What the general public doesn't know about Nintendo Page 2

  • Freek 22 Jun 2004 20:54:39 7,682 posts
    Seen 7 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    The reason you will never see a person get a siezure from a Buffy episode is becuase televions is regulated (over here atleast, aprently not so much in Japan), programs have to pass tests.

    And it isn't just Pokemon either, the uses of flashes and paterns is something common to anime in generel, it's how they make fight scene or dramatic death scenes. Pokemon wnet to far in it and the episode got banned.

    Nintedo being the biggest offender is unkown, one TV show tested a handful of thier products, nobody is looking at the bigger picture, wich is what is needed for laws and regulations to be passed.




    Edited by Freek at 19:56:45 22-06-2004
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 20:58:24 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Freek wrote:
    The reason you will never see a person get a siezure from a Buffy episode is becuase televions is regulated (over here atleast, aprently not so much in Japan), programs have to pass tests.

    And it isn't just Pokemon either, the uses of flashes and paterns is something common to anime in generel, it's how they make fight scene or dramatic death scenes. Pokemon wnet to far in it and the show got banned.
    The flashes are common in anime, but they aren't as exagerated as pokemon. Specially pikachu cheeks usually flash violently betwen bright yellow and bright red when he is producing lightning bolts.
    TV is regulated, but not as much as you may believe. Actually tv in Japan is way more regulated than here.
  • timo180 22 Jun 2004 20:58:49 2,714 posts
    Seen 4 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    It was a show about Nintendo so of course the show will test Nintendo games, they didn't test any other and people seem to think this is because that none of the other games have the same flashes and patters that could cause a Seizure.
  • sunjumper 22 Jun 2004 20:59:33 3,532 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:

    [snip]

    But that doesn't mean nothing, since the warning warns us against "photosensitive epileptics", describing it as a disease. Fine and dandy, but there are games that may induce seizures in regular folk. Such was the case of a Pokemon episode, which lead many japanese children to the hospital (The episode wasn't translated). Does the game manual contain any "this game may induce seizures to non epileptic people" warnings?

    [snip]


    Please get your facts straight before you post.
    There is no method known to man that will [I]cause[/I] epilepsy. People that get seizures were already latent epileptics, they just had not been confronted with the stimulus that triggered the effect.

    Alcohol greatly increases the probability of getting a seizure, something almost no one knows. a friend of mine went after a party from latent epileptic to real epileptic after falling asleep with his girlfriend with the TV still running. The flickering of the TV screen mixed with being drunk triggered a seizure, which was mild enough as not to wake them. He only noticed that something was amiss when he woke the next day with the last four weeks of his life cleanly wiped from his mind. Did I mention that he had only known his girl friend for three weeks by then?
  • Freek 22 Jun 2004 21:01:08 7,682 posts
    Seen 7 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Did I mention that he had only known his girl friend for three weeks by then?

    Is it wrong for me to laugh, when I read that? :D
  • monkeyspasm 22 Jun 2004 21:03:02 2,968 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    sunjumper wrote:

    He only noticed that something was amiss when he woke the next day with the last four weeks of his life cleanly wiped from his mind. Did I mention that he had only known his girl friend for three weeks by then?

    Nasty. It sounds a bit like that Jim Carrey film.

    Somewhat fittingly, I can't remember the title.

    Great post, too.

    Nintendo = evil? Big fuss about nowt.
  • sunjumper 22 Jun 2004 21:08:57 3,532 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    Freek wrote:
    Did I mention that he had only known his girl friend for three weeks by then?

    Is it wrong for me to laugh, when I read that? :D

    No not really.

    As he regained his memories bit by bit in the following days it wasn’t that horrible in the end and we all know that for some strange reason stories of misery are often the most funny.
    You can show your friends slides of wonderful landscapes for [B]hours[/B] yet what will be their favourite slide? The one where you can see how the wind blew over your grill and set your tent on fire, with you mates running around like hysterical chicken trying to extinguish the fire with vodka...


    Edited by sunjumper at 20:11:59 22-06-2004
  • mal 22 Jun 2004 21:09:01 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:
    What you don't seem to get, is that you will never ear a piece of news of people who had seizures after seeing the latest buffy episode. No matter how many explosions it uses. The problem resides in those bright colors we see in cartoons like pokemon.
    That's because Buffy is a series about vampires. Vampires only come out at night, hence, distinct lack of bright colours. But there was a big hoo-haa about TV shows that did bring out latent epilepsy in childeren, which is why all TV shows and films with strobe lights in them have a warning beforehand.

    And once again, I guess you didn't understand. The example I gave with pokemon, induced seizures in normal people, people who were and are not epileptic. We have all been warned that games induce epyletic seizures on epyleptic people - but they can induce seizures in NON-Epyleptics. Although those games, are just a select few who have certain colors and certain flashes of color with certain frequencies.
    Surely once you have an epileptic fit you are an epileptic? Therefore, nothing can induce epileptic seizures in non-epileptic people.

    Meh. Anyway. Bright flashing colours are the *best* *thing* about Nintendo games. I like the play them while eating sweets with additives specially designed to make my hyperactive.
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 21:12:17 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    sunjumper wrote:
    Please get your facts straight before you post.
    There is no method known to man that will [I]cause[/I] epilepsy. People that get seizures were already latent epileptics, they just had not been confronted with the stimulus that triggered the effect.
    What are you saying? That I am wrong? That there aren't any programs that can detect if a image sucession might cause seizures (which there are)? Or that there are non epileptic seizures, and that most people will suffer at least once from one during their life, even if they are not aware of that?

    I think you are mixing the facts. Before telling me to check my facts, why don't YOU check my facts and google "non-epyleptic seizures".

    The pokemon incident caused a non-epyleptic seizure in many children, which are not epileptic (weren't back then, and aren't today)
  • monkeyspasm 22 Jun 2004 21:14:14 2,968 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    This is going nowhere fast.

    Meh.
  • Daryoon 22 Jun 2004 21:18:42 5,912 posts
    Seen 55 minutes ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:
    The flashes are common in anime, but they aren't as exagerated as pokemon. Specially pikachu cheeks usually flash violently betwen bright yellow and bright red when he is producing lightning bolts.

    It happened in ONE episode, the 38th episode, and lasted for all of a second. The clip a flashing of red/blue electricity, not Pikachu's cheeks and the episode has never been seen since, outside of bootlegged copies.
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 21:26:48 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Daryoon wrote:
    CyberClaw wrote:
    The flashes are common in anime, but they aren't as exagerated as pokemon. Specially pikachu cheeks usually flash violently betwen bright yellow and bright red when he is producing lightning bolts.

    It happened in ONE episode, the 38th episode, and lasted for all of a second. The clip a flashing of red/blue electricity, not Pikachu's cheeks and the episode has never been seen since, outside of bootlegged copies.

    I'm not saying it was pikachu's cheeks that caused it. I'm saying I've seen pokemon a couple of times, and every time pikachu lights up his cheeks, a rainbow of colors follows. I've seen alot of anime, and Pokemon comes over the top with Pikachu effects - and they are getting stronger and stronger (look at the classic pikachu attack moment on first series, and look at it now). It also uses alot of "quick flash show character face over white background" moments. It happens like 10 times each episode - while other "cheerfull" animes have this happen 5 or 6 times during the whole series.

    EDIT: and once again, I'm not saying it is problematic now. I'm saying that off the top of my mind, it is the most violent colored flashing anime I can think of, and I know quite a few.

    Edited by CyberClaw at 20:28:22 22-06-2004
  • Daryoon 22 Jun 2004 21:29:16 5,912 posts
    Seen 55 minutes ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    Having seen, oooh, over 300 episodes, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about o_O
  • timo180 22 Jun 2004 21:29:56 2,714 posts
    Seen 4 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Why make the point about pikachu's cheeks if it is not causing any harm? how is it relevant?
  • sunjumper 22 Jun 2004 21:31:53 3,532 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:

    What are you saying? That I am wrong? That there aren't any programs that can detect if a image sucession might cause seizures (which there are)? Or that there are non epileptic seizures, and that most people will suffer at least once from one during their life, even if they are not aware of that?

    I think you are mixing the facts. Before telling me to check my facts, why don't YOU check my facts and google "non-epyleptic seizures".

    The pokemon incident caused a non-epyleptic seizure in many children, which are not epileptic (weren't back then, and aren't today)

    No need to become so hostile.

    I was referring to the fact that usually these kind of seizures are a mild or latent form of epilepsy. They are not caused by the flashing lights, the flashing lights just provoke a reaction.
    Even ‘non-epileptic‘ seizures are a very weak form of epilepsy, which is only provoked by very strong and/or special stimuli.

    What you said previously sounded a bit like watching Pokemon caused epilepsy in healthy children.

    Before this devolves into a flame war let me say that I think that it would be a very wise idea to regulate television, video games and other ‘flashy’ media so that the risk of getting such a seizure is minimal, as these can make a latent epileptic into a real one.

    Blaming Nintendo for being the main culprit for what happened to the children watching a cartoon on TV, which Nintendo did not personally produce, nor did the higher ups rub their hands in glee before commanding their minions to put the flashes in episode 69 (not the real number) so that Mariothoth their dark lord and master might feast on their misery, is a bit exaggerated though.

    Please take note that I am not defending Nintendo per se, they have time and again proven to be bastards in their very own way (yes Nintendo Europe I am looking at you) often showing a horrible disregard to their costumers, yet they are not alone out there.

    Let me tip my hat to the wonderful people of Squeix for their deep wisdom they have proven with the now immortalized aphorism: ‘Our European costumers do not want neither 60hz nor proper PAL conversions.’
    Or my special friends at Microsoft: ‘We did not include the DVD playing capabilities of the X-Box right from the start because we did not want to force upon our costumers what they possibly do not want.’




    Edited by sunjumper at 20:34:25 22-06-2004
  • mal 22 Jun 2004 21:34:53 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:
    I think you are mixing the facts. Before telling me to check my facts, why don't YOU check my facts and google "non-epyleptic seizures".
    You wrote:
    The example I gave with pokemon, induced seizures in normal people, people who were and are not epileptic
    Now you don't actually talk about epileptic seizures here, but if you use the word 'epileptic' in the same sentence, it's usually considered necessary to point it out if you're talking about non-epileptic seizures. For the second time in this thread, you seem to be having repeated difficulty in explaining yourself clearly to other people. I suggest you make an extra effort not be mislead accidentally, and you may be put on ignore by less people.


    Edited by mal at 20:35:22 22-06-2004
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 21:55:01 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    mal wrote:
    Now you don't actually talk about epileptic seizures here, but if you use the word 'epileptic' in the same sentence, it's usually considered necessary to point it out if you're talking about non-epileptic seizures. For the second time in this thread, you seem to be having repeated difficulty in explaining yourself clearly to other people. I suggest you make an extra effort not be mislead accidentally, and you may be put on ignore by less people.

    Okay, let me explain from scratch then. Epilepsy is a disease, that provokes seizures. Seizures, is when your body tenses up, and may or may not be provoked by epilepsy. There are many things that when together might provoke a seizure, such as stress, alchaol, fatigue, etc.

    So, when I say the word seizure, I'm referring to an attack a person suffers. When I refer epilepsy, I refer to the disease. And since the begining, the point I was trying to get across, is that there are warnings in the manuals that games provoque epileptic seizures, but there is no reference what so ever that it also provoques seizures on normal people (non-epiletic). What I personally would like to see, is that this games are either altered, or have a tag in their cover saying "may provoque seizures on general population" (or "general non-epileptic population, since most people would probably mistake the tag with an "epilepsy warning").
    EDIT : To clarify, this tag wouldn't be required in all games (or else it would loose meaning), but the games which were tested, and had the problems and weren't changed.

    Edited by CyberClaw at 20:56:46 22-06-2004
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 22:08:13 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    sunjumper wrote:
    1-No need to become so hostile.

    2-Before this devolves into a flame war let me say that I think that it would be a very wise idea to regulate television, video games and other ‘flashy’ media so that the risk of getting such a seizure is minimal, as these can make a latent epileptic into a real one.

    3-Blaming Nintendo for being the main culprit for what happened to the children watching a cartoon on TV, which Nintendo did not personally produce, nor did the higher ups rub their hands in glee before commanding their minions to put the flashes in episode 69 (not the real number) so that Mariothoth their dark lord and master might feast on their misery, is a bit exaggerated though.

    4-Or my special friends at Microsoft: ‘We did not include the DVD playing capabilities of the X-Box right from the start because we did not want to force upon our costumers what they possibly do not want.’
    1-Sorry. Replying to 30 people at once I come a little abrupt.

    2-There was already invented a program that scans for problematic paterns. I dunno why it isn't used. POssibly because advertising it, would greatly stun the consumption of the product - at least while this isn't a well known fact. I suppose that in the future, we will see games with a "tested and aproved" kind of tag. I can only hope.

    3-Nintendo didn't produce, and it was just an example. The franchise by a matter of chance belongs to Nintendo. But it was an example on how certain video paterns can induce seizures in non-epileptic people.

    4-I could awnser that fully, but I'll do it briefly. MS didn't include the DVD playback ability from the box on the XBox, because you have to pay royalties to be able to do so. The point is, that they were trying to cut the costs of the console - if you already had a DVD player, you wouldn't want to pay the extra royalties, and if you hadn't, all you had to pay extra was the royalties and the hw of the transmiter and the controler (where the nifty DVD logo - notice the XBox itself doesn't have the logo). As an example, I bought my PS2, and I'd gladly pay 20 Euros less, if it wasn't able to play DVDs from the go (notice the PS2 itself already has the DVD logo). Bottom point, I'm paying the royalties for playing DVDs on my PS2, when quite in fact I don't.
    Was MS smart? Of course. I prefer their choice over Sony's - specially when the PS2 is such a crappy DVD player ^^;
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 22:08:22 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    timo180 wrote:
    Why make the point about pikachu's cheeks if it is not causing any harm? how is it relevant?
    My point was simple. It's quite obvious Nintendo isn't the devil incarnation - so they don't do it on purpose. The mentioned episode effect happened by random. They weren't aiming for that to happen quite obviously. But, a show with their colors and apresentation, has more chances of it to happen, than Buffy's show, for example. As an example of the excecive use of colors and flash, pikachu's lightning attack came to my mind. I could as well have said:
    "Pikachu lightning bolt attack is way more agrassive to the eyes, than Buffy's ass rolling down a set of stairs - and more likely to induce a seizure."

    Someone picked up on my example because it wasn't pikatchu's attack that caused the problem. And all I said was that it was an example on how the colors in Pokemon are stronger.
  • sunjumper 22 Jun 2004 22:15:41 3,532 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    Cyber Claw no offence taken.

    Now that I finally understand your point I have to agree with you that the warning might have to be written more clearly. It would also be wise to make pattern testing if it is indeed as easy to implement as you said, mandatory.
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 22:22:00 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    sunjumper wrote:
    It would also be wise to make pattern testing if it is indeed as easy to implement as you said, mandatory.

    I didn't say it was easy - but I said it was possible, and someone already was able to make a program that recognises the paterns.
    For pratical purposes, the ELPSA and their kind could try to rate it, but they many times are only sent tapes of the material, not the game itself - so it would be a little hard to test it properly.
    The best solution then, would be to incorporate it into the big 3 playtesting sessions. Before a game is allowed to be published in their system, it has to follow certain guidelines. Framerates, content, etc. all is subject to be rejected (MS for ex. "demands" 60 FPS for fighting games, and 30 FPS for every other - Nintendo in the old days would reject a game with violent content - and nowadays Sony rejects games with explicit sexual content). When they were testing the release candidate versions they suposely test, they could also be running the program that searches for it, and I supose trainiong the personal would also be required (since they should also be on the lookout of parts of the game they should try to explore to try and produce the said effect).

    EDIT: Nintendo has their own first party testing department (Mario Club) which tests the games during development (even before reaching alpha stage). How hard would it be adding some more safety measures? That wouldn't be the problem. The problem would be the public awareness - which could affect their sales.

    Edited by CyberClaw at 21:25:00 22-06-2004
  • sunjumper 22 Jun 2004 22:30:04 3,532 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    Sounds like a plan. I believe that it would be quite easy for Nintendo or any other games publisher for that matter to turn that into positive PR.

    'We here at Mario Club toil away night and day from the very first moment that even the smallest sprite takes its first step to ensure your security and that of your loved ones!
    We use advanced 1337 tecnices adn m07r81k2!!1!’
  • CyberClaw 22 Jun 2004 22:59:44 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    sunjumper wrote:
    I believe that it would be quite easy for Nintendo or any other games publisher for that matter to turn that into positive PR.
    I dunno. In one side, they'd be saying to the general public "we are doing something abut it", but on the other side, the general public would become aware of the problem, and over-protective parents might not buy little Jimmy a new game (specially if the games that are more likely to occur with that problem are bright colored games with plenty of flashes - which represents 90% of Nintendo's first party lienup compared to 10% of either Sony or MS). I know 10 years ago, parents made up all this rules about playing games - like only playing 1 hour a day, because otherwise it would "make bad to your eyes". Which let's face it, was a fustration. Is it even possible to finish Super Mario 3 in 1 hour? lol :)
  • Razz 23 Jun 2004 01:07:50 727 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    Stupid Bastards!!! I SPIT ON YOUR WIVES!

    ACCCH TOOOOOO!!!!
  • mal 23 Jun 2004 02:19:24 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:
    Okay, let me explain from scratch then.

    Ta, much clearer. I wasn't actually aware that non-epileptic seizures could be caused by visual triggers.
  • Freek 23 Jun 2004 02:55:17 7,682 posts
    Seen 7 years ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    CyberClaw wrote:
    sunjumper wrote:
    I believe that it would be quite easy for Nintendo or any other games publisher for that matter to turn that into positive PR.
    I dunno. In one side, they'd be saying to the general public "we are doing something abut it", but on the other side, the general public would become aware of the problem, and over-protective parents might not buy little Jimmy a new game (specially if the games that are more likely to occur with that problem are bright colored games with plenty of flashes - which represents 90% of Nintendo's first party lienup compared to 10% of either Sony or MS). I know 10 years ago, parents made up all this rules about playing games - like only playing 1 hour a day, because otherwise it would "make bad to your eyes". Which let's face it, was a fustration. Is it even possible to finish Super Mario 3 in 1 hour? lol :)

    How did Mariokart Double dash and a banned Pokemon episode become 90% of thier line up? The show tested 6 games, the ones they foccused on where Megaman X(not even Nintendo but an old Capcom game) and MarioKart DD.
    DD failed the test not because of flashes but becuase you drove real fast you got repeating texture paterns.Megamn failed for the same reason. There's no accesive flashes in most Nintendo games anyway, they're cartoony sure, but it's not like the screen goes crazy every time you jump on a Koopa Trooper in Mario,nor are they all racing games where the enviroment textures speed by really fast. And Pokemon is still aired globaly, hugely popular without any problems since that one show, even MK:DD doesn't cause the major problems like the banned show.
    Besides, there woulden't be a need for any PR spinning. The only way the industrie is going to do something is if/when laws are passed to make it mandatory.
    "We're compliying with the law, risk gone."

    Nintendo isn't the specific problem here, videogames with flashes and repeating paterns are the problem, wich exist on all platforms and nobody is regulating it and non of the developers are doing anything about it.


    Edited by Freek at 02:21:44 23-06-2004
  • CyberClaw 23 Jun 2004 11:25:45 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Freek wrote:
    How did Mariokart Double dash and a banned Pokemon episode become 90% of thier line up? The show tested 6 games, the ones they foccused on where Megaman X(not even Nintendo but an old Capcom game) and MarioKart DD.
    I referred Mario Kart DD, Metroid Prime, etc. because those were the titles mentioned in the article. I actually don't know the specific reasons of why each title may trigger seizures (and I hardly find Metroid fast, so I guess that's not the reason in Metroid - or Megaman for that matter). That's not the point. The point is, that Nintendo ALREADY KNEW about this, and when they showed up in the court, they didn't present the hundreads of pages they had on the subject. They actually hided them. The court demanded those pages, and when they showed up, the court thought it would beb better to end that trial and start a new one, face to the new evidence (the defense should have had access to it from the begining).
  • mal 23 Jun 2004 14:43:58 29,326 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 19 years ago
    I've lost track of this thread a bit, I apologise. Are we talking about epileptic seizures here? I think the opening sequence has some bright flashes and perhaps some disorientating camera movements. And I wonder if some of the visor effects could also be to blame.

    Freek wrote:
    DD failed the test not because of flashes but becuase you drove real fast you got repeating texture paterns.
    Oh no! Ban all PSOne driving games with really crappy small tarmac textures! ;-)
  • CyberClaw 23 Jun 2004 20:03:46 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    mal wrote:
    I've lost track of this thread a bit, I apologise. Are we talking about epileptic seizures here?
    Yes, and no. We are talking about seizures - which can also be triggered on non epileptic persons - which is the real reason of the thread. We all read the epileptic warnings in the manuals, but there is no warning that certain paterns in certain games, can trigger a seizure in non-epileptics.

    Nintendo was already aware of this, but did nothing to remedy the case.
  • CyberClaw 24 Jun 2004 04:12:09 2,085 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    kevf123 wrote:
    To blame Nintendo in particular is just ludicrous, and sounds like that nonsense BBC diatribe from a few weeks back which was widely panned in gaming press and broadsheets as being horrificly biased.
    Nintendo is blamed in particular, because they already knew about this, they had documents studying the case in their games where this happened, although THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT IT, and when the court demanded to see those documents, Nintendo "lost them", and we are referring to 100s of pages of documents. The next day they found them, and presented them - face that, the court decided it was better start a new process, so that the defense had access to this documents since the begining, like the law says it should be.

    It can happen with any game, or any movie or series that shows in the TV as a matter of fact. Nintendo is the specific target, because they knew about the situation in their own games, they knew that their games could harm people, but they didn't warn, nor do anything to avoid the situation, because they were fearing losses of sales.
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.