[games_access] Legislating for Game Accessibility

Matthias Troup foreversublime at hotmail.com
Thu Dec 20 15:54:52 EST 2007


People don't want other people to *tell* them how/what to do their ^job^ much less be *forced* to compromize their ^passion^.

Then again, as a designer I love to play games and preach how x or y could have been done "correctly". Hypocrite is me? Ha!

-Matt> From: barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk> To: games_access at igda.org> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:00:31 +0000> Subject: Re: [games_access] Legislating for Game Accessibility> > I'm not 100% on either side of this fence - but the phrase "reasonable > adjustments" doesn't ask for universal accessibility anyway. That said, your > "rob them of time and money" does sound like some of the protests shop > keepers were making pre "Disability Discrimination Act". I think slowly > people get used to these concepts.> > How could "reasonble adjustments" be made reasonable with video games. I'm > not 100% sure to be honest. I just don't think it's anywhere near as > frightening as some people seem to think it is.> > Barrie> > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tess Snider" <this at malkyne.org>> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 12:33 AM> Subject: Re: [games_access] Legislating for Game Accessibility> > > > On Dec 19, 2007 11:06 AM, Barrie Ellis <barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk> > > wrote:> >> So if an expectancy of "reasonable adjustments" in commercial software > >> was> >> introduced (which I truly belive will eventually happen) how badly would > >> the> >> artistic side of things be affected? What is reasonable is the tricky> >> point... But I didn't see too many shop keepers crying about giving > >> greater> >> access to shoppers with different abilities.> >> > You're comparing apples and oranges. You can't just bolt a ramp onto> > a game, and call it accessible.> >> > There are some types of entertainment experiences that are simply> > incompatible with certain disabilities. This is not due to> > insensitivity on the part of the artists, but the very nature of the> > experience. Someone who is vision impaired, but not blind, might> > really enjoy the extra-large picture provided by IMAX movies, while> > someone who is completely blind will get no benefit from the giant> > screen.> >> > A lot of audio-only games for blind players are made by small,> > independent developers. Many of them are labors of love. Would you> > force these folks to invest extra time and money to develop a version> > of their game that could be played by deaf players? Would you rob> > them of the time and money that they might have put towards making> > more games for the blind? Legislation can hurt the very people we are> > trying to help.> >> > I continue to believe that the push for accessibility labeling> > standards is the right approach. This does not mandate accessibility,> > but it does create market pressure, and get companies thinking about> > how they can tick off more checkboxes. I guarantee you, you'd see> > much more widespread coverage for at least the low-hanging fruit (e.g.> > captioning, visual cues for auditory alerts, configurable controls,> > etc.) than you do right now. As it is, it's hard to get companies to> > even remember that some people are left-handed!> >> > Tess> > _______________________________________________> > 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
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20071220/5af8fd89/attachment.htm>

More information about the games_access mailing list