Should this be an option in games

[@centurosproductions8827]

Remove triggers? No, we need those buttons.

[@dudebruh8534]

Take my thumbs up you bastard.

[@maolcogi]

HAH! But also on a serious note, imagine if they really tried removing them all. "People are afraid of open spaces and other people!? "Apartment of Warcraft, the new Massively Single Player Online Sit At Home Game" ... oh wait"

[@centurosproductions8827]

@@maolcogi That just causes a crippling loneliness and fear thereof.

[@maolcogi]

@@centurosproductions8827 it was a joke. But not everyone needs other people to be happy. Some of us are really odd. :P

[@sageoftruth]

I honestly wondered at first if that was what this video would be about.

[@lancesniper]

It can be something optional, but should never to be expected and required. Something that is often forgotten (and this applies to artists and VAs as well) is the barrier of entry to video game production. Overtime, we have somewhat required nice arts produced by artists and games voiced by proper VAs, these increases the production time and cost. Adding alternate variants to cater to various phobias and something that used to be able to produce by 2-3 man teams now needs double the team size. I have Trypophobia and Trypanophobia but I will never ever expect developers to put in option to remove such elements from their production. At the end of the day, I want more fantasy, sci-fi, horror, etc worlds to visit. Some of the world may have things I like, some may not, but all part of the experience and I want as little hurdles for people out there who are capable of crafting worlds to do so.

[@billionai4871]

I think something that a lot of people forget when discussing "games" is how broad a medium it is. We recently got innundated by a game that was developed as a side project to learn a programming language (minecraft) which is a pretty damn low barrier to entry. Freely available, and even open source engines exist where a lot of work can be done with little knowledge of music, or art, or programming. A single enthusiast can hardly be held to the standards of indie companies, which shouldn't be held to the standards of AAA companies (industry issues aside about how it feels like indie studios make better games). saying "every game should have X" can be an annoyance to AAA studios that now need a new team, a heavy burden for indie companies that have to meaningfully increase their staff, and a flat out impossibility for a single dev at home. let alone the fact that it may clash with the vision of the game itself and remove some uncomfortable but important aspect of the art. This can be true with spiders, where it may be that a spider den needs to be filled with spiders, it doesn't make sense to use geckos or crabs, but it can also be true with - for example - difficulty sliders, because maybe the story is about overcomming what is supposed feel like impossible odds. At the same time, not every game will have that, and in some, spiders are just shorthand for "enemy that walks on walls and restricts your movement" and then I dont see why a huge crab cant be climbing a wall (by puncturing the wall with its impressively strong legs) and holding you down with its claw. The only request is the courtesy of a game dev saying how their art may be uncomfortable, no need to change that uncomfortableness.

[@kaleidopixels7451]

Implying that teams would have to double their sizes to accommodate common phobias is absolutely bizarre, most of those phobia replacements tend to be very low poly or intentionally humorous because that's the best way to defuse the anxiety of the phobic player. They aren't being replaced with production-quality assets. Why even say this? lmao

[@Zectifin]

@@kaleidopixels7451 or people could just not play the game.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Depends... People ask for a lot of things. Not all things are worth the tine nor the cost to develop. Make a good game. Not a game that won't even make it out of the oven.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@billionai4871 To conform to society, is to rust away what makes your art unique. Do not please everyone when everyone will never be pleased no matter what you do.

[@ristopaasivirta9770]

Warning: This game contains scenery depicting outdoors and nature.

[@TheGaMerPrOvince]

Touching grass ?? ewww

[@MK13wolf]

agoraphobia is a hell of a thing

[@wrongthinker843]

@@MK13wolf That's a great example of why you should be ignored. You don't even know the terms you're crying about.

[@Aisaaax]

😨

[@grimgaunt.]

disgusting

[@XLR8_47]

It’s nice to have as an option if a game developer wants to include it and I think that in some games it can enhance the developers vision of the game. Lethal company is a good example I think, the arachnophobia option in that game is so silly and suits the game perfectly.

[@aukora129]

I think the arachnophobia option for Lethal Company is exactly what I hate about those type of phobia removal options. Arachnophobia is not a phobia which is more common than any other phobia (almost any statistic you see on arachnophobia above 5% is a survery that asks "are you afraid of spiders?" and that isn't arachnophobia, thats fear of spiders and not a phobia) . People have phobias of heights, phobias of deep water, phobias of injections, and phobias of small spaces. Nothing in that list gets removed from games despite being equally (or in the case of injections, more) as common as arachnophobia. There are at least 10 things in Lethal Company that have equivalent or higher rates of phobia than spider, but only arachnophobia is removed. Sure putting the word "Spider" in is a funny gag, but it's just that, a gag. It's not an actual attempt at accessibility, it's making the game more fun for 0.2% of players and going "Look at how good we are for making you not be afraid" while 7% of people are still standing there hating it, it's some weird thinking that somehow arachnophobia is more important. Either don't put any in or put them all in, and we know nobody is putting them all in.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Do you have any idea how little that narrows the line if you try to please everyone WHO WON'T EVEN BUY YOUR GAME?!!! There are two truths in my statement... Never try to pease everyone... And don't waste years trying to pease everyone... Make a good game. Don't waste resources in trying to conform your game to "society". And humans die for lesser... ... ... That's the reality.

[@elio7610]

​@@aukora129What is arachnophobia if not the fear of spiders?

[@aukora129]

@@elio7610 Phobias and fears are different, yes the literal translation of arachnophobia is "fear of spiders" but a phobia is an irrational extreme fear response. Fear is being scared of heights but being willing to bungie jump for a grand, phobia is being scared of heights and will have a panic attack, cry, or worse before you could make them jump and certainly not for mere money. All phobias are fears, very very few fears are phobias. More than 90% of things people are fearful of, even very fearful of, are not phobias.

[@fishbiter9409]

I have a fear of heights, but when I have to I can get up on some power equipment to get stuff off the top shelf at work, because it's a rational fear. I'm afraid of falling and getting hurt, so I can deal with heights so long as there are precautions in place. Someone with acrophobia, a phobia of heights, might go running at the sight of a ladder because they're scared someone is going to force them to climb it. Being near a window inside a tall building will give them a panic attack. Their fear is irrational, and confronting it feels like climbing in a cage with a hungry tiger. So a phobia isn't a fear of something, it is a debilitating irrational fear of something. @@elio7610

[@Phillz91]

I recently finished the Outer Wilds DLC, Echoes of the Eye, and it has a warning at the start that a 'less frightening' mode is available to ensure some sections of the game don't hinder someone's ability to enjoy the game. While it is a great option, it also kind of enhances the mystique as anyone who has played the base game would not describe it as 'frightening' in the traditional sense. It's difficult to full describe without spoilers, but is an interesting implementation that kind of works with how the game is paced.

[@toolatetothestory]

Would you spoiler me, what is scary and how is it made not scary? I am curious now but don't really have the time to go through a whole game

[@Phillz91]

@@toolatetothestory Spoilers for those who want to play the game (highly recommended). The base game has almost no living things in it (the only thing is found in one specific spot), and neither does the DLC for the first hours. After a certain point you will enter a dream world that, to be able to progress, you will encounter multiple other patrolling aliens in the pitch black when the only thing you have to navigate is a lantern that lights about 1m around you, or a narrow beam into the distance with no other lights around. It uses darkness and the unknown to ratchet up the tension and is easy to stumble into one of these aliens by accident. The 'less frights' setting just changes the beings AI to be less jump-scary, but the knowledge of 'less frights' being an option is interesting because you just spent 15hrs with the base game not really seeing another alien, then you go into the DLC expecting frights and not seeing anything else for hours, then you get hints of other beings being alive, and only then do you confront them in the pitch black. If you don't have 20-30hrs spare, but want to experience the game, look up a supercut playthrough, gives you a decent sense of the game in a couple hours. Edit: also, later on in the game you make a discovery that completely negates the darkness that you could have done all along, you just didn't have the knowledge needed at the time.

[@alansmithee419]

I loved that DLC. (slight spoilers) I spoiled the base game for myself and still haven't played it (though I can't say my experience watching it was poor). Of all the places, the stranger now acts as my home in that game. I feel far safer there than on Timber Hearth. Sort of makes me feel more of a kinship with the owlks than I suspect most players have.

[@ultimate9056]

The worst part about the "reduced frights" setting is if doesnt actually reduce the frights. It just makes the DLC laughably easier and removes alot of problem and puzzle solving which is the entire point of the game. I get irrationally torn up knowing that people have been scared by that message into turning reduced frights on or doing so after seeing the "frights" even though it will only worsen their experience

[@alansmithee419]

@@ultimate9056 It only makes certain "puzzles" easier, and I wouldn't personally call them puzzles. Nothing like what appears in the base game is made easier by turning the setting on. So you're essentially saying "the entire point of the game" is something that doesn't even exist at all in the base game. And yes, it reduces the frights by making them less threatening. They're still there, and they still do everything they're supposed to, but the reduced danger makes you feel a lot safer - it's less frightening. Personally I had the setting on and the threat posed was still just *annoying.* It was the worst and least interesting part of the game in my opinion. They weren't a puzzle, they were an unfun obstacle in the way of getting to the puzzles.

[@VerbalLearning]

I believe that when it comes to facing ones fears voluntary exposure is what helps best. Keyword being voluntary. This is why you usually can't force someone to overcome a fear, it tends to make it worse instead. You can however, push someone/support someone to face their fears, which is very helpful when done correctly, but it has to be at the pace of the person with the fear not the one doing the pushing/supporting. However the person dealing with their fear might not realize how much they're capable of and might give up a lot faster without a hypeman backing them up telling them that they can do it. So it's a balance that has to be found. In regards to trigger warnings i believe there's mixed data on the subject. They can help people choose when to engage with their fears which leans into the voluntary aspect of things, but they also help people avoid their fears and they can also increase the fear by making a big deal out of the subject matter at hand, which tells the person with the fear (or even people without it) that the thing they're afraid or about to see is something to actually be scared of which makes things worse. So again it's tricky. I think where i land on this is that for people with explicit traumas, like PTSD from War or Sexual Assault and other similarly gruesome things (doesn't have to be quite that extreme in all cases), trigger warnings can be useful. But for the general populace i think they're mostly unneccesary.

[@MSinistrari]

Exposure therapy is a thing, and when done correctly, does work wonders. It was a lifechanger for me. As far as trigger warnings go, they've done studies that so far have proven they're not particularly helpful and can make things worse in that they can set off anticipatory anxiety which can be worse than what the warned content is, as well as reinforcing avoidance which can prolong trauma. There has to be some alternative that works better, but so far no one's come up with something.

[@beardalaxy]

@@MSinistrari Oh that's very interesting to hear. I actually think that may be the exact reason a game like Silent Hill has the warning right before the game, particularly Shattered Memories that tells you the game will be psychologically profiling you as you play. It WANTS you to get scared and be anxious. I'll have to take that into consideration when making a horror game.

[@MSinistrari]

@@beardalaxy The effectiveness of trigger warnings has long been an interest with me. Ages back when I did fanfiction, we used to give fics a movie style rating so someone could avoid NC-17 graphic content if they were really in the mood for something PG. When trigger warnings entered the arena, it came across like we reinvented the wheel and you still had people spitting a fit over there was blood in the story even with the warning of 'gore'. Many of the studies I've read in the psychology publications are all from the past few years so they've had ample time to research and see the effects.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@MSinistrari Compared to the hood... The idea of always needing a trigger warning is best left to the gun.

[@DerekS-kq3zh]

@@MSinistrari A content warning is advising people about what kind of content is in the material they are about to engage with so they can make an informed decision. When someone asks for a "trigger warning," what they mean is "alter this thing so that I can engage with it in the way that I please"

[@All4Tanuki]

4:15 Gen Z appropriates the language of therapists, talk about "being in touch with your emotions" etc but there's absolutely no difference in introspection or empathy. When young, hip people my age and below say stuff like "do better" or "learn and grow as a person", they don't mean it. The only difference is that it's popular amongst the younger folk to imagine themselves as wise, sensitive, & compassionate whereas boomers and Xers generally prefer the "rugged individual" tough guy act. If you actually examine these people, both are hollow projections.

[@theopeneyes]

Trigger warnings also have a draw back of potentially spoiling story content and can remove the surprise of powerful story moments that might be upsetting to certain people. For example if I play a game that gives a warning for a certain type of content, instead of being surprised by it, I end up playing the game waiting for that content to turn up. Using the giant spiders example a trigger warning can turn a spider boss from "oh crap there's a giant spider in this game?!" to "oh there's the giant spider i was told about", the warning kinda takes the bite out of the surprise. I think a compromise could work where the game gives a Trigger Warning screen with two options [List Triggers] and [Continue], with the first option taking you to a screen that lists the potential triggers and [Continue] just takes you to the game without listing potential spoilers. This way people who do have triggers can know if the game has them and people who want to avoid possible spoilers can avoid it.

[@WubWubX]

I found Josh through his old school RuneScape fight caves guide a few years ago. Now he is one of my favorite content creators

[@marcelluslongus1202]

I found him during his Otherland adventure. He is one of my favorites too. And I'm not even into MMOs. And now I just realize he has already over 800k subscribers.😲

[@Brioshie]

Favorite philosophers you mean 😜

[@withoutrhythm4009]

My favorite middle aged gaming man ♥️

[@CyborgJesus]

12:30 Yeah our current culture seems to be fairly anti-criticism these days which I feel why alot of media kinda sucks in the west. Then theres is the issue of deflecting criticism with identity politics, I think it sort of started +5 years ago when the phrase mansplaining was trending.

[@wrongthinker843]

It started in 2012 after the occupy wall street movement. The rate of divisive political messaging in media skyrocketed.

[@evdomos]

Never thought I'd hear someone say this out loud but absolutely, trying to shelter everyone about everything is absolutely insane.

[@crabman3144]

I think a warning is sufficient. That's the standard we have for potentially photosensitive seizure-inducing effects in films and video games, and I'd argue that that's a much more serious issue. If a developer wants to have alternate versions of a game or toggle options to remove content that might set off a phobia, that's on them, but like Josh said, that changes the vision for the end product. I have a series of quotes on a poster on my shop wall, and one of them is "If you don't know what it is or what it does, don't touch it." It's one of those things where, if I were to be asked who said it, I'd answer with "I did. Someone else probably said it first though." Looks like Chesterton said it first. Also, some jumping spiders are actually kind of cute. Overall, I agree with Josh here.

[@scragar]

A lot of games that could trigger photosensitive epilepsy released in the last 5 years or so have an option to turn it off or down, and even films like Enter the Spiderverse had an accessibility cut which slowed the flashing during a few scenes to ensure it wouldn't cause issues for people who were concerned about it. I think when it comes to things like that where it's an obvious danger and often a simple fix it makes sense to turn it off, similar to how some games have an arachnophobia mode which replaces spiders with something else(often even more terrifying) without actually changing the game mechanics(the spiders are just hunters who throw bollas to slow you down and use poisoned spears, they're totally not just reskinned web shooting venomous spiders). Even editing storylines has been a thing for a while; 4kids is infamous for editing anime to be suitable to kids, often removing things like death, weapons, and sex. Editing media to appeal to a different audience has for a very long time been a popular idea.

[@commandershepard7728]

I have Trypophobia....how does a developer work around that! - I think half of these "phobias" are not medically backed and I do not think we need to hold the rest of the world to 1 persons "phobia"

[@nattythepanda4692]

@Ambander1 Tell me you're terminally online without telling me you're terminally online.

[@dragonmaster1360]

@nattythepanda4692 Ambander is right, though. If you can't handle the phobias, you shouldn't be playing that game. It's simple as that. These people, who are a tiny minority of players, are expecting developers to change the game from WHAT IT WAS INTENDED to suit them because they can't handle spiders. That's not something that should happen. If it's in the game, it's usually in the game for a reason. Whether that be plot (Kill it With Fire - spiders), ambience (spiders and webs make things feel creepy), or the entire point of the game (deep water and Subnautica), IT'S THERE FOR A REASON. Removing it to bend to the less than 10% of humanity that can't handle looking at it is just bending to weak minded individuals that have no self control. People with phobias and ANY modicum of self control will AVOID GAMES WITH THEIR TRIGGERS. Not demand game devs to change their vision.

[@nattythepanda4692]

@@dragonmaster1360 And the point you're making is sustained by...???? None of those games that you cited had to change their gameplay because people with phobias demanded them to. In fact, with Subnautica, people with thalassophobia actively played the game to challenge themselves. You are making up people to be mad at, you are quite literally doing the twitter thing.

[@Bloodfencer1990]

Trigger warnings are very interesting from a psychiatric stand point. On one hand, yes, people should receive ample warning about content that could be traumatizing to them, like arachnophobia warnings. On the other hand there is evidence suggesting that this might lead to damaging behaviour as you point, where people will just keep avoiding things. It's essentially externalizing the responsibility for your own mental well-being. You expect others to take care of you and when you run into something that makes you feel uneasy you start blaming them for it.

[@robinnewhouse1563]

At the end of the day, it's about video games, we're not talking about skirting real life experiences or shunning yourself from them to never expose yourself to something that triggers you. Why should people be excluded anyway? If it leads to more sales of the game then it's pretty much a win win, and if some people cry because there's a remove spiders slider, or trigger warnings, then there pretty sad and petty people to begin with.

[@stefan1360]

ironic@@robinnewhouse1563 , the only trigger warnings a game needs is the esrb rating on it's cover

[@wrongthinker843]

@@robinnewhouse1563 Nah, the sad and petty are creatures who think everyone owes them something.

[@shrubninja6444]

When I was a kid, I was deathly afraid of heights. My friends convinced me to give a rollercoaster a try, and at the end of it, I was much less afraid. The same is true for a lot of things, like arachnaphobes realizing that spiders in general want nothing more than to be far away from you. Most irrational fears lessen with exposure to the thing causing the fear because they're just that. Irrational. Avoiding the thing you're afraid of will just let you get even more worked up over all the theoretical awfulness, making your phobia even worse.

[@lordrevan571]

Or, or, don't play video games, just stop existing, you're clearly not able to handle the real world without someone changing the world around you to make you comfy, so stop, stop existing, you're an issue.

[@akun50]

I think your analogy at the end is perfect: If you don't know what something is doing, don't touch it until you do. I've read too many stories of managers, supervisors, owners, and consultants deciding to let someone go or remove something that was critical to their company's success/morale and subsequently damage their own company immensely as a result. And I have no doubt it's happened in video games as well.

[@donventura2116]

Trigger warnings would be an accessibility feature. Devs are not obligated to implement accessibility features, it's nice to have and greatly appreciated, but it's not needed nor should it be a standard of accessibility. I think alternative control schemes and other similar items are more important to accessibility.

[@femthingevelyn]

I mean sure it's not necessary but how hard would it really be to put a list of text in a settings menu, or maybe right after a title crawl. it's not about whether the feature is necessary or not, it's really just a question of how much suffering are you willing to put vulnerable people through because you refuse to implement an incredibly basic thing that would take one guy maybe an afternoon to put together. like sure some people would consider alternate control schemes more important, but it's also a completely different thing, that's a whole other game system to implement, plus you have to ask questions about whether you want to set up preset control schemes or let them rebind freely, how many controll schemes do you want, how would the rebind work, are there keys you don't want to include, plus you have to make any on screen prompts during any tutorials double check the keybinds to display the right buttons. Implementing trigger warnings wouldvbe nothing but a net positive, just like the settings that have become really common for things like text size, subtitles, or color options for the colorblind.

[@noodle_Cx]

Okay when you are stuck in a wheelchair or have your arms removed to stop a fungal infection, I'll remove all the ramp access points into public buildings and tell you accessability isnt necessary. Accessability is necessary imo, I think games are art and everybody should have a chance to enjoy art. Should EVERY game have accessability? No, not really. Games specifically based on harmful or sensitive topics where the story focuses on those things probably aren't for people who are affected by those topics anyway but that's like with everything. If you're physically disabled you aren't gonna try and use a treadmil are you? Where possible, accessability should be there, like with anything else in life. People shouldn't be excluded just because they are "inferior" humans, they're not. They just have different requirements. Vulnerable people deserve a life just like any physical or mentally capable person.

[@baitposter]

Trigger warnings are harmful and there's plenty of [not even recent] research literature positing as much

[@TheTruestZero]

Trigger warnings are the bottom of the barrel in terms of Accessability. Flashing lights are probably the only justified one in my book but anything else should be as optional as it can get.

[@Derjeniche1510]

​@@noodle_CxThese are obviously two different definitions of accessability. It's a game and doesn't hinder you from partaking in life. People come up with ridiculous types of phobias and thanks to the internet every single problem gets blown out of proportion.

[@Stolanis]

Although, in response to the last point, backing up your code, removing the line you don't understand and then seeing what breaks and how can sometimes be a good way of understanding what it does. Failing safely is a great way to learn.

[@edcrichton9457]

Just avoid experimenting on systems that are live.

[@yewtewbstew547]

I think if designers want to include a content warning or toggle, then they should do it. But I never want us to arrive at a situation where they're expected to do it, let alone required to. There's a whole argument about artistic intent to be made there, as touched on at 10:45, but essentially I really think this all just boils down to video games still being treated as toys for children rather than a legitimate form of entertainment medium like books, film or theatre. Even by adult gamers themselves, albeit perhaps more subconsciously there. Unfortunately I think this expectation, and perhaps eventual requirement, is inevitable. Because a lot of this stuff is already being trojan horsed into more important discussions about accessibility. I doubt we'll ever reach a point where authoritative ratings organizations enforce a requirement, but beyond a certain point social expectation kinda becomes requirement. If the simple act of not including a content warning or toggle becomes a potentially damaging PR event, then a company is effectively required to do it. If this comes about in any way, it will happen that way.

[@DarkScreamGames]

It's a lot simpler than that. A big AAA company will feel obligated to serve these niche communities (accessibility etc) because ultimately their goal is to maximize sales, they want every person on earth to buy a copy because it's a manufactured corporate product often created on borrowed money and time that they need to recoup. And if they're a live service game they want to make sure you stay long after launch. Some people like big games, because any game without a million players is a "dead game" to them. A smaller (or smarter) company can just make a game as art for art's sake. Part of Art is how you experience the medium. You don't see painters offering alternative tint paintings to cater to the colour blind, you don't see musicians change their music to suit the needs of those hard of hearing. They offer their product with confidence to those who will enjoy it, and those who don't enjoy are no bother to them. Some people like artsy games, because any game without a soul is a "dead game" to them. tldr different strokes different folks

[@TuffMelon]

There's also the question of where the line is put. Certain phobias definitely exist, and yet I wouldn't expect someone to adjust their game for my own. For some reason, spacial distortions like Black Holes in games freak me the fuck out. I can still play, but it is very hard to work around it. But I wouldn't expect developers to give an option to toggle off this shit just because I'm badly spooked by them.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@TuffMelon As a person with acrophobia, I'm almost certain I had more fun playing Dying Light than anyone else I know.

[@mrosskne]

unfortunately, nobody but you is responsible for your mental health. stay in your room and never interact with anything if you don't want to be challenged.

[@AdariousMistdancer]

@@wrongthinker843 Might have to give that another go. Think I got to a spot I couldn't get past. Think it was early on ..the pact with Rais.

[@Stroimex]

I heavily disagree that "kids these days" are much better are expressing their feelings and accepting others. I see that people try to enforce that but most end up falling into saying it more than doing it and the very moment they have to face something different they don't like it is right into shitting on it and the person the most passive aggressive way possible

[@wrongthinker843]

Yeah, I don't see emotional incontinence and entitlement to being coddled as "good communication".

[@SirSpence99]

Beyond that, in the majority of cases, "expressing their emotions" is a power play in order to manipulate the behaviors of others. In cases in which it is not, it is split roughly evenly between externalizing their emotions (relying upon the response of others in order to verify they are "feeling the right thing") and actually representing their emotions... Which ends up with them actually expressing their emotions in a healthy way less than the "toxic man". (Which is a nonsense term and a sign of extreme misandry in the first place)

[@Puzzlesocks]

Absolutely agree with you. It's not at all that we are teaching kids how to recognize emotions, we are teaching them how to attempt to manipulate others using their emotions. I think this leads to using it to abdicate responsibility, seek pleasure at the expense of others, and dissociate from reality. I see it quite often among younger new hires, and my only solace is they often end up fired pretty quickly when they think they can use it to take advantage of my no-nonsense boss.

[@cynthiahembree3957]

As an older Gen Z(I'll be 25 tomorrow) this is exactly the problem. I think the issue is that kids these days are very manipulative and can't handle a disagreement often times. The things I've been called by my generation are ridiculous. People aren't teaching them to accept their emotions anymore they are teaching them to use them to their advantage. When I was younger my therapist told me "it's okay to be angry but not okay to take it out on others". I don't think people are being taught that anymore

[@Stroimex]

@@cynthiahembree3957 Happy Birthday

[@LLPTV]

I disagree that newer generations are better at dealing with different people, it seems quite contrary to me. Social media actively, algorithmically encourages people to get into their own bubbles&echo chambers where they never have to deal with differing opinions which leads to more violent conflicts when they eventually do. But otherwise this video has some really good takes.

[@pumpkinlemonjuice]

Yeh i think he's noticing differences between older and younger gens and confusing it for acceptance, and the "not feeling the desire to prove how much better or worse they are" goes in the same vein. they just have their own different cliques.

[@cynthiahembree3957]

I've found the older generation doesn't call me names when I have a different opinion. I am an older member of gen z and trust me some of the younger part of the generation have really serious issues with actually dealing with other people. Also I have seen more Gen z and millennials compete for who's life is worse. Again this is as a member of the generation in question. It makes me wonder how may people he actually has dealt with in this generation

[@DebunkedMommy]

on many systems (including mine) PoE runs better if you disable many of the sounds in the config file. I don't wanna live in a world where we want devs to work on disabling triggers when they could be working on solving problems with the game.

[@Isaygoodday5]

This is an excellent point. In the world we live in where so many games are riddled with bugs and issues, toggling potentially triggering issues should be at the very bottom of the priority list

[@cynthiahembree3957]

this is my exact same issue as well

[@georgepayne9381]

It will never stop annoying me that Josh is the younger, better looking, more driven, more successful, and (I'm willing to bet), slightly smarter version of me. I'm pretty sure I know why and I take ownership of it, but whenever he talks about acting, teaching, and just sorta stumbling in to this "playing games for money" gig, I think "well, I'm not dead yet, always time to learn," and then I go to sleep. Rock on Josh.

[@chameleonedm]

Man you gotta get your ego in check dude Stop comparing yourself to exernal factors, aint gonna do you any good, every time you do that it is your ego talking

[@Mythicalgoon]

​@@chameleonedmcan you elaborate on this? Seems interesting as it's something I do pretty often

[@Whydoesthissitesuck]

@@Mythicalgoon Don't compare yourself to other people

[@chameleonedm]

​@@Mythicalgoon If you are measuring your success by comparing yourselves to others, you are being egotistical. Your ego is demanding you rank yourself, which does absolutely nothing to actually change your output. It can only serve to disappoint you as by doing this you are putting other people in charge of your own success, which is nonsense You need to do things because you enjoy doing them, not because it makes you better than someone else. Otherwise you're just going to be miserable Any time you "feel behind" in life, that is your ego

[@Mythicalgoon]

@@chameleonedm extremely interesting read, thank you.

[@the_beemer]

I used to have really bad Arachnophobia. I think it is nice if a game adds safety tools if it can't be modded, but I wouldn't expect it ever. Exposure works but the incremental part is hugely important. If the exposure leads to a really really bad reaction that makes the phobia worse in my experience. My way was that I modded them out in Skyrim, Dragon Age, Witcher etc. and quit PoE because of them, because I knew they freak me out so bad they would make it worse and it was genuinely unplayable. Eventually I got there through looking at illustrations in Bestiarys of TTRPGs, then some images of real ones. I had 2 sessions of therapy that helped incredible amounts where I had to look at dead spiders, move them with chopsticks etc. and eventually catch some daddy long legs (is what they translate into apparently) All that helped slowly and now I am a year later at the point where I will use video games as exposure because its not overwhelming anymore. I was able to deal with Baldurs Gate spiders and am incredibly proud of that. Currently playing Witcher knowing there are some in Blood and Wine and I will not mod them out for the first time, will see how it goes The point I am trying to make is that removing triggers is not a bad thing since it just depends on the person whether the trigger in the game is helpful exposure or makes the problem worse. I don't think anyone should be told that they just have to suck it up and confront themselves with it, its not that easy. But in the end of course exposure is the only long term solution, so affected people need to try and find a way to do it incrementally

[@wrongthinker843]

It's a piece of media. You are in full control at all times.

[@godspeedhero3671]

Nah, fuck that. I have severe arachnophobia. I've slept with spiders during SERE, held pet tarantulas and a million other activities. But it's a goddamn video game. Someone made it. There doesn't NEED to be any spiders especially when it's not fucking important to the story in any way. There should be an option to remove them and it should be a legally required option.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@godspeedhero3671 Ah, yes, subjecting art to law. Very "anti"fa of you.

[@nattythepanda4692]

@@wrongthinker843 Your baits are SO bad man, just give up at this point, I give them a 4/10 just for the effort and you got a few people, still didn't pass though, go back to trolling class, please.

[@mandragorius9637]

I'm afraid my stance is a little more pro art. A great example is doki doki literature club. It has its ups and downs and being a free visual novel helps the impact greatly, but the tags warn you of psychologically horror and the intro warns you about dark themes. And while both is definitely a correct statement it makes you suspicious of the experience from the start. It changes how you look at things It changes what you expect I.agine the act one twist with no warning and the Meta horror starts without a warning It would be such a different experience It might actually make some people believe it's real even, if they are on the gullible side. But now they know exactly Oh, yeah psychological horror, that's why

[@RAFMnBgaming]

I would definitely love to go into games like that with no idea what I'm going in to, but at the same time it's difficult to seek stuff like that out for... well, the inherent impossibility of wanting to be surprised.

[@Nurr0]

Agree with you about people not wanting to be wrong, but it goes way beyond that. People don't even want to be exposed to information that upsets or unsettles them in any way, shape or form and it doesn't matter what it is. People will just be offended that you upset them regardless of reality etc. It's really troubling. And in turn it leads to a worrying concept: People just want people/media to reinforce what they already believed. Insert filter bubbles/algorithms etc.

[@wrongthinker843]

And the media is all too happy to oblige.

[@mrosskne]

like the information that your identity is a matter of objective facts and isn't something you chose

[@wrongthinker843]

@@mrosskne What even is "identity"? The word by etymology means "similarity (to something)".

[@mrosskne]

@@wrongthinker843 it's not well defined. we might think of it as something like "all of the facts which in summation we consider to constitute an individual". the idea that discrete objects exist is itself not well supported, though.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@mrosskne True. The point I was getting at is, if you want to define yourself by similarity to something external, you've failed from the start.

[@midori_the_eldritch]

For trauma and severe phobias, running into a trigger unwarned can make things worse, but if you know its coming it can blunt the edge, and a lot of people with trauma and phobias enjoy knowingly putting themselves in kathartic version of the situation. Its the difference between making a dam that has fewer, less katistrofic failures and just making it bigger each time.

[@thebluemoon19]

For for others read the op, this doesn’t mean everyone. I know the way hey wrote it sounds like everyone with traumas and phobias feels this way, but we don’t. Humanity is a vast and varied spectrum. Accessibility is for everyone. To address the original comment: just have a toggle for trigger warnings 🤷‍♀️ that way you can have your surprise and catharsis and can chose based on if I can handle these triggers at the time.

[@luvhair255]

@@thebluemoon19 I think just having a disclaimer with the different triggers listed would be good and leave it at that if there isn't going to be a toggle to change them.

[@midori_the_eldritch]

@@thebluemoon19 I pretty deliberately avoided absolute statements. Where did you get the idea I was treating us as a monolith? Please tell me so I can do better in the future. On to your bit about a tw setting, I'm under the impression most people with trauma who care about trigger warnings want them to be treated like epilepsy warnings, correct me if I'm wrong or out of date. Also how would that setting work? On by default? Or "I have trauma so let me see if they listed "self termination" (cus i don't want to get flagged by an automod) in this romance visual novel about a high-school book club? Or would it just add a frease frame with a continue button before Sayori's death, leading to people who didn't know Doki Doki's twist getting invested in the carecturs and playing for hours before learning that something that might fuck with there depression or trauma from finding someone will leave the game unfinishable for them?

[@thebluemoon19]

@@midori_the_eldritch sure no worries then and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I'd love to actually discuss this with you further (and I don't want you to think I'm ignoring you) but I'm incredibly sleep deprived. I just wanted to apologize before I forgot.

[@selay333]

For some giving a warning can end up causing them stress and other problems. It's hard to find a balance for this sort of thing because each person is different in how they respond.

[@wiirlak8681]

Could also be a spoiler.

[@Matt_the_pirate]

There could be a button you can click to see the content warning so that you can choose whether you want to read it or not

[@selay333]

@@Matt_the_pirate This is something I would love added to games. Especially with games that get censored, just let us toggle that stuff and I think the majority will be happy.

[@Zectifin]

@@Matt_the_pirate thats a great option. I don't want to see triggers that would spoil the game, but I don't want it to be removed for people who need them.

[@solsystem1342]

​@@Matt_the_pirate Exocolinist's system works like this and actually goes more in depth. There's an option on the menu which will take you to a screen which has a quick blurb about each content warning. Then, if you want spoilers you can click to drop down and get more detailed information. It lets you know about whatever might affect your enjoyment of the game while avoiding spoilers if you don't want them. Which I think is just great because it lets you dip out if this is not what you wanted. Especially like before the game pulls out a tramatic event you've went through personally. Tldr: there's a whole fuzzy spectrum of possibilities out there that work for different games. Doom probably doesn't need to tell you that death and dismemberment will be involved but something like ddlc should (and they did) probably tip off the player that things might get intense before deciding to play the game.

[@Kaotiqua]

The problem with putting trigger warnings on games is, there are a million and one fears/triggers. Everyone's fears and triggers are at least somewhat unique. So on the one hand, there can never be an adequate list that covers even _most_ things, and on the other, if you try to create that warning list, it's just going to get bigger and bigger, until it's completely unmanageable.

[@billionai4871]

So just because it is really hard (nigh impossible) to ensure everyone's mental safety, we shouldn't try to make anyone safe? It sounds like you're saying that, because your comment reads like "if we put trigger warnings on things, we will have to put too many". I don't see a logical path from "the creator of the game may have never thought that the fact you need to dive in a deep ocean" leads to "so we shouldn't warn people of things that are broadly known to be problematic like SA, bigoted behavior or child abuse"

[@brook_angel]

Oh the horror when does it end. As if that's ever going to inconvenience you in the slightest when there is information available whether or not people with a certain phobia or other issue maybe should avoid a game. And it's not as if gave developers don't know what stuff is in their game. They put it there. It didn't just magically manifest. "oh but people are afraid of everything, must we put a warning for ceilings in the game now" or similar arguments are so strawmanny it's a fire hazard. Stop making up people who don't exist or using 5 teens from tumblr/tiktok as the basis for your argument. We know what the more common and relevant things are that could require a trigger warning.

[@Bomberman66Hell]

​@@billionai4871No, we should not. It is a waste of time and a burden on developers, and in the end you will never be able to satisfy everyone. If a game is going to trigger you, you most likely will be aware by the synopsis on a store page alone.

[@Zectifin]

@@Bomberman66Hell thats why instead of requiring it we just shame developers who don't do it and call them ableist. its the best of both worlds.

[@Bomberman66Hell]

@@Zectifin If the developers are being ableist, does that mean you're incapable? Fitting!

[@TheSunGamer101]

As someone with arachnophobia I really appreciate arachnophobia modes in games where the spiders are there to be scary *because they’re spiders* eg. Lethal Company or satisfactory. Exposure therapy is about having safe experiences where you train your brain to have less of an anxiety response, a horror game, or one where they’re a properly difficult and scary enemy isn’t going to help me conquer my phobia, it’s likely to reinforce it.

[@Dhalin]

There is something to be said about being able to _overcome_ said fear, though. But yes, jumpscare games are not going to help your phobia. But a game where you progressively kill harder spiders could potentially help through overcoming them. Early in the game, the spiders are small and easy, and they slowly get bigger and harder, allowing you to defeat each one. You're still in your safe space because it's just a video game afterall and you can turn it off when you start getting uncomfortable.

[@dragonmaster1360]

@TheSunGamer101 Then don't play the game. Don't force games to change the way it was intended to be played to suit you. Lethal Company, as you yourself said, IS SUPPOSED TO BE SCARY. Removing an element that's supposed to be scary because YOU can't handle it removes the entire point of the effing game! Get over yourself, conquer your phobias, or play something else! This is coming from somebody who has near crippling thalassophobia, and yet has dozens of hours on Subnautica. Yes, I stick around the shallows as much as possible, but I still go deeper when I have to and can. Deal with it or play something else.

[@Dhalin]

@@dragonmaster1360 I've watched more than a few videos of people with thalassaphobia playing Subnautica and most of them agree that Exposure Therapy helped them loads. I myself have it, but Subnautica never triggered me. I still can't swim RL, though lol. I doubt that's likely to change anyday soon haha. Exposure Therapy is proven to work _sometimes_ and it really is a case-by-case basis. If it don't work in your case, then don't do it. Not every game is for everybody and it's fine to say "no thanks" and walk away. For me, I hate jumpscare horror. That's why, as much as I am intrigued by the FNAF franchise and its story, I tried to play the first FNAF game and yeah, having to turn up the volume to hear footsteps only to get my ears blasted out by jumpscares... nah, I'm good. I'll stick to just watching youtubers uncovering lore videos and/or having the volume turned down slightly to mitigate the jumpscares. I am *NOT*, however, going to ask Scott Cawthon to add a "Mute Jumpscares" option to the game, as that would be ridiculous. It'd be awesome if he did, but I wouldn't ask for it.

[@Ephelle]

@@dragonmaster1360 They never said anything about forcing devs to remove things they can't handle. They just said they appreciate when the option is there, and that horror games might not be the best in terms of exposure therapy. Maybe you're the one that needs to get over themselves.

[@FuckGoogle502]

Yeah, safe experiences like playing a video game with spiders instead of playing with real ones? Also, spiders aren't scary to lots of people. Spiders are more just jump-scary since they tend to pop outta cracks.

[@T61APL89]

People with deadly allergies know what makes them sick, they aren't seeking prohibition just merely a heads up before they bite into something that an ingredient is included. That's how my sister explained trauma and trigger warnings to me. The problem lies in representation and as you said courtesy to know who to design accessibility for and how. The people who have "triggers" do not have straight forward fears that can be easily avoided, often times its rather something more mundane connected to the event. Say for example you were mugged at gunpoint in a new city you just moved to, the gun might not be the main trigger point so much as the smell of the mugger's aftershave/ sound of his necklace/ feeling of being lost right before the mugging. No one can create the perfect trigger warning because no one besides the victim really understands what triggers that memory of abuse/loss. What I'm trying to get at is that some victims are in constant fight or flight mode where they don't actively require trigger warnings because they are already experiencing the nonstop PTSD/depression/anxiety that comes with trauma experience. TW in media is more so to give an appropriate disclaimer should these people seek to consume their content while seeking a break from that day to day exposure.

[@TehDanny]

I deeply hate rain, to a point where it can be considered a sort of anxiety. That's one of the reasons why I love Valheim. In that game, unlike many other games with rain, you get a debuff when it's raining. Your stamina regenerates slower I believe. Finally a game which aknowledges that walking around in rain can affect you negatively. Yes I sometimes walk when it's raining, both IRL and in-game, but other times I deal with it, for example use an umbrella or go into cover or fight dwarves less frequently. And when I reach the Swamp biome, where it rains constantly, it's a scary place for me, which makes the gaming experience interesting, like watching a horror movie. In games such as Minecraft and WoW, where rain is just a sound and graphical difference, I disable it or turn it down as much as possible, since the lack of a debuff makes the experience seem less realistic to me - I'm sitting there annoyed, irritated or frightened, but my game character doesn't care. So yeah I like incremental exposure, when it's implemented properly. I also really enjoy Against The Storm, partially for the same reason. Incremental exposure IRL is not my favorite concept though.

[@PatrickRatman]

Project Zomboid you get wet in rain and have a higher chance of getting sick.

[@theprecipiceofreason]

There will always be more triggers. This guy's trigger is rain, and that sucks but, if you hit the remove triggers button, expecting the torture, bad language, homophobia, violence, sexuality, etc to be removed and then hey remove gd rain, most people would be nonplussed. Everything could be a trigger. Trauma doesn't know rationality and it can make anything a monster.

[@vagabond2570]

Who tf hates rain lmao , weirdo .

[@TehDanny]

@@vagabond2570 it's a type of anxiety or phobia, stop being judgemental, asshole.

[@Zectifin]

but the thing is that the option to turn off rain isn't an accessibility option, its for people with shitty graphics cards.

[@resinks2269]

I think it really depends on the phobia, as I remember the streamer/youtuber RTgame once said, that he would go actually sick to the point of throwing up when seeing those spider squid things in Subnautica due to his arachnophobia. So with this (only anecdotal) evidence and my close to 0 expertise on this topic I would say that at least trigger warnings should be a given, and on a level to level basis the developers should decide if it fits their games tone to allow the removal/reskin of certain enemies and such in the option menu. A good recent example is lethal company, because it removes the Spider in a funny way that works well for the games tone of an unserious-serious horror

[@doppelkammertoaster]

Discussing and speaking about it is different from actually understanding and accepting it. It's directly tied how you understand yourself and your own preconceptions. I do deal with a lot of people of all ages and backgrounds on daily basis and that things seems to be the common demoninator to me. It's definitely true that the jounger people tend to speak more about it, for sure. But I also met my fair share of the same age cohorts who talk about it but are as unwilling to see others as old folks. It's a good start though. It's more accepted now. Now we have to learn how to get to know our own minds. Dealing with our own avoidance of hard things to deal with is part of that. We need to learn about and work with our minds.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Sounds like children... That's a good thing. Unlike the real world... Given war. Evil smiles... Until humans are wiser.

[@flame4864]

I think it's a slippery slope and vague to turn off all "triggers" since nearly everything can be considered a trigger. I remember learning in my psychology class about a kid who was taught to be scared of rabbits or santa claus beards. Does that mean every single video game he plays should have a disclaimer saying there are rabbits in it? But the spider analogy is a good one. A lot of people are afraid of spiders, and I remember in Hogwarts Legacy that there were giant man-eating spiders that were frankly terrifying. I'm pretty sure they allowed you to turn on "Arachnophobia mode" which changed the model of the spiders into something else. It's not really "changing the vision of the game." It's in the same vein as not showing blood or nudity.

[@attaug]

The only issue I have with arachnophobia mods is most people I know who use them are taken right out of the game since it usually just turns something into a ball, blob or shadow. Usually crushes the enjoyment for some and those I know who decided not to use a replacer/filter tended to get better with time since it's just a game. Also, changing a spider into something like a crab can still be triggering to those who are truly arachnophobes as it's not always the fact it's a "spider" and it's more the whole "spider-like" thing.

[@ArDeeMee]

To me, the worst thing about replacing a spider for a floating ball is that that’s CLEARLY a spider whose legs were pulled off. How is that supposed to help me? I recommend watching spider documentaries an YT. Dave‘s Little Beasties has done more for my phobia than anything else.

[@theprecipiceofreason]

The problem with removing triggers is that there will always be more triggers

[@alansmithee419]

I agree (I think) that phobias and such should not be particularly worried about in games. But this is because I simply do not think it's a significant enough issue to be worth tackling. But if it were worth tackling, reducing the problem would be preferable to doing nothing, even if it can never be completely solved. This is to my mind like saying "The problem with arresting murderers is that there will always be more murderers." I think people too easily accept seemingly simple, but invalid, arguments for things they already agree with.

[@theprecipiceofreason]

@@alansmithee419 Equating the issue to murder is a massive fault in that. Not anyone can just say ' I was murdered' and then attach to it literally and actually anything at all. Not at all the same. Bad analogy. Irrelevent. Triggered by false equivalency, sorry. You'll just have to accommodate me on this.

[@alansmithee419]

@@theprecipiceofreason I never claimed an equivalency between murder and triggers. I intentionally replaced "removing triggers" with something *far more extreme* (not equivalent), keeping the rest of the statement the same, to demonstrate that the *argument's format* does not stand up on its own. If it did, it would be applicable to everything. It is not, and therefore is not sufficient reasoning to reach the conclusion suggested. It is at the very least an incomplete argument. Why is its format applicable to triggers but not other things? This detail is missing. You also jumped on my swapping out words in that example and ignored the rest of my comment. My actual point, as I explained, was that not being able to eliminate an issue entirely does not, on its own, justify doing nothing about it at all.

[@asteria9963]

There is no problem with removing triggers. Bad logic.

[@DerekS-kq3zh]

@@asteria9963 Propaganda about forcing gender transitions upon minors triggers me. That needs to be removed from every game.

[@moleyface]

Personally, I'm always pro "more options", if it's within reason and doesn't change the game too fundamentally. Yes, changing out a spider enemy may change the game's vision, but not all aspects of that vision are created equally. As an artist and dev, there are definitely aspects of anything I make that I'd be willing to compromise on if it made the experience better. The "vision" isn't sacred or beyond adjusting. But also, I don't believe I or any other dev should be the arbiter of how someone confronts their fears. The onus should always be on the player. If they see that disclaimer and decide to go ahead? Cool. If a toggle is available and they leave it unflipped because they've decided this is their exposure therapy? Great! As long as it's their call. In my eyes, it's not coddling as long as the player always has a way to decide for themselves. That said, the decision to include it or not is entirely case-by-case. Any accessibility features are always appreciated and I will always vouch for them, but sometimes it's just not doable.

[@wrongthinker843]

"I have chosen to engage with something I dislike and now I'm upset. How dare you!"

[@mrosskne]

there's an infinite number of phobias. how many options should a game have?

[@Alex-0597]

@@mrosskne As many as the game devs want to include?

[@harrylane4]

@@mrosskneas many as the devs feel are necessary. It’s not that hard to explain.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@Alex-0597 How about 0?

[@jimothyslim7332]

There are phobias of everything. There are people who have a fear of vegetables, fear of children, even fear of feet. Should every game have a massive list of every potential trigger, or should people exhibit a little responsibility for themselves rather than trying to shift responsibility onto everyone else?

[@jimothyslim7332]

As someone with a fear of trigger warnings, I find the suggestion that trigger warnings should be listed as triggering and troublesome.

[@completelyferrouschemist6776]

Trigger warnings are a catch-22. They add anticipation which makes the experience much more stressful. If you don't have them, you trigger somebody and they end up being stressed anyway. All it ends up doing is tells those who are triggered easily that they shouldn't play or watch, which they end up doing.

[@Tinyflower1]

for me as someone with ptsd the warning allows me to brace myself, if a trigger happens in a show i am watching or a game and it's out of nowhere I might get flashbacks, if I know it's coming it will be uncomfortable, but I can look away, or somehow else deal with it that doesn't involve flashbacks

[@clarkecorvo2692]

@@Tinyflower1 problem is you never know when some scene pops up which could unsettle people, so you pretty much had to give triggerwarnings right before every scene for it to be effective. im honest, that just pulls you out of the experience. sometimes people just have to accept that things are simply not for them if they cant handle certain subjects or themes which are likely to come up.

[@TheAyanamiRei]

We already have basic warning like Graphic Violence/Nudity. Like if there is Torture I think that would be a thing a lot of people would want to know about.

[@Puzzlesocks]

@@Tinyflower1 Trigger warnings have been proven to make reactions worse. Think giving a kid a vaccination, if you prep them by telling them the shot is going to hurt they freak out, but if you give them a candy and do it when they aren't paying attention then they barely even notice. Personally I think the whole prospect is asinine. There are people who get "triggered" by anything, and if we start piecemealing society to try to create a life where we never come across unpleasant things or adversity then it isn't life at all anymore. Sure, I could probably agree on some extreme examples, and maybe even some common examples that are less extreme. Even then though, we end up in endless arguments defining what we are referring to and where lines should be drawn, an obvious example being "what qualifies as pornography". Finally, as someone else pointed out, even if we could come to agreements on what should have warnings, it's going to break immersion and rip even more resources away from making good products and deterring those who might want to get into it.

[@Dhalin]

That's on the person, then. If you have arachnophobia and a game warns you that it contains big scary spiders, and you decide to court your curiosity and look into said game... *THAT'S ON YOU.* Nobody's fault but your own.

[@DavidSoucie]

I've always said that we should treat emotions like our body deals with disease. You have to build up your physical immune system to be able to handle pathogens, and similarly you have to develop your emotional/mental immune system so that you can handle it when things don't go exactly the way you want them to.

[@adayoung2740]

You can in fact treat anxiety disorders by exposing people to the thing that causes them anxiety...but you don't start at 100%. If you have somebody with a phobia of spiders (and I mean an actual phobia, not just "I'm scared of spiders") throwing a spider at them isn't going to do them good, it's just going to be traumatizing because that's how bad a phobia is. If you want to actually help them it has to be something they have some level of control of, and it starts with baby steps. The example given when I was studying psych was you might start with literally just a picture, and even that is not going to be a fun time for them, so you take it slow, a few minutes at a time, and only after they've started to get comfortable with that extremely distant kind of exposure do you slowly step it up until (depending on patient's needs/desires) you can handle any kind of interaction with a spider without freaking out.

[@GriffinPilgrim]

@@adayoung2740 Exactly. Simply exposing them to a spider would be like trying to building up your immune system by injecting yourself malaria.

[@nicholasfigueiredo3171]

No. Trigger warnings are actively harmful. There is a bunch of literature on it and I have no idea how it got popular on twitter when we already know for a long time that they are harmful.

[@TheRadioSquare]

I think those things can be in the game, but just put them away into some accessibility menu for people who specifically want to know, and spoiler them on store pages. It's not something that everybody must see or acknowledge when they're booting up the game.

[@Ephelle]

As someone with arachnophobia I absolutely appreciate when a game does include an arachnophobia setting, especially when it's a first-person game, but I would never say games *should* have them. I do think warnings are good though. They could even be diegetic warnings like an NPC mentioning spiders up ahead, or seeing webs long before seeing actual spiders. I, at least, am much more able to handle it when I have a chance to prepare myself for it, and if I feel like I can't handle it at that moment then I have a chance to walk away and maybe come back to it another time.

[@CataclysmDM]

Censorship and alteration of artwork for fear of offending someone is... bad. Very bad.

[@hihihi1q23]

People say stuff like this but never mean it. Think of how many 'anti-censorship' types demand that things they deem woke be censored and removed from media.

[@CataclysmDM]

@@hihihi1q23 Ummmm. Well, I actually believe it sooo....

[@justinfritz4817]

barony added a toggle to turn the spiders into very threatening crabs and I found that a neat solution

[@donald12998]

Crabs are often spidery enough to still trigger arachnophobia.

[@wrongthinker843]

So they hate people with kabourophobia? Such bigots.

[@crabman3144]

I might turn that on just to have more crabs in games.

[@starilvara]

Having the option to play your favourite game with/without the triggering thing *is* part of controlled, safe exposure for a lot of people. Having the option to remove X doesn't mean you'll always pick that option, it means you get to decide 'hmm, today I'm not feeling quite in the right place for X, but I still want to enjoy Best Game' or 'yeah, today is a Do My Best To Deal With It day!' Which isn't to say it's reasonable to expect all games to have this option (not least because anything can be a trigger, and also a common trigger (say, child death) might be a plot point or otherwise difficult to remove entirely without completely restructuring the game). But I think there's a common assumption that everyone who's asking for trigger warnings/an option to remove certain triggering content/images from a game is wanting to ALWAYS avoid the thing, rather than wanting to have *control* over when/how they choose to expose themselves to that thing, and have the ability to make sure they have the resources on a given day to do so.

[@Typhoonflame]

True, I was never hateful towards other cultures bc I grew up having online friends from all over the world.

[@ZatomiAwake]

I agree, mostly. I think on the subject of triggers, a lot of people tend to forget that plenty of people with triggers will still play a game or watch a movie, but the warning braces them enough that they can be steeled for it. Way too many people think that trigger warnings are a quick message that pops up at the beginning and tells sensitive people to leave, which pollutes the discourse. Though I think a general or specific distaste warning isn't unreasonable even if you don't have any triggers. Like distaste can mean lots of things from "im uncomfortable and want to cry" to "this subject is in the game, maybe dont check this one out until you feel up to it", so I don't think it's unreasonable to have a system that labels games as having elements in them that some might find distasteful. Like the ESRB will tell you if there's violence or swearing or gambling in a game. Is saying "a dog is killed in this game" so a person who maybe just lost a beloved family pet can make an informed decision about buying and playing a game going too far? Is mentioning that there's a sexual assault or extreme depictions of racism as plot significant moments too much to mention and if so, why? You can say "these are parts of life and you have to get used to them", but that's failing to consider that I might already be used to them and just don't want to interact with them right now. If the game can tell me there's blood in it, it can mention some other details.

[@kdog3908]

"The Coddling of the American Mind" by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. Speaks to this. I think their broad conclusion is; over protectionism is a net loss for everybody. "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." - Friedrich Nietzsche.

[@Otacanthus]

The spider thing is funny for me since I often try looking up games that have spiders in them as a playable character for example since I really like spiders. But it's always the arachnophobes that show up when I'm trying to find like the exact opposite. One of my friends and my partner have also started almost being weery of spiders in games since they don't want to kill them since they know I like them.

[@leonbarry5403]

See as someone who just 40 I find that behaviour from your friends bizarre. Video games aren't real life. If they are trying to shield you it's asinine because they're not really spiders or they're trying to shield you from the idea of killing spiders and that to me is so much worse. The idea someone would self censor ones fantasy for someone's real life ideals Is, I don't know, weak and pathetic and if I my friendships had that kind of dynamic they wouldn't be my friends. Why would you even want that, just look in a mirror.

[@Otacanthus]

@@leonbarry5403 I just think it's funny personally, they know I don't really care but it's just how they're like. I love having spiders in game personally, I don't feel anything about killing game creatures unless it's not the direct intent to show a wounded animal trying to get away from you like monster hunter. You should really know at your age not to put intent that's not mentioned onto other people's comments. I never said they didn't want them in games. If anything I'd want more spiders in games. I want playable spiders, spider themed classes, spider enemies and allies

[@leonbarry5403]

@@Otacanthus I wasn't remarking on you, more your friends. A phobia is an irrational fear, people shouldn't be mollycoddling for irrational fears. I really dislike spiders, I couldn't sleep if there was one in the room, but in videogames/ movies ect its not real, i have zero reaction because it's not real. I didn't put intent on your comment. You freely admitted your friends self censor in video games because you like spiders. What I'm getting at is it's not real, if your friends don't want to kill real spiders around you that's cool 😎, but to extend that to the non real, as an older person i find strange at the very least.

[@resinks2269]

I dunno I feel like its wholesome that they dont kill spiders. Calling them dumb, weak and pathetic for that is kind of rude. I wouldnt call it a self-censoring of their fantasy, since it might just be a part of their fantasy to be a nice person. People have different ideals of what they want to be in a videogame: for some that might be starting a godmode killing spree in Skyrim, while for others it is to build a nice Community City in Minecraft or be nice to NPCs in Animal Crossing. Not every fantasy is a power fantasy and it isnt censoring to do things out of kindness.

[@GikamesShadow]

That is in a way cool to see but especially in the adult world, I will just assume you are due to how you refer to your partner in a mature way, it is a bit odd. There is a case to be made that they are very much trying their best to be nice and thoughtful here but also that they are going above and beyond to effectivly "please you" for a lack of a better way to describe it. I highly doubt you make them do this but if this continues into more extreme ways, I would make sure to encourage them to just... do it. Kill the spiders. You already show that you dont mind if they would by how you talk about it. But it feels like they dont neccesarily know this? I hope that makes sense :o

[@Dhalin]

I think OMORI sets an example, it displays a splash screen when you start the game up and it says "Warning, this game contains blah blah blah" and it's prevalently displayed on the Store Page for Steam as well. OMORI does not sugarcoat what's in the game or try to hide it. I think that's what games should do. Tell you of the major things in the game that people might have issues with and if you don't like it, don't buy it.

[@marcruth4531]

16:15 "I don't know what this picture of a coconut is doing, so I'm going to remove it."

[@Nachokinz]

I am of the opinion that the only obligation is to have a general informational notice on a store page and at the beginning of the game. We need to be able to cope with aspects of life that we are uncomfortable with; as is mentioned controlled exposure in order to learn and adapt is extremely important in order to succeed. For example I am taking first aid courses that while unrelated to my career path ensure I am prepared to at least stabilize either myself or others in case something catastrophic occurs; being mentally and physically prepared for what may happen is perfectly healthy and should be encouraged in order to better society as a whole.

[@runakovacs4759]

Some of us are forced to deal with constant, incessant bullshit in our lives. Threats of violence, assault - both of raw physical and sexual natures - severe discrimination, criminalization. Some of our lives *are* discomfort. Example are LGBT people living in Turkey, Russia, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Belarus. We want a fucking break from our shithole countries and being threatened to be beaten up on the train because I'm visibly transitioning during my daily commute.

[@kiblams]

There are more phobias than you can count... How long do you wanna sit reading a list of content before playing your game?

[@noriringtail7428]

As someone who suffers from PTSD, trigger warnings are more than enough, I promise you. I've been exposing myself to my triggers for years and years, and it's helped me not have such a horrible time when I encounter them. That said, I DO need the warning. Showing it to me without warning is basically akin to punching me in the face.

[@unicornucopiaclear]

Love that a ton of minions act like a bunch of birds on a power line when you're standing still. Just constantly moving and switching places. Bird tech.

[@WorldCrafterPrime]

Sadly, being able to talk about your feelings and being accepting of others will do jack all for society if they're too anxiety-ridden to function productively.

[@ArthurTorrias]

Story of my life. XD

[@cynthiahembree3957]

Yeah this is true.

[@danielbeshers1689]

Trauma therapy is my career. Josh is correct. However: if trauma therapy is *not* your career, you are not the person to judge when a person should be confronting their phobia or trauma and when they should not.

[@banhammer7243]

If they want to put in a button that turns off spiders in a game, go for it. But I would suggest not long after that becomes common place in games, someone will start demanding a button that turns of other creatures and monsters and game makers will end up spinning in circles trying to please everyone without pleasing anyone!

[@TNH91]

@@pistolman44 Don't try to make it into a different "issue". It's dishonest argumentation.

[@harrylane4]

And if the devs want to do that, they can. If they don’t, they can just… not.

[@harrylane4]

@StefanRial you threw your entire argument away when you started complaining about “wokeness” lol

[@wrongthinker843]

@@harrylane4 Only to thought police like yourself. F off.

[@miuzoreyes6547]

​@StefanRial I completely agree with the first part that you shouldn't really develop things that will cater for a very small minority, as it isn't really worth the effort though admittedly those are nice things to implement. However, "wokeness" literally has nothing to do with it - nobody is forcing you to add diverse characters for a story if you don't want to, don't buy into the delusions that garbage drama farm channels on this platform peddle.

[@AvariaDemon]

i don't like the idea of forcing anyone to do anything (though i think there is a situation where it is called for) especially when it comes to art, because that can really lead to some effed up effects. i would love to see CWs in more video games and awareness as that can open access of the games to those, and potentially save someone from accedentally having to face something that their afraid of. the option to remove? is up to games, i've known people so afraid of spiders that they have to look away from screens that are showing them, so being able to drop them would probably help TBH. but that kind of thing would be going above and beyond what is expected. great video

[@clarkecorvo2692]

to some degree people just have to deal with it, end of story. this whole "i never want to get triggered by anything!!!!" mindset just produces emotional stunted babys in a grown body. serious question: wtf will such people ever do when times get harder? sorry, but if you get a mental breakdown because of a virtual depiction of a thing on a screen, than THATS the bigger problem than the thing on the screen and should be worked on.

[@SocksAndPuppets]

On the other hand, it's polite to make some considerations for people who've been through incredibly traumatic experiences, especially in their recent lives. You don't *have* to just surprise them with fuel for flashbacks. It doesn't hurt anyone else to have a buried menu option under "accessibility", or a list of what to expect on the box or product page.

[@clarkecorvo2692]

@@SocksAndPuppets just imagine the myriad of things people get triggered by, especially today where its pretty much a sport for some people. it would be an ever growing list devs had to account for, to wrap everyone in blister foil. nah man, people need to suck it up at some point.

[@MooncricketsInc]

​@@SocksAndPuppets They already do the mature content warning on steam. Tells you what the game has and is about. So, a remove option is unnecessary and beyond dumb, especially if you're playing some creepy weird and gory horror game.

[@daschawk]

Games should NOT NEED an option. It's not the games responsibility to save you from your own triggers. I hate that. It's a fucking video game. However, if the developer WANTS to implement them for their own reasoning, why not? Doesn't bother me to add it but I don't need a popup every time I start a game about "this has triggers, would you like to disable?" That's just some really dumb shit.

[@DasUberLobster]

It's a huge discussion point these days. As a trauma therapist, my peers are pretty split on this, with folks falling on both sides of the argument. I end up with two major positions- for one, it is never someone else's responsibility to manage my emotion or reaction to a thing (assuming it isn't intended to be harmful) because if it is, and they don't, I get hurt and they don't. Why would I do that to myself? For another, a person generally ends up feeling best when they are confident that can overcome their challenges rather than when they believe others will keep those challenges away. I've never counseled someone and said "Ah yes, you have a phobia of spiders. Your job is to petition every game, ever author, everyone who manages your hiking trails or cleans your office etc. and have them remove all spiders from your life." It's too much work and is an inefficient use of energy. It's more realistic and more empowering for a person to be able to learn to overcome the world (or themselves) than for them to "get better" at demanding that the world accommodate them.

[@EdgyVidyaGeneral]

4:50 that's simply not true. The criteria for what's "better" or "worse" has changed.

[@farkle4207]

The problem with trying to cater to triggers is that the sheer number of things that could be a trigger would require an immense amount of reworking games to ensure that everyone can filter out what might trigger them.

[@Godwinsname]

Also, for people like me, the more triggers I get, the more I get over my past trauma, due to both getting over getting triggered easily and through getting triggered and knowing it's just a BS trigger and not the real thing which prompts me to realize there's still work to do to heal the trauma more. So yeah, gimme those triggers.

[@ViniSocramSaint]

"cater to triggers" as if it's the same as giving into an enemy ideology... "sheer number of things that could be triggers". They "could" not be triggers, triggers simply "ARE". And I wonder what is the problem with making lights flicker less often, take away bloody splatters, and putting warnings about the content, especially if it involves analogs to real life traumatizing stuff. So f*cking difficult to "cater to triggers"... I just can't with anti-w*ke r*t*rds...

[@Grimbop]

The thing with trigger warnings is that they enable people with phobias to never confront them and also its impossible to cover every single one anyways so why bother in the first place. Not telling someone there is a spider in a game is not equal to throwing some into the deep end and no where is it even close, it is arguably THE SAFEEST controlled way you will ever experience your phobias. Arachnophobia is an IRATIONAL fear, it is similar to being afraid of the dark or monsters under your bed. The likely hood of a giant spider attacking you is never and even the likely hood of a small spider attacking you is very small to never. Things like sexual trauma or other mature topics make sense to receive a warning, phobias do not.

[@Tlogos47]

Thanks for the explanation as of facing thing you fear and developing the skill to face them. It's true it's going to take way more energy to avoid it on the long run than dealing with it. I've been running from a sensation for 20 years and I start to realize I need to deal with it. It's the mountain I'm going to start climbing this year.

[@jarrakul]

For me, and this is really weird, but for me what helps is being insecure. I don't want to lose face so I'll face my fear instead. I don't want to look pathetic so I'll admit to being wrong. Insecurity drives a lot of people to lash out, but that /looks/ transparently insecure, and I don't want to look like that, so my insecurity pushes me away from that.

[@mrosskne]

this is the meta

[@feral_orc]

yeah jeez I wonder why humans have evolved to feel this sensation. It must have a purpose. For me, I believe insecurity comes from a lack of self-respect. The line between insecure and anxious is a tight one though.

[@BeNice108]

As somebody that hasn't gotten over my fear of heights, and have gotten better about spiders. It is meaner to let people live in fear than make them face those fears. The nice act that people guilt-trip others with does more harm than good. Coddling people leaves them vulnerable and weak to these fears. The fear itself won't kill them, but it sure as heck can make life harder.

[@maikdaboss]

love the YU-Gi-Oh Jumper❤ Where did you get it?

[@the0new0revolution]

I think there are two problems that can arise with the metaphors and examples being used. One, trauma or phobias are things people can and should be allowed to work through at their own pace, and video games are things most people turn to for relaxation. Not all games MUST have the ability to turn off certain triggers, but those that do really provide that choice that allows people to experience the majority of a game while also making the choice of if and when they are ready/desire that exposure. Particular for major, extreme phobias, it's often better to begin that process in a clinical setting. Two, this is largely based on the idea of relatively common phobias, often with varying degrees of severity (Like your example of seeing a snake and being able to just walk away. That's a reasonable fear, but far from a crippling phobia). Where it falls apart a bit is with triggers related to things like sexual assault, things that are rooted deeply in trauma. Those aren't things we should ever reasonably expect to have to face once, much less multiple times if there's already a related trauma. Allowing someone to skip a portion of a game or a cutscene that includes such material can still allow them to enjoy the rest of the game while skipping past things that there really is no "exposure therapy" for. Again, games don't have to include these things. A warning is sufficient, but I don't really see any argument for why they SHOULDN'T include them. If a game doesn't, fine, people can dodge it, but if a game does I can't see anyone considering that a bad thing.

[@Radintoriov]

This is a really good reply.

[@Mermiam]

Except the extra costs. Also how many phobias need to be provided for? Let's take Bioshock for an example, we have plane crash, adrift in a dark open ocean, child abuse, murder, self mutilation, drug abuse, firearms, several examples of nearly drowning or others drowning, being stuck in a degrading city under the ocean, suicide, slavery, torture, sexual abuse and obviously a fair few more. Now tell me after you remove all of those things, with skip buttons or with options in the menus. How much of that game, it's message and it's characters remain?

[@the0new0revolution]

Pretty specifically said multiple times that no phobias need to be provided for. Acting like it's some slippery slope to provide a trigger warning and potentially allow people to skip one or two is silly. Devs can allow players to skip as much or as little as the devs see fit, and if a player skips everything the dev allows them to, they've gotten the experience they desired. I genuinely don't care, and neither should anyone else, about what message other players get from a game if they enjoyed it. If the devs decide they'd like to provide that option, it'd be extremely weird for players to be upset that other people were able to play the game in a way they decided wasn't the way THEY preferred to play it. @@Mermiam

[@Mermiam]

@@the0new0revolution Oh didn't realise you're a tourist. No worries you wouldn't understand. You probably don't even know what Bioshock is. But either way the answer was no and it is most definitely a slippery slope but again as a tourist you wouldn't care enough to know.

[@the0new0revolution]

What does tourist even mean in this context lmao? I've played every bioshock. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you're resorting to personal attacks as a backup. GGs I guess, gl next @@Mermiam

[@remustdr246]

I agree with josh's point that people should take the time to overcome their fears rather than running away but I feel that is the responsibility of the person not the game. I think accessibility settings like an arachnophobia mode can be compared to settings like an fov slider. Some people, when playing video games, see the screen moving in front of them and their brain cannot process that it is simply a computer screen, which induces vertigo when their vision tells them they are moving but other senses tell them they are not, and fov settings among other things can help alleviate these issues. I think it is the responsibility of developers to provide common accessibility settings for afflictions which affect a substantial portion of people, arachnophobia being somewhere around 2-6% of the population, where in some cases these people would be unable to play these games and have no control of their response.

[@andrewgreenwood9068]

exactly. also it is extremely important for exposure to not be too extreme because if it triggers a panic response it will further associate the object of fear with negative emotions.

[@happyninja42]

I'm 47, born in 1976, and I can confirm that our generation (while I'm technically not a boomer, my parents are) does align with how Josh describes them fairly well. As a guy, it was conditioned into us, both overtly and subtly that we are not allowed to show our emotions. Unless it was anger, any other emotion was ridiculed and would get you singled out and mocked to some degree or other. Even if they weren't trying to be mean about it. For example you might be at a movie with friends, and an emotional scene comes up that makes you get choked up or teary eyed. It's highly likely that someone (usually a girl) would point it out. "Look! X is crying!" Now this could go one of 2 ways, 1. they were actively trying to make you uncomfortable and mock you, or 2. They were simply trying to point out "Look! X is expressing emotions!" out of a surprised state. The problem is the reaction is the same. You are suddenly the center of attention, while you are in an emotionally vulnerable state, and you feel embarrassed and called out. So you push the reactions even further down, because you've learned from social reaction that if you show emotions, it will be exploited. So my generation tends to suppress them. Again, unless it's anger. That's always been acceptable for some bizarre reason.

[@Dharengo]

None of this has changed. Men still get ridiculed for having emotions. Especially by women. But generally by everyone.

[@bdelsouza]

"talking about how they feel and accepting other that feel different" the first half is true. the second half is an absolute lie and everybody knows it dudes are driving the Cancellation car proudly

[@snowmanzach2311]

I want the option to turn trigger warnings on or not. There's no topic that "triggers" me, but when I see a trigger warning I'm like "Oh, so that's the direction this story is going." So instead of following the story organically I'm then looking for those events because I was told it would be there.

[@gwen9939]

I can see this argument. Like, I recently watched a DnD actual play in a horror setting that had trigger warnings at the start, and I think they should be there, but also upon learning about them, now I know what to expect and if I know I don't have any particular triggers I'd rather not know. There are multiple ways to make them optional, like adding them in a separate description or even give a spoiler warning for them so you can skip them. It wasn't a big deal for me, but I can see it lessen some experiences you'd rather go in blind to.

[@designerwookiee]

It's been pretty wild doing Quality Control in corporate. Most of upper management get so offended that you would even bother to fact check THEIR reports, charts, etc. And then when you find something they're exactly the type to be, "Well that's rude. How dare you tell me that I'm wrong and that I need to fix it?" Like, nothing personal, bud. Just part of the job.

[@DeathScavenger420]

I never understood the hatred for spiders - They eat other bugs. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

[@ligmaphotons]

I don't like the fact that something that small can absolutely wreck your shit tbh

[@NevisYsbryd]

Partially biology, partly bigotry from conditioning. Centipedes are a relatively normalized pet in parts of East Asia whereas many people are averse to and/or scared of them. Modern generations have grown up in a cultural context that routinely reinforces a narrow subset of mammals and avian traits as normative and everything else as alien and dangerous if not outright malicious. Soft and fuzzy != safe or good. More people die from deer annually than sharks, wolves, or big cats in most "first world" countries, and dogs have one of the highest human kill counts globally (after a few parasites, snakes, and mosquitos).

[@JJSquirtle]

I used to have wicked vertigo and a massive fear of falling. Then at bootcamp they made me tightrope walk across a canyon with a harness. Needless to say I hated that sooo much and slipped off several times. But I no longer have any fear of heights, just a crippling fear of bridges

[@DTACGaming]

Going to have to disagree with the gen z accepting of people who are different

[@Silphiroth]

oh pls pls pls pls be a boomer and make this comment so so meta

[@DTACGaming]

Millennial @@Silphiroth

[@FF-tp7qs]

Josh has to be one of the most likeable people on KZbin It would be too hard to account for every single thing that could upset someone. If they can't take something being in the game, its up to them to either deal with the thing they don't like or to jsut choose to play another game.

[@Defixio.]

A video game...is the safe space to encounter a big ass spider. it can't hurt you. it's the place to get exposure.

[@ince55ant]

its low key the entire point of games existing. like as an ancient civilisational invention

[@n8doggy733]

in order to inflict exposure in this game you need a mod that allows you to inflict exposure on hit, or nearby enemies have blank exposure. 👍

[@Budehgong]

yeah but I can still see it if I close my eyes and every hair on my body feels like a spiders leg now

[@ikcikor3670]

From what I understand for some people it's on a more deep psychological level and way harder to overcome than standard fears one might have. I chatted with one small streamer once who played Deep Rock Galactic and it just didn't trigger his arachnophobia at all because the enemies looked different enough compared to actual spiders, so it's likely the subconscious pattern detection that triggers the fear

[@sameerdodger]

@@ince55ant i'm sorry what ancient game was invented to help with exposure therapy? i'm sure chess helped people get over their irrational fear of giant pawns and bishops that can only move diagonally

[@Silphiroth]

This comment section makes my IQ sink. Arachnophobia is not just a little fear you overcome. I love horror games and I get why you want to overcome fears. And yet if a game has spiders in them I CANNOT play them. Period. Some people should get down their horses and stop crying over people asking for OPTIONAL sliders. "Just don't play it then" is also extremely ignorant. I wanna be excited about a trailer I see - but I don't know if I even can play it until I know if it has spiders or not, Wu Kong being the best recent example. Can I be excited for Rise of the Ronin? Who tf knows! Its fucking annoying. Same goes for every new Resident Evil game, cause again, I love horror games.

[@GabeDelaSoul]

Mild take: There's a point of egocentrism in the expectancy that a game will include optional sliders for any type of phobia or trigger. To clarify, you're absolutely right, no issue in asking for them or wishing for them. What people shouldn't do is expect them, for two reasons: (Taking a horror game example here) 1. You as a customer, can not and will not play a game with spiders, unless you could turn em off. How many other customers are likely in your same boat on a completely differen type of fear? Blood, monsters, jumpscares, the dark, sounds of people screaming, gun shots, maybe even dogs (Re4 ex). You specifically appreciate the slider because it's your phobia, but you're also one customer out of millions for a game. The're an invisible market that a horror game won't touch, the "I don't play horror" crowd, and while you may love the genre, you're just falling inside that bracket for games with spiders in it. 2. Making a slider isn't as easy as people would assume. A game could have a whole level based on the monster or enemy mob you have a phobia about (Bloodborne ex). To replace the asset with something completely different means even more work for the animators, artists, riggers, and everyone along that chain. Games already suffer from bad crunch, so not having a slider they wished to have from some chalkboard meeting 2 years ago happens way too often. Indie games have the double-edged sword of being small enough to do it, but small enough that allocating resources for it means a huge cost of money and work. You may despise the answer of "Just don't play it then", but it is a valid answer, even if the people who say it are filled with snark. Thousands of people live right now with a fear of vehicles, not driving is an answer, even if it stunts their adult life to find employment. Is overcoming something that holds you back not the answer? No matter how challenging, isn't persevearance the goal to self improvement?

[@kai7692]

There are no end of phobias, you want a slider for all of them or just your specific one?

[@Tigatron1448]

Video games have always been a means to escape REALITY. The more we try to make them align with the real world, the more we take away from that magic. Sure, there's a place for games that cater to specific needs, but trying to apply that mentality to all games is a quick way to stifle creativity. Games can be an amazing way to help people learn to confront all kinds of different fears and constant warnings can just increase anxiety. Having these constant "safe spaces" where people don't have to ever contend with things that might challenge them or their ideas has proven to be disastrous. Yes, I'm proud that my son is so open with his feelings... it allows me to better understand his needs and help him. However, I do him nothing but harm if I try to constantly "protect" him from everything. We need that exposure... otherwise how else are we going to learn how to deal with the harsh realities of life?

[@androsh9039]

You clearly don't understand phobias, trauma, or PTSD. Rather than asking people to toughen up, maybe use empathy and see how you can help them have fun without getting psychological triggers?

[@Tigatron1448]

@androsh9039 my guy (or girl, or w/e)... I'm not going to sit here and just trauma dump my life story onto you... but I know a thing or two about phobias, trauma, and PTSD. I can tell you that one of the most harmful things people do for me is when they get overprotective and try to shield me from life. They get worried that something might trigger me and I'll try to kill myself again. It's a pretty crappy thing to go through life being scared and worried all the time. I have far more empathy than you realize... just because I want people to actually grow and get better doesn't make me some heartless monster. Life is objectively difficult... even when it's going great we have all kinds of daily challenges to face which can make things hard if we don't know how to deal with them. We need to recognize that there's a healthy middle ground between the stoicism of boomers and the emotional openness of our current generations. Again, I'm all for games catering to varying needs and providing different experiences for everyone. You want to make a "safe space" game for certain folks? Then by all means, go for it. Those games have a place and should be welcomed, but it shouldn't be an industry standard.

[@wrongthinker843]

@@androsh9039 Trauma survivors aren't there to be political tools for you, scumbag.

[@yourguysheppy]

There's already rating systems for games, why not include triggering content there? Give each game a 'phobia rating', and which ones it could trigger. The great thing about games is that for the most part, you can pause them, quit whenever you want, etc. Could be a great way for someone with arachnophobia to be exposed to spiders in a safe environment, for example, where they can exit whenever they want. Over time I feel like that could help people at least work through their fear when playing games, at the very least.

[@rextitan]

The thing about warnings is that there's research (although i don't believe its extensive,) that indicates they aren't likely to reduce the impact of the forewarned content but are more likely to actually make the person's reaction worse. I don't think they're the way in the specific case of content that might just make people uncomfortable.

[@sameerdodger]

it's not about making peoples' reactions better, it's about informing a person of the content in a piece of media. if you're a r*pe victim just minding your day watching some TV, you may not want to be reminded about the incident sometimes. sometimes you just want to go through your day without coming across that kind of thing, maybe you're feeling a bit vulnerable that day or you're just having a good day and don't want to be reminded of certain things. some r*pe scenes in movies are incredibly realistic, rightfully so to inform the viewer. but not everybody wants to watch a r*pe.

[@rextitan]

@@sameerdodger To be clear. That's not a situation that "might just make people uncomfortable," and is also accounted for by age rating boards for movies and tv for the most part. If a piece of media has sexual violence in it, it is noted alongside the suitable age rating.

[@myself2noone]

​@@sameerdodgerWhy is that a good in and of itself? Surely the objective should be to reduce harm. Not just vague notans of "consent" for the sake of it's self. And trigger warnings don't do that. They've never been shown to reduce people's distress, and have only ever been demonstrated to make things worse.

[@MalonzeProductionsGaming]

No, there should not be a trigger warning. I think they dumbest thing ever is the game grounded making spiders turn into blobs for people with arachnophobia. like.. if you have a crippling fear of spiders, WHY play a game about bugs and spiders?! Also games are fake. not real. I have a fear of anoles (no idea why, but I do) i also have a fear of frogs. and drowning.. i have killed lizards, frogs and have drowned in games and i dont go cry in a corner. If you are scared of pixels, you need to seriously put the controller down and go seek therapy

[@nathanlaleff4273]

They should have warnings because that thing that "triggers" could be very much the intent from the dev, whether that be a fear like aracnaphobia or a trauma like SA or kidnapping. There should definitely be a warning of content at game start and probably a setting for when it appears like in the Dead Space remake.

[@jacob-2271]

imagine buying a horror game and pressing a button to make it not scary anymore

[@MooncricketsInc]

You're the kind of idiot that probably finds everything and anything offensive and demands safe spaces online.

[@andrewgreenwood9068]

@@jacob-2271 imagine caring about a button existing in settings which doesnt effect you in any way

[@jacob-2271]

@andrewgreenwood9068 I simply don't understand what anyone can get out of a piece of media after twisting and contorting it to the point it's unrecognisable. If you don't like scary things, why would you buy a horror game and want it to not be scary instead of playing literally anything else that is just inately not scary? What do you get out of a horror story without the horror?

[@andrewgreenwood9068]

@@jacob-2271 neither do i but i also dont really care. there is no "right way" to engage with a piece of media and i am quite strongly against people who act like there is because a lot of them end up being strait up nazis

[@Sherudons]

Absolutely not, fear is a weakness, overcome it like a dark souls boss, or rage quit... To be fair, it's funny watching people with thalassophobia playing things like subnautica.

[@mm-yt8sf]

if there is a disable triggers...could there be a slider to set triggers to max? 🙂

[@exosproudmamabear558]

In my opinion warnings,genres and category tags should always be given prior to playing the game then warning right before the cutscene or the gameplay can be removed if the person wishes since the person notified this game has those things and decided these are not a problem. They dont need warnings to spoil the fun if they like. But as a ff writer and manhwa/manga reader myself I like warnings,they are necessary and useful so not adding them is not an option, giving an option to turn off them on the other hand is another matter.

[@Slysheen]

I think the warnings themselves are pretty useful. There is likely a cluster of the more common and serious ones that can be placed without it turning into a massive AO3 tag list. Making a version without wouldn't work though because of the problem of scope. Removing a spider is relatively simple, but how would you "remove" say high areas for Acrophobia or remove guns from a free roamer for a survivor of gun violence; without just making a fundamentally different game entirely. The warnings keep customers informed and lets them interact with the trigger by their own choice which I think is the best approach for a piece of entertainment.

[@SnoFitzroy]

I like this take. It's nice to be warned ahead of time so there's space to think clearly. A panicking mind doesn't have the capacity to make a good decision.

[@exosproudmamabear558]

Warnings are extremely important in entertainment and general genres should be used all the time such as romance,smut,bl,gl,tragedy,psychological,SA,gore,vore etc. since a game as much as it is about gameplay it is also about story and graphics. For other things such as small catogories like spiders,dark spaces, enemies to lovers etc. those can go to categories tag that you can look if you want to and will be pretty long list. Mangas ,manhwas and novels use these systems for years thanks to bakaupdates and novelupdates. It is weird that video games are only described with game type without proper warnings ,genres and category tags.

[@ahnmadehv51]

I think phobia and trauma should be distinct because being scared of spider and seeing one in game won't have a lot of effect and is probably fine but if I have a panic attack because you didn't warn me that your game has depiction of r*pe then we'll have a problem

[@gazz3867]

Grounded has a way to deal with spiders. It won't remove them but turn them into rather cartoonish versions.

[@vast634]

How about an option to turn zombies into happy clowns?

[@CyborgSelZero]

@@vast634 I would love that. That would be exactly my type of zanyness.

[@jippenfaddoul]

First off, I think trigger warnings are good - as it allows folks the agency to choose if they want to confront a trigger/phobia/etc at this time, rather than having a game designer force them into a decision of "Deal with this or never complete this thing you've purchased - and likely can't refund at this point". There are a certain number of gamers who are going to hit the "Well, you have to fight through the cave of nope halfway through the game" and will stop playing. Even worse is when your base game didn't have these issues - but they were added in a later patch/dlc. Now the game that was a safe and comfortable space no longer is. Allowing a basic menu toggle to turn common phobias/triggers on/off is good - a-la house flipper allowing you to deal with cockroaches... or not. Or change your mind mid game. Ideally, IMO - consider how these things interact with the game world, and if there is an in-game reason to have them -- or remove them. Fight your way through the cave of giant spiders OR climb up the mountain and do a quest for a mad warlock to replace all spiders with imps, cause his patron diety is at war with the spider diety. You can let players choose which way to go and have a more interesting game because of it. Also, especially for the big, super common phobias of spiders, snakes, and insects... consider them like other parts of the game design. If that cave is filled with orcs instead of spiders, does it change ANYTHING in the game? In Legend of Zelda, Ocarina of time... if you swap out the collectable spiders with, say, lizards - what effect does that have on the game world/feel/story? Also - hey, you needed an enemy for your action rpg and you went with bigass spider like every one of your competitors. So, if a gamer wants to play an action rpg without having to deal with a bigass spider - did you and your competition just team up to push that player out of the genre completely? Is that fair to your players, or were you just digging through the bin of tropes for something to use for that boss? Is that boss being a spider part of the vision and lore of the game in its whole, or could it have been something else without affecting the game? In a horror game about someone fighting through phobias and that - yeah, you probably need the spider boss. It should be there, and the game's marketing should have the general courtesies of "Here's what you're getting into, choose if you want to or not." If you're designing a puzzle game, do you need spiders to crawl across the screen whenever players pass through a spiderweb - several of which are mandatory in the first level? Probably not, but The Ball decided to go that direction for some reason. Unfortunately, they also did this before you could get refunds on games from steam, so the developer got the money and I got something I didn't want to play because of unskippable, undisclosed phobia triggers. I think a basic warning should be mandatory, as we already have in many places with movies. They're labeled in the movie ratings as "contains alcohol/drug use" for example, so someone struggling with a dependency issue may choose not to deal with that *right now*. I do think its irresponsible for game developers to spring these things on unsuspecting customers in the name of 'teaching them to deal with ', as they're not trained or aware of the individual issues/traumas/phobias that the players may have. Its not "creating a safe space to approach and deal with these issues" when you take a game thats been spider free for the first 10-20 hours, then suddenly have them start spawning in and dropping from the ceiling out of nowhere. Thats "Being a dick for the entertainment of the developer at the expense of the player", and I've seen many, many games do things like this.

[@andrewgreenwood9068]

if someone has a pannic attack because of seeing a spider in a game it will cause them to further associate spiders with negative experiences and make their arachnophobia worse (this is also a somewhat common way for people to pick up phobias they didnt have before). exposure therapy is about having positive and neutral experiences so they no longer trigger that response

[@Lightdark1992]

is he not using loot filter?I cant focus on what is he saying while haveng all that garbage on the floor

[@pvshka]

I'm surprised Twitch hasn't bullied him into using one yet m

[@Kingpin267]

Josh looks like one of those memes "No we have Henry Cavill at home"

[@ikuma8291]

I notice this when discussing random things with boomers (my boss/ older coworkers). There really is no discussion because they are not open to discuss the topic and have their mind set on the topic. Like everything they know is 100% fact. I'm not so young anymore, 31 but as I grew up I realized almost everything is bullshit anyways so its a little bit fun to share opinions/ discuss with other people without being serious.

[@bustoo]

My dad once said a leader can never be wrong. No matter how wrong they may actually be, they can't admit it because it would lose the respect of their peers. I've seen that thinking a lot sadly. All it does is make me respect you even less because you'll keep doing the stupid asinine thing instead of admitting your wrong and changing.

[@Puzzlesocks]

I mean, evidence suggests that personal bias is practically impossible to overcome. Personally I don't think it's feasible nor reasonable to have your mind open to anything. As my uncle used to say "You mustn't be so open-minded that I could hear the wind whistling through your ears where your brain used to be."

[@bustoo]

@@Puzzlesocks you definitely can't just accept everything everyone says as 100% fact. But you can go into a subject knowing you don't know everything about it, and when hard evidence is shown to counter what you think is true you shouldn't double down.

[@Puzzlesocks]

@@bustoo That's personal bias at play. It's not a matter of what you should or shouldn't do. That's just how our brains appear to operate. People like to think thoughts are intangible things that can easily be changed, but thoughts are the result of systems of connections in the brain that require literal rewiring to think something else. There are some methods to this, but if you ever go into a conversation with the hope that you will say something to change their opinion in the moment, then you are betting against biology. It works well during development because the brain has more plasticity and those connections are not yet formed. It's the difference between building a house and having to tear down a house to build a new one in its place. Edit: it should go without saying that this applies not only to development, but to completely novel situations. Completely novel situations and ideas are pretty rare as you get older though (especially in the information age), and even then we try to find similarities between a current thing/situation and our repository of information in the same way you decide to drive on the road instead of in the ditch.

[@levijonathansix]

Seeing Jaws gave me a phobia of being in wide-open water. Being forced to clean that grouper’s mouth in the Eely-Mouth’s Dentist stage of Super Mario Sunshine made me overcome it. Probably would have avoided the game if I knew about it with a trigger warning. When I first saw the Grouper’s glowing yellow eyes I screamed but I was having so much fun until that point in the game that I didn’t want that to be the end of my adventure so I simply toughed it out despite having crazy high anxiety spikes being in that thing’s mouth.

[@vadimakdav1357]

11:07 can't wait for every game to have an infinitely big list of all the "potentially offensive" things the game contains, similar to license agreements

[@Fionor01]

It doesn't need to be long. Just most common phobias and potentially offensive topics - or, more specifically executions of said topics. It's mostly okay to portray (for example) racism in period specific game and be critical about it, but it might be triggering for POC to be exposed to prolonged scenes of racial violence portrayed as funny bit (in same vein as particular FPS game handled shooting at civilians at airport). Also, some warnings are obsolete with a territory - Dark Souls doesn't need trigger warning about body horror. Resident Evil games will probably show a lot of blood. Wolfenstein will have nazis (unavoidable topic even in Germany where the game didn't show swastikas, because of laws against showing them).

[@PP-ok2xt]

The call of duty bit wasn't played for laughs though...

[@wrongthinker843]

@@Fionor01 "potentially offensive topics" So, literally everything?

[@Fionor01]

@@wrongthinker843 That's a strawman argument. Try harder.

[@Fionor01]

@@PP-ok2xt But it was act of terrorism carried by player, who had no agency in it (no option to refuse said act of violence against innocent). It was heavily criticized just because of that.

[@jippy33]

There is a phobia for everything, making the ideal game one with a blank screen.

[@zeidrichthorene]

Should japan just pack up and evacuate their country because of earthquakes. Or do they learn to earthquake-proof their buildings? The people who say "move the village", I think its a fair question but we rarely stop to ask what we lose when we avoid the uncomfortable thing. When we let emotion take over and run away out of fear we can lose a lot and not even face it, because we can't even always recognize what we're leaving behind when we get so caught up in what we're scared of. It also teaches us that avoidance is the tool. So when we run away, later we find ourselves in another uncomfortable situation where we need to run again. And when we're always running we never have a chance to ever build something big enough to not want to run away from. So we also feel no reason not to. This can be relationships, jobs, community, dreams, whatever.

[@Jan12700]

10:00 That's also why you should do Back-Ups of your Stuff. No backup, no pity 16:05 For me it always depends on the circumstances. When I learn something, I just have to break things like that. If you remove the fence and see what breakes, it's more effective to see it than reading through things and finding out why it's there. This can also be effective when things are stuck in a rut, otherwise you won't adapt to changing situations. It could be that the fence was useful years ago but is no longer of any use and is holding you back. This is also the approach of SpaceX and why they did create the first Reused Rocket, they removed the fence that other Space agencies didn't wanted to remove and this is why SpaceX succeeded.