I mean, if it wasn’t obvious that you were trolling before it certainly proven now, but still, I like the McDonald’s Coffee case so I’ll talk about it:
A lady spilled coffee on herself in a McDonalds and she sued them for the damages she experienced from it - insane burns and permanent scarring but it became known as a “I will sue you foe any kind of reason”-case, due to the naming convention of it
BUT when they were examining it McDonalds was found to serve LUDICROUSLY hot coffee, as in way, way above what was a normal temperatures
So no, it wasn’t a case of “Warning given and ignored” or “Warning not given and required”, it’s a case of that the coffee itself was a SERIOUS health risk due to the temperature it was served at (which is also why she was rewarded like 80% of it, as 20% was determined to have been her own negligence for spilling it onto herself)
So… your example actually works against you, as it had nothing to do with warnings but the actual question of “Is this a serious health risk people are unaware of and subjecting themselves to unknowingly” which… it were much so was in the McDonald’s Lava-Coffee case, but not at all in the case you are posing here in terms of photosensitivity, even more so with there being options you can turn off and on in the settings
Never used the term I just call them auras I guess they are the same ,where patterns block you vision due to stress factors. And yeah, it does get unbearable.
Europe is laughing you can chop off your arm on McDonald’s and even if it is their fault you get like (maybe) 100-1000 dollar or just a excuse and 0 dollar.
There is a warning as part of the terms of service. If you acknowledge them without reading them that is your business but Blizzard is complying with the law by giving fair notification to individuals with photosensitivity.
No, she won because McDonald’s refused to pay her medical bills, then she sued the court granted her the money. The manager was known for fast boiling the coffee
You don’t have to legally warn someone of…well, anything, in a game or a video or whatever. Not sure how someone would possibly file a lawsuit over a flash effect in a video game.
He said your example works against you because the question of the “Lava-Coffee” McDonald’s case was, “Is this a serious health risk of which people are unaware and to which people are unknowingly subjecting themselves”, in which case it was.
In your case, though, it isn’t, because there are options you can turn off in the settings. On top of that, Tyzzi mentions the seizure warning in the manuals of the core game and its expansions, which I will here quote for your convenience:
and at a point, you have to start questioning the user when they use a product KNOWN to do something that might adversely affect them and then complain about it.
yeeeaahhh…use a frivolous lawsuit gone hippie haywire to prove that ALL companies should be held liable for the lack of intelligence of the consumer. lol
“Our photosensitivity law suit settlement cost us a raid tier. Thank the people who played video games but did not expect light and colors to be on their screen.”
you can chop off your arm on McDonald’s and even if it is their fault you get like (maybe) 100-1000 dollar or just a excuse and 0 dollar.