[games_access] GDC 2008: VERY Bad News

Sat Dec 1 13:22:50 EST 2007

By the way: found a later version of that document:

http://www2.hku.nl/~mosh/ga/gatheoryshort029.doc

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "AudioGames.net" <richard at audiogames.net>
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [games_access] GDC 2008: VERY Bad News

> Hi,
>
> Well, me? > 1) See my doc, which I think is the best attempt to capture 
> game accessibility so far. I anyone disagrees PLEASE :) tell me... :)
>
> Greets,
>
> Richard
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Bannick" <jbannick at 7128.com>
> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 6:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [games_access] GDC 2008: VERY Bad News
>
>
>> Michelle,
>>
>> Well put.
>>
>> So OK. I volunteer to assemble, contribute to, and be responsible for 
>> delivery of Item 1.
>>
>> This means:
>>
>> 1. Getting from you good folks any work in progress you want to share, 
>> synthesizing it into something that works, getting a quick review by 
>> anyone here who is interested, and delivering a first cut of SIG Game 
>> Accessibility Criteria.
>>
>> 2. Getting from anyone here who wants to contribute, and contributing to, 
>> a list of target developers, organizations, institutions, and 
>> distributors we send this to, getting a quick review, and delivering a 
>> first cut Distribution List.
>>
>> 3. Writing a first draft cover letter /  promo piece, that is sent with 
>> the Criteria, getting a quick review, and delivering this first cut Cover 
>> Letter.
>>
>> All of the above sent to you, Michelle NLT 15 January, 2008.
>> That way you get the volunteer work, you maintain control, and everyone 
>> is included.
>>
>> BTW. This isn't nearly as formidable as developing coding standards for 
>> the 50 engineers who did the software that laid out the NY Times, and 
>> surviving the process.
>>
>> Does this work for you, Michelle?
>>
>> John Bannick
>>
>> At 12:24 PM 12/1/2007, you wrote:
>>>All of the things John mentions are projects we have talked about and/or 
>>>taken passes at (the top ten list from two years ago and now the new 
>>>project that Barrie has started up, etc). Others have brought up other 
>>>ideas that we've either done or attempted and then the projects lost 
>>>momentum. All these things are great but there's a problem...these things 
>>>also take active volunteers in the SIG and from that perspective our 
>>>numbers are low. So we need people who are willing to put in the time and 
>>>may/may not get any reimbursement for that time and every project cannot 
>>>be started and maintained by me.
>>>
>>>So instead of continuing to criticize ourselves (I know...I started it 
>>>but I was really mad after killing myself over the proposals at 
>>>deadline), the industry, the GDC etc...who from WITHIN this SIG can put 
>>>in the time needed for these things AND actually follow through? No, it's 
>>>not fair that we aren't in a position to reimburse people for time and 
>>>that won't change in the near future. But it's something that will have 
>>>to change and it will change but we can't just wait for that day to come 
>>>(because it won't come if we don't put in the sweat equity now). People 
>>>need to honestly commit the time and work because they believe in making 
>>>change. Take some of that anger and tell me what YOU are willing to do to 
>>>help us make change. Take ownership of something on behalf of the SIG. 
>>>Ideas are great...but we need people who will put in the work so that the 
>>>"SIG" is able to do these things.
>>>
>>>So who will join in putting in some volunteer time so that these ideas 
>>>can become reality?
>>>
>>>Michelle
>>>
>>>>Reid is right.
>>>>
>>>>There are developers right now who want their work to be accessible.
>>>>
>>>>This SIG could right now facilitate that by:
>>>>
>>>>1. Providing, distributing, and publicizing a concise, specific set of 
>>>>functional criteria that define what means accessible.
>>>>2. Compiling, publishing, and publicizing an annual list of which 
>>>>companies and games meet those criteria.
>>>>3. Maintaining a forum (The currently rather drifting Game Accessibility 
>>>>Project comes to mind) where developers can go for immediate help.
>>>>
>>>>I'm a developer of games that are accessible.
>>>>Have shipped 22 different revenue-generating products in a wide variety 
>>>>of vertical markets in the last 30 years.
>>>>Am neither stupid nor lazy.
>>>>And don't see any of the 3 above items.
>>>>
>>>>None of the 3 items should take long to build as a first cut.
>>>>
>>>>And if not from this SIG, then from where?
>>>>
>>>>John Bannick
>>>>CTO
>>>>7-128 Software
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>At 02:26 AM 12/1/2007, you wrote:
>>>>>Please, can we stop with the negative talk about GDC and the game
>>>>>industry? I work in the game industry for LucasArts. Just last week I
>>>>>talked to a highly respected programmer and he's 100% behind us and
>>>>>wants to talk about what we can do to improve accessibility in our
>>>>>games after our current milestone is finished. There are dozens of
>>>>>people at LucasArts that support game accessibility. Nintendo totally
>>>>>gets it, EA Games totally gets it with their Family Play modes in
>>>>>their sports games. Peter Molyneux gets it, Will Wright... the list
>>>>>goes on and on.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's offensive to me when people of this SIG accuse developers of not
>>>>>caring because WE DO CARE. The last thing you want to do is insult the
>>>>>people you have to work with. It's the quickest way to turn them away
>>>>>from our cause.
>>>>>
>>>>>So, instead of complaining, lets do something about it! First,
>>>>>everyone here needs to understand what it's like for developers and
>>>>>why it's so hard for them to adopt accessibility features.
>>>>>
>>>>>1. Limited financial resources - Games are very expensive to make and
>>>>>any new features adds to the cost. Before you can add accessibility
>>>>>features you must have a game and that's where most of the money is
>>>>>spent first.
>>>>>
>>>>>2. Limited time - Game development is incredibly complex and hard to
>>>>>tame. No matter how much extra time gets budgeted into the production
>>>>>schedule, it always runs out well before all tasks are complete. When
>>>>>this happens, features get cut in order to save the core of the game
>>>>>and again, without a game, there can't be any accessibility features.
>>>>>Because this usually happens so late, there isn't enough time to work
>>>>>on accessibility features before the game has to ship.
>>>>>
>>>>>3. Limited information - Even if a developer was pro-active and
>>>>>scheduled the development of accessibility features into the games'
>>>>>development schedule, there's still a major lack of knowledge and
>>>>>tools that enable them to do their job. The SIG has been thinking
>>>>>about accessibility features for years and we have all the solutions,
>>>>>but developers don't yet. We need to make ourselves known and readily
>>>>>available to help them.
>>>>>
>>>>>What can we do to solve these issues? We need to develop our
>>>>>relationships with developers and offer our assistance. Our attempts
>>>>>to work with GarageGames is a good start. When a new game is announced
>>>>>we should contact them and offer our expertise.
>>>>>
>>>>>We have GOT to get a website up so that we can communicate our
>>>>>abilities and expertise to our target audiences (game developers).
>>>>>
>>>>>But there are technical issues and many of us are volunteers and so
>>>>>things move very slowly.
>>>>>
>>>>>Several of us are writing guidelines for implementing certain features
>>>>>but again, this is a slow process. Others are doing research. Going to
>>>>>conferences is awesome. Writing articles to Gamasutra is great as
>>>>>well.
>>>>>
>>>>>Eitan is right, we have to "sell" our expertise. It's not that
>>>>>developers don't care, they don't know that they SHOULD care.
>>>>>
>>>>>-Reid
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>games_access mailing list
>>>>>games_access at igda.org
>>>>>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>>Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.11/1161 - Release Date: 
>>>>>11/30/2007 12:12 PM
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>games_access mailing list
>>>>games_access at igda.org
>>>>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>games_access mailing list
>>>games_access at igda.org
>>>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 
>>>269.16.12/1163 - Release Date: 12/1/2007 12:05 PM
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access 