[games_access] GDC: in retrospect

[Ben Sawyer]

First, the Serious Accessibility for Serious Games Panel -- I'm not  
sure why we had an auditorium nor do I know why it was increased to  
60 minutes (from the proposed 45 minutes). I think the Serious Games  
people like to think that they care more about accessibility because  
they are the ones that have the legal obligation to do so. But in the  
end...we know we barely had people in the room for that session. So  
that's a constant baffling bit for me.


There are no serious games people in this case... it's just me.   
Legal obligation???  Yes that's part of it but I also run games for  
health and I'm amazed at some of the actual applications and games  
that can be made too and further I just think this is a really cool  
thing for games in general.  If you want to know what I think my  
email is plastered everywhere and if people want me easily enough my  
AIM is BENSAWYER.  Pop me a question at any moment.

Why you were in the big room may have been a snafu of late  
rearrangement of the schedule -- you were supposed to be in a smaller  
room.  You were increased to 60 minutes because I figured you had a  
lot to say and its a panel and thus 45 minutes may have been too  
small.  We can certainly work closer to help hone things.  As far as  
I'm concerned I will keep booking accessibility sessions at all  
serious games/games for health events regardless of what people say  
or how many show up because eventually it's going to settle in.  The  
attendance at Robert's session at Games for Health was pretty strong  
I believe.

In looking at the posts in general I really think you're all being  
very hard on yourselves.  Numbers don't matter if you get the right  
people and build the network further.  The numbers will eventually  
follow even if it takes longer then it did for others.  I struggled  
for two straight GDCs with 30-40 people.

I think one of the things you might need to do is figure out how to  
get more attention from some critical people who can help more and  
help you grow the network.  Have any of you spent time talking to  
Jamil Moledina at all?  If not I'm happy to talk to him more about  
things.  GDC has grown now to the point where there may be other  
avenues like a booth on the floor in North Hall that could help you  
much more then a 5th extra session...

Also as I relayed to Michelle briefly before your panel I'm working  
on a new setup for our Games for Health conference for May 2008 and I  
want to create an entire daylong conference within a conference  
focused on accessibility.  I'm working specifically on this idea and  
will be in touch with Michelle shortly on it.  It would have its own  
agenda you control, it's own marketing, price for specific entry and  
facilities.  I'm working also if we can define it enough within our  
next grant proposal for it to have its own funding.  Lots of promises  
but that's the trajectory I'm trying to go on because I believe in  
the work.  I really think that through Games for Health we can  
attract a very big crowd for a standalone event.  I see this as a  
conference that could be profitable in its own small right and  
eventually have 100+ attendees.  I'm crossing my fingers I can  
organize the proper investment for it.

So please I hope you don't see it just as legal obligation -- there  
are initially some huge concerns there as people could use legal  
hurdles to accessibility to fight serious games in gov't using it as  
a technicality when their objections are otherwise but beyond that I  
and others in the community have much deeper interests in a broad  
range of applications.

One thing the SIG might want to do is create an industry advisory  
board of people who might help further things a bit more and provide  
advice on how to get in the doors of places you want to get into.   
There are many other things you can do and I'm happy to try and help  
provide ideas and contacts.

You're not bumping up against failure -- you're bumping up against  
success.

- Ben