[games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

Javier javier.mairena at gmail.com
Tue Jul 6 11:08:37 EDT 2010


I think MMOs will be always a favorite genre for another reason, besides all
that you have already commented: socialization.

All of us like to socialize, but much more if several times you have felt
discriminated, like a lot of disabled gamers have felt.

So disabled gamers want more games for them, but i think they will prefer
games with multiplayers modes to play with others, even if they are disabled
or not.

I think we must think of more things that only accessibility options or
design for choosing the reasons of a favorite genre ;)

2010/7/6 Michelle Hinn <hinn at uiuc.edu>


> Gotta run to the Amtrak station but I agree 100% that we are all on the

> same team. We can discuss here and at AbleGamers and other places that are

> safe for us to see each others points of view. I agree that our individual

> specialities and interests have some great differences but I see your

> point(s) just as you see mine. All have value and all are complex and so

> often individual.

>

> I definitely did not mean or want to suggest that AbleGamers where it

> started is in the same place now -- there's been so much growth that perhaps

> an original core group was more MMO oriented but things have greatly

> expanded.

>

> In the end...we all want the same thing. More accessible games -- and

> that's true no matter if you are more industry or academic slanted or of

> mainstream or specialized gaming. But just don't let the rest of the

> industry catch on! ;)

>

> And Chuck's game(s) are brilliant! I have in my own ways supported it

> wholeheartedly and it's a shame that EA won't let him send it overseas. :(

> Because it's no doubt EXCELLENT work on so many levels. What disappoints me

> so much is that Star and Stripes paid it no mind...that is the real crime.

> :(

>

> And I understand the personal aspect of feeling like, for every individual,

> the "giving in" point is set at a different level. No shame in any personal

> value mark -- life is a trade off of many many things and what is easily let

> go of for one person is another person's rallying cry! :)

>

> And I also agree that I'd much rather get the first person accounts from

> 1000 gamers than figure out the almighty dollar survey questions. To me?

> That's where the REAL heart of gaming lies. Perseverance is always what is

> going to be much more of a call for action for most than anything that

> market for company ABC will ever want or be convinced by.

>

> We're all in good company here. We may disagree but our hearts and passions

> are in the right place.

>

> Ok...onto the train!!

>

> Michelle

>

> On Jul 6, 2010, at 4:11 AM, Steve Spohn wrote:

>

> [replying to the most recent e-mail as to keep the conversation all

> included - forgive the length of the e-mail]

>

> To Barries email:

>

> You might be correct about the intent of the author to focus on one group

> with two disabilities, we would need clarification to be sure. Just to be

> forward about the fact that I did speak with several individuals both in

> real life and on-line who confirmed that they believed it was speaking about

> two groups that share the same barriers, I requested outside opinions

> because I wondered about that sentence as well.

>

> YouTube is an excellent place to find videos of exceptional players. I've

> seen the videos of people who can play professional level first-person

> shooters with sip & puff. I've even interviewed N0MAD who uses his face to

> play games quite remarkably. But we will have to agree to disagree on the

> abilities of one-switch gamers. Especially as it is your particular area of

> expertise, whereas mine is in motion impaired.

>

> There are no doubts that for individuals who can only use one input any

> game we can give them to continue gaming is a victory as far as I'm

> concerned. However, I do believe that video games are nothing more at their

> core than finding multiple inputs. Therefore, if you continue adding one

> switch upon one switch you increase the complexity of video game that the

> individual can participate in.

>

> Also, no one really gets into the quality of gameplay in most discussions.

> Take for example, I enjoy playing counterstrike source on occasion even

> though it is outdated. When I do play its not impressive, I'm relatively

> bad at it because I have not purchased enough accessible technology to get

> the required inputs. I run only forward with the ability to turn and shoot

> (6 inputs) - after having hundreds of conversations with other gamers who

> use similar tricks of shaving off inputs can be a viable way to play.

>

> Again, I believe the caveats of this conversation is where you set the bat

> of who is disabled and who is critically disabled, to use the author's

> terms. Critically disabled to me, is the point where no accessible

> technology featured on either of our sites can help the gamer and they are

> purely down to one button. At that point, only the exceptional gamer will

> be able to continue to play commercial RPG's.

>

> However, as long as someone is able to use some of the head mice as we have

> covered on AbleGamers or EyeGaze mice as was covered on one switch, playing

> RPGs is viable. At least some. I could turn this into a very long e-mail

> but suffice it to say that also depends on which game you choose. World of

> Warcraft requires no reading you can simply follow the arrow and go kill

> stuff, whereas something like oblivion requires in depth reading and

> comprehension of complex quest chains.

>

> Furthermore, my comments often call upon on my own experience coupled with

> the discussions I have with disabled gamers in our community. For the most

> part, what I hear again and again is that first-person shooters are the most

> difficult genre and the first most motor impaired gamers give up.

>

> Which is kind of what I was getting at by my disheartening comment, which

> I'm glad was understood. And it was not aimed at this paper in particular.

> I do enjoy reading white papers such as the one by Eleanor and Stephanie,

> and this one, and others, but they don't ever going to talk to actual people

> (actual gamers).

>

> I do not personally have the desire to write white papers, but if I did, I

> would love to make one where I would go out and personally speak to 100 or

> 1000 gamers and compare the ways that they game as opposed to relying on

> statistics and census numbers.

>

> To Michelle’s email:

>

> Indeed an interesting question to which I honestly do not know the answer.

> I disagree that people who enjoy MMOs gravitate towards AbleGamers over

> other genres but if the reason that it appears so is because World of

> Warcraft is such an amazingly large juggernaut of a videogame… that is

> something I can't answer because it's entirely possible and let's face it

> World of Warcraft changed how we view video games (150k used to be an

> amazing amount of subscribers and now it is considered a failure).

>

> On to the rest of the e-mail, although we all have our differences of

> opinions on this sig, I am in complete agreement with you that the

> developers only care about the bottom line, well I should say that the

> investors care only about the bottom line. I have interviewed plenty of

> developers who generally care but either don't know about disabilities or in

> a few situations were told that they could not spend the time needed to

> include accessibility.

>

> I also agree that when approaching developers we must use the standpoint of

> the almighty dollar. However, when we are speaking amongst ourselves as we

> are now, it honestly boggles my mind why most of these conversations revolve

> around statistics and figures.

>

> I remember when Chuck from VTREE flew off the handle at the bickering back

> and forth. One of his comments was that these types of lists often make for

> a lot of conversation but very little actual action. Which is generally

> where my opinion comes from as well. Take for example the wonderful

> MyFootball game his company produced, which I purchased a copy of, that

> videogame complies with everything we ever want from any developer.

>

> Yet, other than the extreme amount of coverage that AbleGamers gave - the

> title was largely shoved under the rug. Now, please don't misunderstand

> that comment as touting the AG line or a slam against any other website.

> I'm simply bringing up the fact that we can get what we want but in the end

> is it really what we want?

>

> Although this e-mail has already horrendously long, I would like to give

> you a brief example. I've recently been reviewing one particular video game

> that has every single feature AG looks for in the accessible game of the

> year award. I'm not going to give that title away until we run the feature,

> but suffice it to say the game has built in auto-pilot with the ability to

> kill monsters what one button push only one time. One button push to turn in

> quests. One button push to make your character Ron where you want to go. The

> environment is fully developed and 3D with World of Warcraft type graphics.

>

> That's everything we want developers to do. It's friendly for the motion

> impaired, it has changeable colors and fonts for the visually impaired, it

> has quests that can be completed but only pushing one button for the

> cognitively impaired and it has everything subtitled or close captioned.

>

> But after reviewing the title for two weeks.. I was BORED and I mean like

> amazingly bored. This has fundamentally changed my opinions on what we want

> in videogames. I believe it is now more important than ever to tread the

> waters between accessibility and what the nondisabled fear the most “dumbing

> down games.”

>

> I also dislike absolute statements or so-called one solution fits all. I

> was very pleased when our accessible game of the year award went to a game

> that included the cognitively impaired because they often are overlooked in

> AAA gaming because of the nature of the games themselves.

>

> And I do not take offense at your Asterix comment. I completely agree, no

> matter how I come off to the sig, or developers, or the community at AG it

> is never my intention to say that one of us has superior solutions to

> accessibility issues. As far as I'm concerned, if a tin can and some string

> allows you to play a video game then great I have done my job and I feel

> good about it.

>

> However, yes there is always a however, it is absolute human nature to

> formulate plateaus or mile markers of success and defeat. Therefore, I

> believe there are solutions that imply giving up. Personally, and I have

> gone on record in gaming magazines as saying this, I view using sip & puff

> as a defeat.

>

> Categorically when you are at the point when you need to use such a device

> you have already exhausted most other means currently available from

> assistive technology today. Although, that statement is slightly false

> because it is now the 3rd from last resort as you can turn to IR and Eye

> technologies when all else fails. Still, on a personal level that is my

> opinion of being defeated for myself.

>

> On an even more personal note, I viewed having to go to using Dragon

> NaturallySpeaking to do my typing as a defeat. But it increased my

> productivity but nearly 1000%... it's difficult to argue with going for

> something that makes you be able to accomplish more in a day but that didn't

> stop me from feeling like I was giving up on typing.

>

> Now, where I will agree with you is that it should be up to the individual

> to as to what is considered necessary for the optimal quality-of-life. The

> cochlear implant is an excellent example because each disabled community has

> its own version of what they considered to be “last ditch effort.” But, I

> think anyone would be hard-pressed to argue that almost everyone has the

> so-called mile markers.

>

> Maybe it's how much money is in your bank account, what job title you have

> finally managed to get to when you thought you would be higher by the end of

> your career or a certain point, what types of amenities you can afford, what

> level of skill you possess, what movement you have remaining, etc. I

> believe everyone has something that they look down upon and say to them

> selves “at least I'm not at that point yet.”

>

> And finally, to both of your points about discussions. No, discussion is

> rarely a bad thing. There is some underlying bad blood between different

> groups. But I found even at that after people with their heckles down - the

> sharing of the viewpoints is the only way to see something from outside of

> your own shoes.

>

> I think that's why I have such a unique investment in AbleGamers. This is

> not an academic cause to me or something I want to spend my time writing

> white papers about. Someone else can do that and it will help in its own

> way. But for myself and most of the staff at AG - we deal with the

> impairments that everyone else is talking about, every day. However, if

> talking about my opinions or our staff and the way we see accessible gaming,

> accessible technology, and accessibility as a whole from the standpoint of

> someone who actually has to go through using it, not as an option but as

> necessity, actually helps someone to make a better controller or a better

> video game then so be it.

>

> Apologies for the long email and any dragon errors.. Man Mark would love it

> if I would go back to writing these long drawnout and thoughtful posts in

> article format. lol

>

> Steve Spohn

> Associate Editor

> The AbleGamers Foundation

>

> www.ablegamers.com

> www.ablegamers.org

>

> Find me on Skype! Username: Steve_Spohn

>

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

> games_access-bounces at igda.org] *On Behalf Of *Michelle Hinn

> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 06, 2010 4:05 AM

> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List

> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

>

> Great discussion!

>

> Regarding stats, I think the point Eelke is trying to stress is what

> Eleanor also mentioned on the list earlier is that we have statistics on

> disability (even though they are complex and hard to separate from one

> another when talking about complex issues like cognitive disabilities and

> multiple disabilities) but the question that has been asked for so long by

> the industry is how many WOULD be gamers...and that's the hardest part to

> make a good estimate of regardless of how complex a statistical breakdown

> you do. :( I wish it were easier...but it's what the industry keeps pushing

> back on. It becomes what is beyond the "right thing to do" as we know and

> what's the "proven" percentage of those who would purchase what is necessary

> to be gamers (as if we can predict with a large enough degree of confidence

> that takes game type preference in mind as well) and without that, it's a

> continued excuse for many companies to continue doing nothing at all.

> Sigh...

>

> I also have a chapter in a book with the 2008 stats (the chapter was

> published in March 2009) that state similar stats but again the question is

> only disability rather than a survey on the percentage of those who want to

> game versus the percentages of disability breakdown. Perhaps this percentage

> will be higher than those without disabilities. But we don't know that

> beyond what I think we most of us are passionately convinced will be the

> case. And then the question of game preference comes up...and accessibility

> does not equal desire to play. So we struggle on with this one! I agree,

> with you Steve, that multiple solutioned approaches are badly needed -- one

> solution does not fit all...with the bigger question of whether one solution

> fits very many people overall!

>

> Because of the enormity of the category of cognitive disabilities, I am not

> of the same opinion that strategy and RPGs are the most accessible game

> category for many who have disabilities in this area, like myself. One

> question that I think that deserves discussion -- and I'm not suggesting a

> "right or wrong" here, just a point of discussion -- is, again, access

> versus preference. I know that I have a few cognitive disabilities using

> multiple definitions of what constitutes a cognitive disability but do I

> enjoy games in the genres that may be "most" accessible (and by what

> definition)? No, not at all especially if we stick to a definition of that

> gaming category that does not necessarily include sports and music

> simulations. WOW and similar games hold very little interest to me.

>

> This is not to say AT ALL that my preference is the same as others with

> cognitive disabilities. But that's just it...preference.

>

> And due to the tradition of AbleGamers as a community, many who enjoy MMOS

> gravitate to the site. And that is absolutely needed. But it is only one

> slice of a picture that we all are trying to map out with any type of

> impairment. And AbleGamers has certainly widened it's initial scope but

> there are still many who look to the site as something vital to the types of

> games that they prefer -- MMOs. There are definitely more than a few

> thousand motion impaired individuals but is the reason that so many of this

> slice of those with mobility impairments play MMOs if they choose to game

> because they enjoy them most of all, because those that frequent and benefit

> from AbleGamers the most are more interested in these games, or because

> they are statistically the largest game genre that game players with

> mobility impairments play? Or is the answer somewhere between all these or

> even just a part of these things in addition to other reasons?

>

> Re: the mouth controller, it is still quite used even if it may not

> necessarily be the most ideal for even those who use them -- but once you've

> invested in this type of AT, how much more can many spend? I agree that it

> is far from the only way to play but it's a way to play that some still use.

> But I defer to you and your expertise on that and don't assume at all that I

> have the more full individual and well thought out experience that you

> have.

>

> **note this is not a comment about you but just a comment I have overall **

> One thing that I don't like to see is that when those do use one solution

> over another that it is a form of "giving up." I understand the sentiment

> with regard to everyone's individual goals and preferences on how they wish

> to live their lives including the technologies that they use. But I do get

> sad when I read that to use one solution versus another is somehow

> incorrect. I am not saying that you have said this or mean this -- but it is

> just something that I have noticed in the disabled community in a multitude

> of areas within and outside of gaming. I may be not be understanding every

> issue but it reminds me of those within the hearing impaired community that

> get offended by those who choose to have a cochlear implant versus those who

> do not -- is there really a "right" answer as long as the individual is

> comfortable by what they decide on?

>

> I do completely understand your frustration with the nature of research

> surveys -- but that is also my frustration with the entire field of game

> accessibility. Lumping "cognitive" impairments together is an example of

> this and yet it is done all the time by research and advocacy groups. This

> is something we are all guilty of so we must be aware of when we do it

> ourselves (and I've done it too so I am not free from this either!). It's

> easier to lump than to wrestle with smaller categories...certainly

> "soundbytes" in the media do not lend themselves well to things like "but

> really these categories are much too large and we cannot make any

> recommendations because it's all too complex."

>

> Thanks to Eelke for posting his student's paper and to all who have

> participated in the feedback loop so far! These are the things that we all

> wrestle with and if we don't...who will? So discuss on! :)

>

> Michelle

>

> On Jul 5, 2010, at 6:05 PM, Steve Spohn wrote:

>

>

> Indeed a good paper. Here are my thoughts on some issues.

> * *

> *2.5 Game accessibility statistics*

> *‘‘How many people cannot play video games because of a*

> *disability?’’ is a key question to investigate because, to the*

> *authors’ knowledge, such data has not been determined*

>

> Actually 7-128 software and the AbleGamers foundation put out a white paper

> on those statistics which can be found at http://www.aging.ablegamers.org

>

> *3.1 Switches*

>

> The motor impaired gaming area is something I've largely dealt with, mainly

> because I'm a motor impaired gamers who counsels other motor impaired gamers

> on how to play.

>

> The mouth controller shown here is largely outdated and a relic in some

> respects. Someone who has ability left to use a device like this is not

> limited to single inputs at one time. Something like broadened horizons

> versatility would be wonderful. Those who specifically need one-switch

> games that utilize the large red button type of switches would be critically

> disabled but for the most part, one can adapt many of the switches Barrie

> has listed in combination to become a gaming rig of sorts.

>

> Which leads into...

>

> *4.3 Directions for research*

> *Game genres: As discussed in Sect. 3, severe motor and*

> *visually impaired players can only play games within a*

> *limited number of game genres. Popular game genres [20]*

> *such as strategy, sports and role playing games are not yet*

> *available to those groups. Unlike hearing impaired players,*

> *severe motor impaired and visually impaired players typically*

> *face critical barriers preventing them from playing the*

> *game.*

>

> For a large number of motion impaired gamers strategy and role playing

> games are the number one most accessible genre available today. Strategy

> games often have pause features that assist not only motion impaired but the

> cognitively disabled as well. Strategy games are largely accessible

> especially in the casual category such as risk.

>

> As for role-playing games, World of Warcraft is one of the most played by

> disabled motion impaired gamers title I've seen yet. Ablegamers is a

> community of well over 1000 gamers who are primarily comprised of motion

> impaired gamers and have often discussed what they play in no relation to us

> or anything that we recommend. Most every single motion impaired plays

> role-playing games because they are easy and accessible by their nature.

>

> RPGs like Sid Meier's civilization are turn-based and allow as much time as

> you need between taking turns. Games like WoW or EQ can be played with an

> input device that only allows two buttons and a directional mover such as

> eye or headmice.

>

> As Eleanor mentioned earlier, it would be more interesting to see

> statistics on multiple accessible technology being used in conjunction. As

> a large part of what our organization does is figure out combinations of

> accessible technologies that allow for the most input multiple no matter how

> severe your disability.

>

> *4.3 (Cont.)* *However, one popular game genre, FPS, has many*

> *accessible games for almost every type of impairment*

>

> Although I do not disagree with the statement on the whole, the paragraph

> when all put together is slightly misleading. First person shooters are the

> first genre of games taken away from motion impaired gamers, particularly

> those with degenerative diseases. Even then AT can compensate for some

> time.

>

> First-person shooters take the absolute most dexterity, timing, and hand

> eye coordination among all other video game genres.

>

> However, that does not mean that with the right combination of accessible

> technology that first-person shooters will remain off-limits. The author

> suggests first-person shooters are extremely accessible due to

> modifications, but the truth is many disabled gamers who are far more motion

> impaired than I am (and I can only use a mouse) play first person shooters

> with no modifications whatsoever.

>

> People like Corey Krull who played video games using a Morse code device to

> allow multiple inputs with relatively no muscle control whatsoever.

>

> -------

>

> As a side note, I find one thing disheartening about research papers is

> that I have gotten to know several thousand disabled gamers in my multiple

> year career fighting for disability, as I'm sure many of you have. Yet,

> these type of papers tend to lump gamers into generalized categories that

> are only vaguely accurate at best.

>

> The best way to bring true awareness to the cause is to show people the

> lengths disabled gamers will go to to play even the most simple casual and

> hard-core games.

>

> Steve Spohn

> Associate Editor

> The AbleGamers Foundation

>

> www.ablegamers.com

> www.ablegamers.org

>

> Find me on Skype! Username: Steve_Spohn

>

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

> games_access-bounces at igda.org] *On Behalf Of *Barrie Ellis

> *Sent:* Sunday, July 04, 2010 6:16 PM

> *To:* games_access at igda.org

> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

>

> Just finished reading the Game Accessibility survey. Very good! I found the

> bulk of it really smartly explained, with excellent diagrams and tables.

> Very useful. Very Nice!

>

> My 10 pence worth...

>

> p7. 3.1.1: *One-handed controller typically provides only one analogue

> input.*.. Apart from the Wii, the only game console one-handed controllers

> in recent production I'm aware of have both analogue sticks available

> (Access controller and "one hand controller" -

> http://www.oneswitch.org.uk/1/AGS/AGS-onehand.htm).

>

>

> p8. 3.1.2: *OneSwitch.org.uk** *isn't actually non-profit, although there

> is tons of free stuff. Over 100 one-switch games now for free. Thank you for

> the mention!

>

>

> p9. 3.1.3: *Frogger* - all good points about this game, but might have

> been worth mentioning that you can move left and right, when you hop on the

> moving logs and turtles.

>

>

> p14 3.5: *Universal design does not indicate that all impairments are

> supported, but rather that multiple types of impairments are supported...*

> I always thought it did, but simply hasn't been managed yet. Doesn't seem

> to make sense to me otherwise.

>

>

> p16: *For example, a one-switch racing game does not allow the player to

> brake or speed up because certain input options may have been removed to

> allow for one-switch**

> input...* Can be done. Using the 4Noah utility and Destruction Derby on a

> PSone emulator, at Kit 4 Kidz in Leeds earlier this year, we had tap to

> cycle between left-nothing-right-nothing-(and repeat) for steering, and hold

> for a couple of seconds then release to cycle between

> accelerate-nothing-reverse-nothing-(and repeat). Because Destruction Derby

> has helpful barriers all around the track to help keep you on course, plus a

> self-righting system if you get spun in the wrong way, it's quite playable

> for someone with really accurate one-switch skills. You could also have a

> game with auto-braking (e.g. F355 Challenge and Forza 3), and perhaps Mario

> Kart style speed ups on the track.

>

>

>

> p16 4.3: ...*severe motor and visually impaired players can only play

> games within a limited number of game genres. Popular game genres [20] such

> as strategy, sports and role playing games are not yet available to those

> groups. Unlike hearing impaired players, severe motor impaired and visually

> impaired players typically face critical barriers preventing them from

> playing the game....** *I guess it depends upon the degree of visually

> impairment, but wonder if some of these would be playable:

> http://www.oneswitch.org.uk/2/sd-sport.htm ?

> My final thoughts links to the lack of games for cognitively impaired

> players. I do agree that it's a complicated area, but when taking into

> account learning disabled users, I'm surprised only a handful of games were

> found:

>

> http://www.helpkidzlearn.com/games.html

> http://www.graemesfreegames.com/

> http://nanogames.com/index.htm

> *http://www.inclusive.co.uk/catalogue/acatalog/switch_friendly_games.html*

>

> http://www.priorywoods.middlesbrough.sch.uk/page_viewer.asp?page=Free+Program+Resources&pid=161

> http://www.scottmckay.com/

> http://www.marblesoft.com/products.php?group=1

> http://www.shinylearning.co.uk/

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbbc/games/switch/

>

> In my experience, a lot of more severely "learning disabled" people have

> reacted well to some one-switch games, or games that use relatively simple

> interfaces, such as eye-toy and basic joysticks. Some of course get on

> better than I do with complicated games.

>

> Cheers,

>

> Barrie.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> --------------------------------------------------

> From: "Michelle Hinn" <hinn at uiuc.edu>

> Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 9:02 PM

> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>

> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

>

> > I've read the article and it is very, very good! Because the permissions

> are owned by the journal, he cannot post it online because they (Springer)

> are very strict with permissions. But he can send you a copy as he said. :)

> Eelke didn't mention it but he's second author on it and although it goes

> without saying...the quality is excellent!

> >

> > Michelle

> >

> > On Jul 4, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Brannon Zahand wrote:

> >

> >> Eelke,

> >>

> >> Can I get a copy as well?

> >>

> >> Thanks,

> >> Brannon

> >>

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

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

> games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Kestrell

> >> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 7:15 AM

> >> To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List

> >> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

> >>

> >> Eelke,

> >>

> >> May I request an electronic copy of your student's paper on game

> accessibility?

> >>

> >> Thanks!

> >>

> >> Kestrell

> >>

> >>

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

> >> From: "Eelke Folmer" <eelke.folmer at gmail.com>

> >> To: <games_access at igda.org>

> >> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 2:13 AM

> >> Subject: [games_access] Game accessibility survey journal article

> >>

> >>

> >>> Hi,

> >>>

> >>> For those of you interested in: 1) a comprehensive overview of

> >>> academic literature on game accessibility; 2) a synthesis of

> >>> strategies used to make games for sensory, motor and cognitive

> >>> impairments; and 3) data on how many people in the US are unable or

> >>> limited in playing video games per type of impairment, a journal paper

> >>> called: "Game Accessibility: a Survey" written by my student Bei Yuan

> >>> is available online at:

> >>>

> http://www.springerlink.com/content/a0273kw751q71332/?p=3116a648a3a545a5b5f805933963a70f&pi=0

> >>>

> >>> Email me offline if you would like a copy of this paper and you don't

> >>> have access through a university library.

> >>>

> >>> --

> >>> Best, Eelke

> >>>

> >>> Eelke Folmer

> >>> Assistant Professor

> >>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering

> >>> University of Nevada, Reno

> >>> http://www.eelke.com

> >>> _______________________________________________

> >>> 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

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> 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 - www.avg.com

> Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2982 - Release Date: 07/04/10

> 14:35:00

> _______________________________________________

> 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 - www.avg.com

> Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2983 - Release Date: 07/05/10

> 14:36:00

> _______________________________________________

> 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

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/private/games_access/attachments/20100706/c9902745/attachment.htm>


More information about the games_access mailing list