuff, it's wandering around nicely-done recreations of period Florence or Paris or Dickensian London or wherever. It's why I haven't felt drawn to AC Valhalla, because Viking-era England doesn't sound that interesting a milieu (even if it has Keith Flint in it for some reason). Sort of wish they'd done one for the Valley of the Kings DLC, but the ones that are there are really interesting. I think the greek one has a tour as well, don't know about the viking one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
Anyway you look at it, that is a poo poo sailing boat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:We are into that zone again where epilepsy has multiple variants and you really don’t need to use yourself as a test subject, ever, because the triggers can be read off a list by anyone qualified to do so. A famous one was the movie Free Willy got its epilepsy warning because a doctor watching an early viewing went “hang on a second” and spoke to to Disney. There's a poster in one of the game design threads with epilepsy who helps goon game developers modify or take out epilepsy triggers in their games, by using themselves as a test subject. They've posted a thread about it somewhere, talking about how different on-screen effects cause them varying degrees of discomfort or problems, and it really doesn't seem so cut-and-dried as you suggest from their posting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 02:58
|
|
|
That person is also an idiot?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:Anyway you look at it, that is a poo poo sailing boat. Useless prick can't even colour within the lines. They'd have never got a "Meeting Expectations" in Year 1 Art with that level of 'skill'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 04:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/asharchist/status/1608962997648756736?s=20&t=eLY_L3F1M8wf3HDOEsTJQQ lol lmao I'm the joker now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 04:33
|
|
|
Its genuinely really funny how mad people get at the idea of games having cheats and difficulty modes. I've never seen getting stuck on a qte compared to failing to understand the ending of 2001 before tho lol a lot to unpack there. Ah dang i failed the intellect check and the space baby tripped over and now i gotta watch the last ten minutes again! For any other artform the idea that you must consume the piece in the exact manner and context the artist intended would be seen as an extreme stance btw and it seems especialy weird for an artform built around interactivity, where your own experience is going to be unique anyway. Art doesn't end at the author's intention, its just one way of engaging with it. With games i think its better to allow more people to engage, theres so much more to them, so much design, art, music and story. Games are wonderful, why you all gotta get mad about the idea of people playing them wrong? Like if someone just happens to nail Bennet Foddy on their first go? Never fell once? That's clearly not the intended experience, would you get mad at that guy? If someone with bad reflexes played the game at 50% speed, still fell a bunch then eventually triumphed wouldn't they have had an experience closer to the artist's intention? This is why talking about art and intention doesn't make any sense to me, difficulty is subjective, the artist doesn't actually have control of how hard any specific person will find their game. Giving the player more control would lead to a greater number of people having something closer to the intended experience. Celeste has mad cheats but before you get access to them theres a message from the developers. Its the best take on this stuff i've seen in a game imo. "Assist Mode allows you to modify the game’s rules to fit your specific needs. This includes options such as slowing the game speed, granting yourself invincibility or infinite stamina, and skipping chapters entirely. Celeste is intended to be a challenging and rewarding experience. If the default game proves inaccessible to you, we hope that you can still find that experience with Assist Mode.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 04:38
|
|
|
Know who else has been a vocal campaigner against antisemitism over the years, a lot more than Maths Girl, in fact? Yup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 04:43
|
|
|
Just seems to me that these days, to get any sort of 'honour' whether it's a Lord or Lady or MBE or Nobel peace prize you have to actually be a really terrible person. Are there any recent examples of people who got an honour for genuinely admirable reasons?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:20
|
|
|
Mr Phillby posted:Its genuinely really funny how mad people get at the idea of games having cheats and difficulty modes. I don't think you have to engage with a work of art in the manner and context the artist intended, my point is the artist doesn't have a responsibility to modify their art to accommodate the manner and context you want to experience it. If you decide to modify the art after the fact to meet your needs that's totally fine. Laudable, even. People who get mad about that are silly. If someone nailed getting over it on their first go and never fell once I'd find that really funny personally, and be pleased for them. If someone used some external software to play the game at 50% speed and completed the game, that's fine, I guess. I'm not sure I'd agree they got something "closer" to the intended experience since I think "Playing the game, persevering through frustration and eventually triumphing" and "playing the game and getting frustrated to the point where you quit and never play again" are both equally intended experiences. But I do think there is a qualitative difference between the frustration you feel when facing a challenge which doesn't offer you the option to make it easier, and the frustration you feel when facing a challenge which does. The feeling you get when your only options are "start over" and "give up" is different from the feeling you get when your options are "start over", "reduce difficulty", and "give up".
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:34
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Just seems to me that these days, to get any sort of 'honour' whether it's a Lord or Lady or MBE or Nobel peace prize you have to actually be a really terrible person. Marcus Rashford?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:45
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:
Miyazaki didn't accidentally exclude people, he created something that would appeal to people who are already good at overcoming adversity. In other words he concentrated on the group of people he wanted in a way that excludes those outside the group by necessity. Your Mondrian metaphor assumes a lot of goodwill on the part of the artist and ignores his previous mastery of the form - He didn't accidentally exclude colourblind people, he necessarily excluded anyone who didn't already have a grounding in colour theory, an understanding of the conventions of abstract art, and the money to experience it. So in comparing Mondrian to Miyazaki you're kind of proving my point. It is exclusionary. By designing it to appeal to a group who already have high capacity within a certain domain, you necessarily exclude those who don't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:45
|
|
|
Daduzi posted:Marcus Rashford? Oh yes. That was 2021 (IIRC) so he fell off my radar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:48
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:If we drop out of the metaphors for a second, the original artist in question was Miyazaki, and we know his intent, and it explicitly failed because people aren't overcoming hardship in his game (they're either giving up or summoning others). So i'm not sure about then moving on to a metaphor about an idealised version of a different artist's intent, to prove a point that no longer applies to the original premise. I didn’t think we were just talking specifically about one artist, I thought we were talking about the concepts of difficulty and accessibility more generally. If you only want to talk about Miyazaki, I’d refer you back to the first paragraph of that post instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 05:50
|
|
|
If a piece of media can be improved by others after the fact then I don't really see how it is possible to view the initial production as anything other than flawed. The original producer could, conceptually, have done it themselves, that they didn't is a mark of a limitation of either their ability (reasonable) or their intent (dubious) And I suppose in a sense nobody is obligated to produce the best work they can but I certainly don't see why we should settle for flawed work if it can be easily improved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 06:04
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:I didn’t think we were just talking specifically about one artist, I thought we were talking about the concepts of difficulty and accessibility more generally. You're probably right about intent, I just think there's something to be said about Joe Gerstandt's quote: “If you do not intentionally, deliberately and proactively include, you will unintentionally exclude.” I doubt many creators walk into the office in the morning rubbing their hands and going "Right, lets make sure those [insert ableist slur] don't get their broken hands on our fine merchandise." Nevertheless, they do, in a variety of ways. That's probably the basic grounding of what I'm going for here. It sucks to be excluded. It sucks even more to be excluded when it's based on disability. I mean most welfare and accessibility law that exists is based on that premise, I'm just confused about why it seems to be up for debate in viddy games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 06:16
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Just seems to me that these days, to get any sort of 'honour' whether it's a Lord or Lady or MBE or Nobel peace prize you have to actually be a really terrible person. My dad got an OBE for working in the NHS for 4O years at the same time as Kiera Knightly got one for... Being posh and 'acting' I guess?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 06:54
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:We probably are, it's 5am and I thought I was being clever. I think that ultimately there are elements in hobbies which are irreconcilable with complete inclusion. I think the desire to include is a noble one, and it’s absolutely good and right for us to examine critically whether any particular exclusion is necessary and call it out where we think creators could do better. But in a sense hobbies are by their nature exclusionary, they are personal and community endeavours that create groups that exclude via specialisation. If anything I’d say Video Games here are the exception; for almost any other hobby we take it for granted that people are going to be excluded. If your hobby is cooking, for example, and due to a hand injury you can’t operate an immersion blender, when you find a recipe that calls for the use of an immersion blender, everyone would expect the onus to be on you to adapt the recipe to use a different tool, not the recipe writer. A black diamond ski run is generally built around the assumption that you are an able-bodied skier; there are ways for disabled individuals to participate in skiing, but it involved them making the adjustments, buying specialised equipment, harnesses, not expecting the ski routes to be modified. There’s a strong culture in rock climbing against modifying the rocks, adding hand-holds to make a climb easier (or even possible) is seen as defacement by many. Anyone can play football, but certain leagues and competitions are closed off to you unless you and your team meet a skill threshold, and if you can’t meet that, you can’t play. Of course if you look at it from the other direction, the media direction, Video Games are the problem child. Even if you can’t understand the meaning behind Ulysses, there’s no disability that can meaningfully prevent you from reading it if you really want to. And we take it for granted that films should have subtitles and audio descriptions, even if they are outrageously absent from a ridiculous proportion of the catalogues of Netflix and Amazon. So why should games be the only narrative medium that gets a free pass on being inaccessible? Which I think was my original observation back at the start, video games sit in this nebulous grey area, half skill hobby and half media product, and I don’t think there’s really an easy answer. I don’t think it’s as simple as “make everything fully accessible”—I do think it’s way, way closer to the direction we should be veering than the crowd who chew their hair and rip their clothes if you suggest putting an easy mode in Dark Souls. Right now far too few games properly consider accessibility, and I want a future where accessibility features are just taken for granted. But I do think that games which are designed for certain specialised groups without compromises can co-exist with a broader game industry that is accessible to all. Edit: perhaps to illustrate this point while moving off the difficulty bugbear, arachnophobia I’d guess is one of, if not the most common irrational fear humans can have. And it’s not just someone being cowardly or whatever, phobias are no joke and it loving sucks that for a lot of arachnophobia sufferers playing any fantasy or horror game is an extremely dicey exercise because developers just looooove giant spiders. And this isn’t some niche thing, virtually every game I can think of which both has spiders and the ability to mod it, has a mod that takes out the giant spiders, so I don’t believe there are developers out there truly unaware of that. So I believe every developer should think long and hard before putting giant spiders in their game! They should ask if the spiders need to be there, if they could be replaced with something more interesting, ideally they could include an accessibility option to remove them if the spiders really are important, and so on. That’s good accessibility. But at the same time if some developer has an idea for a game that’s about spiders, for people who like spiders, and which has millions upon billions of spiders all over it, it’s ok to make that game, and it’s ok not to include the no spiders accessibility options because the spiders are the point of the game. That’s going to be exclusionary of people with arachnophobia, but I don’t think that’s actually a problem; the problem is all the games not about spiders but that have spiders in them anyways and no way to avoid them. Getting hung up on the spider game would be focusing on the wrong issue. Reveilled fucked around with this message at 07:34 on Dec 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 07:00
|
|
|
When I was a kid I used to like cheating in games just so I could experience the game really, don't know if I would have enjoyed Doom as much without god mode or all weapons at the time. I don't think games have cheats so much any more because of all the achievements and other bits of nonsense intended to drive engagement or what have you - which is a shame I think, let children play violent shooting games with god mode on. (if you've liked the idea of soulsborne games but are concerned about difficulty, Elden Ring is the most accessible as its nonlinear and rewards exploration. I never got that far in dark souls games but managed to finish ER if you're into that kind of thing. Its still difficult, but at least you can play the game if you cant get past a guy) I try to think/talk about accessibility in my professional work as often it just doesn't seem to come up when planning events or doing some sort of activity. Like, does this place have wheelchair access or a lift, or should we design posters that you can read easily rather than being like a magic eye picture. I don't get it right all the time and miss a lot of stuff (how does a hearing aid loop work?) but I'm surprised how few times accessibility crops up when planning work related stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 07:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
Mr Phillby posted:Its genuinely really funny how mad people get at the idea of games having cheats and difficulty modes. Well congrats because you still haven't seen it. I was asking if Miyazaki's claim that the challenge in souls games is intrinsic to his "art" is similar to how Kubrick made many of his films challenging to understand to engage the audience, and that this was clearly not the same as some qte. But sure fine, just make up stuff people have said, this discussion has gone completely off the rails at the point anyway. People have made some really good points and I've enjoyed most of it, especially people talking about the specific issues they run into playing games but it's gotten nasty now and should either come to an end or move to a dedicated thread. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 08:31 on Dec 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2022 07:51
|
|
