[games_access] Reminder: Online Meeting for Games AccessibilitySIG

[AudioGames.net]

Hi Thomas (and list),

This is a very late reply to one of your posts but here is my comment:

***quote
Keynote speakers were e.g from W3C WAI, Judy Brewer and and a guy from Adobe presenting new accessibility features in Acrobat 7.

I also found some time to speak to Judy Brewer about the possibility of some bilateral collaboration between the GA-SIG and W3C WAI. I still have to follow up on this, but she said informal relations were very easy to set up, and that should be a good starting point.
***quote end

Where I work (Accessibility foundation) we have good ties with Judy for several years (just this week we developed a cool brochure on web accessibility, which Judy assisted in editing). Although I have not yet spoken to her personally, my boss has (almost weekly actually). He has been spreading the word about game accessibility and the projects we have done (Drive, Demor) to Judy for quite some time now and I know she is interested in the subject.
At this years ICCHP Sander and me met with several people from the W3C and we (also informally)discussed the possibilities of an 'Initiative', similar to WAI, but then for games. Without reading your white paper (which was not yet released then), we discussed issues like having a validating tool for game accessibility, a logo/mark for accessible games and design principles/checkpoints for accessible games.

The people from W3C, having years of experience with these, did see a lot of complications and very little possibilities. Funding was one thing, since hardly any government will put money into entertainment, even with arguments like edutainment and revalidation. Our solution is asking a major party like EA to do the funding, for instance in developing a branch-logo for game accessibility (which means EA can sell more games if they have a "i am accessible for deaf people"-logo on the cover).
Unfortunately, other issues that we talked about, we still do not have an answer to.

When is a game accessible? When it is playable? When the experience is 100% the same between disabled gamers and regular gamers? How do you validate this? How can one develope checkpoints for games when the definition of the medium itsself ("game") is still heavily debated by ludologists all over the world. Not to mention the fact that I have encountered a large group of blind gamers who almost refuse to take notice of "other" disabilities and who seem to focus primarely on "their own type of game accessibility". 
Even if one can test the accessibility of games, how do you design a mark/logo for it? One for all disabilities? Like: "this game is accessible for the visually, hearing, mentally and physically disabled"? Is that possible? And is that what is needed? Or would we like to split up game accessibilty into small parts like having different logo's: "this is a blind-accessible game" + "this is a deaf-accessible game" + "this is a dyslexia-accessible game", etc. ?

And about the checkpoints? There are already checkpoints for accessible software. At work I sometimes collaborate with the Software In Sight-foundation, a foundation that tests the accessiblity of educational software. They have defined two types of accessible software: one that is accessible with assistive technologies and one that is accessible all by itsself. Now, the checkpoints they use are VERY hard to apply to games. For instance: "don't use time-based actions". What if the fun/challenge of a game is completely about timing/having very little time to complete a certain task? Of course, this checkpoint was not designed for games. But with the folks from the W3C we found out that defining such checkpoints for interactive processes with ever-changing challenges is a lot harder than it may seem at first.

The conclusion of the evening was that the methods of the W3C are not easily applied to games. If we are to start a (similar) Initiative for game accessibility, then we should look closely to what is possible and not simply copy the W3C methodology (not that anyone has claimed that, don't want to tread on anyone's toes :). As far as I can see, I think we have to define a methodology for game accessibility ourselves.

Okay, this started as a simple reply just to say that we're in contact with the W3C already :) I'll let you know when I know more. 

Now a question: did anyone here try to define a list of checkpoints for game accessibility already? Maybe we could discuss such a list on this emailgroup?
Just in case, let's start here (this is just from the top of my head so we have something to talk about; some of the things are maybe absurd, let's hear it then!):

- Provide a visual equavalent for any auditory information (which is the opposite to...) >>> subtitles
- Provide an auditory equavalent for any visual information
- Support controller alternatives: for any type of controller (mouse, joystick, game controller, etc... provide an alternative: keyboard, eye controller, speech commands)
- Use clear language: avoid difficult language
- Avoid color communication: make sure that any information provided by color has an alternative
- Let players set the speed of the game
- Let players set the difficulty of the game
- Avoid flickering (includes heavy explosions?)
- (anyone)

Gotta go now, greetings!

Richard

http://www.audiogames.net 
http://www.gameaudiodesign.com 
http://www.soundsupport.net




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20041210/ad0bb8eb/attachment.htm>