Slashdot Mirror
Who is Responsible for Advice Labels on Games?
AccUser asks: "So, I spent the day in the local hospital with my son after he suffered a seizure while we played a computer game (that shall remain nameless). The game was labeled as one for younger children, but had no warnings about photosensitive seizures on either the packaging or associated documentation, and I assumed that it would be a safe game for him to play. Many games (Halo and others) come with these warnings, and rightly so - I expected that any game that was a potential risk would indicate this. To be honest, all was fine until the final level, when there were a significant number of special lighting effects, and I guess this triggered the subsequent events. So, is the labeling of games to indicate risk of photosensitive seizures and other dangers mandatory, both in Europe and the States, and who is responsible for placing this information? Is it down to the distributor? The publisher? The developer?"
Why nameless? Others with similar sensitivities might be interested in knowing what it is in order to avoid playing it themselves.
Without discussing who's job it is, I'm sure we can all agree that determining whether a video game can be made to create the particular type of pattern that may trigger any person's epileptic seizure might be quite difficult. There are two potential solutions. Labeling, if done conservatively and cheaply would pretty much require every video game developer to put "Danger, this videogame has flashing lights that will give you seizures" on the packaging, and the result would be the same: you wouldn't know which ones were actually dangerous for your son.
The other option would be for some developers to either design the game with photosensitives in mind (unlikely) to put "disable all lighting effects" in the options menu. "Disable all lighting effects" doesn't sound like a bad idea... and probably not as expensive to code or QA as a photosensitive-conscious game. It might decrease the quality of the game for y'all epileptics... but you wouldn't be foaming and twitching on the floor. Personally, I'd take that trade.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
No, no he wouldn't have. That's the point. He saying he knew his kid was sensitive to this sort of thing, and did check. He's probably extremely upset with himself right now, whether or not it's his fault, so I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't have everything right side up.
You watch your kid have a gran mal seizure, and we'll gauge your rationality afterwards for comparison.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
that came with the game system. It may will indicate that the system should not be used, period, by anyone who suffers from photosensitive seizures. For instance, the Playstation 2 manual (available here) clearly states on page 2:
WARNING: READ BEFORE USING YOUR PLAYSTATION(R)2 COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT SYSTEM. A very small percentage of individuals may experience epileptic seizures when exposed to certain light patterns or flashing lights. Exposure to certain patterns or backgrounds on a television screen or while playing video games, including games played on the PlayStation 2 console, may induce an epileptic seizure in these individuals. Certain conditions may induce previously undetected epileptic symptoms even in persons who have no history of prior seizures or epilepsy. If you, or anyone in your family, has an epileptic condition, consult your physician prior to playing. If you experience any of the following symptoms while playing a video game - dizziness, altered vision, eye or muscle twitches, loss of awareness, disorientation, any involuntary movement, or convulsions - IMMEDIATELY discontinue use and consult your physician before resuming play
Moral of the story: Don't assume that merely because the game manual does not repeat this warning that the game is safe for your child; any game (indeed, anything that flashes light, including your TV when it is not being used by the game system) can trigger a seizure.
... and the unfortunate truth is that I have yet to find a game that's 100% safe for her. She's been affected by pretty much everything, with the exceptions being Mahjong and Solitaire. Even Tetris Worlds wasn't completely safe as some levels use different lighting effects than others. One trick she's found is that if the room lights are alot brighter than the computer screen it doesn't affect her nearly as much! Hope this helps and I wish your son a speedy recovery!
Kleedrac
Sure we wang, can.
From what I know of photosensitive epilepsy, the trigger is caused by patterns of light, like strobes and bars, etc. That means that any CRT display can cause a seizure by displaying a pattern at a certain frequency. Like a cartoon explosion or something (remember that pokemon event in Japan a few years back? Yeah, like that).
Now the problem specific to video games is refresh rates. I'm sure I don't have to explain refresh rates to a crowd of geeks, but technically it is a repeating pattern, and therefore capable of causing seizures. Luckilly, most modern CRTs refresh fast enough (60-100hz+) to avoid this problem. But a video game that pushes your hardware might not be able to render frames that fast. If your game slows down to about 25hz or so, you can cause a seizure. Especially if vsync is on, since vsync limits the frequency to the refresh rate of the monitor (to avoid rendering parts of two seperate frames in a single pass - aka "tearing"). If the refresh rate isn't met, then typically a multiple is used, at least temporarily. This can lock your refresh rate below the usual frequency for extended periods of time, which is a recipie for disaster as far as photosensitivity is concerned.
So while, yes, you probably could 'test' videogames for the likelyhood of causing seizures, the reality is that any CRT can be a hazard, regardless of media content. It just means that photosensitive epileptics have to be very careful about what they watch. And how they watch too - taking precautions like staying back from a screen (so it doesn't dominate your field of view), taking frequent breaks, etc. Basically looking out for themselves.
Not that any of this matters in a court of law, mind you.
I did some googling for peanut allergy and photosensitive epilepsy. It seems peanut allergy occurs at about 25x more often; however, I was not aware that either of these are as common as the statistics show. This is quite an eye opener for me.
Peanut allergy affects about 1:125 people
Photosensitive epilepsy affects about 1:3000 peopleNOTE: This post is actually meant to be informative; I went with a humorous title to get noticed.
Here is a guy who tries to take the right steps. He knows many video games label themselves as dangerous. He's scanned them and filters out the ones which he believed were dangerous to his son. This is good parenting. Sadly, the system he depended on failed him. Now he needs to know why it failed, much like the US needs to know how the CIA could be as misinformed about Iraq as it was.
When he asks who is responsible for labelling, he's trying to understand the system better. Don't attack him for that. What does this get him other than fodder for legal recourse? If he finds out publishers are responsible, then he knows to that the publisher of the game he bought can't be trusted and should be avoided. Likewise up and down the chain. This improves safety for him. If labelling is mandatory, he can be relatively comfortable getting games from large companies who would have the adaquate fear of litigation to check. If it's optional, he may need to reasses his strategy alltogether - perhaps try and play all these games through himself before sharing them with his son. Will he be able to detect the danger signs? Maybe.
Don't attack a guy in a rough situation who is watching over his kid at the hospital for trying to figure out what went wrong and how to prevent it in the future. I suspect he knows that all games carry some risk. Instead of depriving his kid of all games, he is doing his best to filter the games that pose the highest risk. Likewise, instead of not driving cars, I try to purchase cars with good reliability, anti-lock brakes and airbags. Again, attacking someone who is struggling to limit risks for his son is insensitive, and childish.
The seizure is basically a large portion of the synapses in the brain firing all at once at a specific time interval. This causes the body to convulse and most thought to stop. In people prone to seizures, if a certain portion of synapses begin to fire at this critical rate, it can induce a seizure. Flashing lights of just the right frequency can cause synapses in the visual cortex to fire at this rate, inducing the seizure.
The only safe route is abstinance.
We all know the kids of today are going to do what they want to do, so please teach them about safe gaming. Try stretching a condom over your child's head (just enough to cover the eyes! we don't want to suffocate anybody!)
(All kidding aside, I hope you little one is better soon.)