[games_access] forums

d. michelle hinn hinn at uiuc.edu
Sat Dec 1 18:01:39 EST 2007

What I mean is with regard to ease of use and accessibility (it would
be weird to have a non-accessible accessibility forum). :) I was
hoping that some of the more "webby" amongst us can guide us as to
which kind of forum is best for the most people.


>Hi Michelle. I'm not sure what you mean by advantage over one forum design

>over another can you explain please? The way it's laid out for colors I'm

>not sure it matters is there something that matters?




>-----Original Message-----

>From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]

>On Behalf Of d. michelle hinn

>Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 5:30 PM

>To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List

>Subject: Re: [games_access] forums


>Hey Barrie,


>Well, unfortunately that brings us back to the issue of the "new"

>IGDA web stuff that was (I thought) about to roll out over the

>summer. It's my understanding that they are going to "upgrade" the

>forums, SIG websites, etc but to what I don't know. So it's a good

>idea to ask -- but the general gist I've been getting has been that

>everything is going into the "new" stuff.


>But I also understand that we are really scattered already with our

>stuff so the fewer redirects we have the more "together" our site

>will look and feel. Any thoughts about the advantage of one forum

>design over another?




>>Why don't we go back to using our original official IGDA forum -

>>which we have more control over? Any thoughts?





>>We could ask the IGDA nicely to add a bit more functionaility (e.g.

>>the ability to add images with ALT text facility - videos etc.).






>>----- 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 4:05 PM

>>Subject: Re: [games_access] GDC 2008: VERY Bad News


>>>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


>>>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



>>>>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.




>>>>games_access mailing list

>>>>games_access at igda.org





>>>>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






>>games_access mailing list

>>games_access at igda.org




>games_access mailing list

>games_access at igda.org




>games_access mailing list

>games_access at igda.org


More information about the games_access mailing list