[games_access] Game Accessibility Info Package - Categories

Sandra Uhling sandra_uhling at web.de
Fri Jul 30 05:25:09 EDT 2010


Hi,

Brannon wrote:

> If you want to point out "High Profile" scenarios,

> that makes sense... but I'd do it in a separate section.


Good idea. Thanks.


Barrie wrote:

> Perhaps we could knock up a shared Google Doc for this?


Good idea.
Maybe http://etherpad.com/ can be used? The pirate gaming guys are using it.
And they do like it very much.

Maybe it is very important to describe first, what purpose a document has?
And what are the visions for it?



I changed from category of disabilities to barriers.
I think this fits better the point of view of developers and designers.
Of course this will not fit the point of view of the business people.

At the moment I do focus on point of view of developers and designers.

Best regards,
Sandra


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Barrie Ellis
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Juli 2010 10:52
An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Package - Categories

I think the categories can be as broad or as narrow as you want them to be.
The GASIG have tended to go towards four categories in the past:

Cognitive
Physical
Hearing
Sight

You can fit in all disabilities / barriers to playing in one or more of
those categories. I don't think you'd be able to make a basic list without
cross-overs, and I also think that this does not matter one jot either.

For that reason, I wouldn't make Speech related disability one of the main
categories, but certainly would make it a sub-category that does fit under
Physical and Cognitive. Likewise, Text related barriers can fit under
three, and all four at a push: Cognitive, e.g. can you understand the text?
Sight, e.g. is the text legible? Hearing, e.g. can you hear spoken menus
etc., and Physical, e.g. can you turn the virtual page/progress the text?).

I also agree that I would not make older gamers a main-category, although it
is an important thing to acknowledge that as we age, we tend to loose
ability. It's also important to acknowledge that people do so at very
differing rates. Perhaps we could knock up a shared Google Doc for this?

Barrie




On 30 July 2010 08:24, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:


Hi Brannon,

you are right.

But sometimes it is good to do something that we normally would not
do.

Silver Gaming is a market. There is potential. Everyone ages.
And hopefully the game developer are more open, when they see this.

I had a discussion about it: They said Game Accessibility is moving
forward.

As example he gives the Wii. And I added a huge list with
difficulties
silver gamer might have.


My personal opinion is, that there is a higher chance for GA,
when the business people see the silver gaming group.
This group is not "anonym" like the others.

Best regards,
Sandra

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org
[mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Brannon Zahand
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Juli 2010 09:03
An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Package -
Categories


My two cents... I think "Elderly People" should be removed as a
category. As
we age, we have various types of impairments become more likely...
mobility
(e.g. arthritis), visual (e.g. glaucoma), auditory (e.g. hearing
loss),
cognitive (e.g. memory loss), speech (e.g. impairment from stroke),
etc. Not
every elderly person suffers from every one of these and some people
who
might be considered elderly (70+) still are in amazing health.

-----Original Message-----
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org
[mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Sandra Uhling
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 10:10 AM
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Package - Categories

Hi,

2 1/2 weeks left to the GDC-Europe/GamesCom. It would be great to
have a
Game Accessibility Info Package. This means I have to check and
update my
notes. It would be great when you all can help me. I am looking
forward for
your feedback!

It would be great to get also some help with my English.


# Categories:
I would like to have a list of two kinds of description/terms.
So when I write an article I will be more flexible.

How can someone be disabled: [viewpoint of designers]
* Visual
* Auditory
* Mobility
* Cognitive / learning [is there a main category for this?]
* Speech / linguistic
* Elderly people (Silver Gamer)

The disability is called:
* Visual disability
* Hearing disability
* Physical disability [or mobil disability?]
* Cognitive/ learning disability
* speech impediment [? But this is a technical word?]
* Mix


I decided to add two more categories:
Speech: Because voice recognition will be used more.
Communication is sometimes very important in Online/LAN Teamplay.
Deaf gamers often have trouble with this. This can also Be very
useful for
the point of view of designers.
(Otherwise we would have to put it under mobility and cognitive??)


Silver Gaming: Often they have a mix of disabilities and usually
they have
age related limitations.
A separate category shows that this is important And that there is a
huge
group. Also it is more logical to Designer. (You know your
grandmother,
grandfather) It is something most of the people have little
experience with.

Best regards,
Sandra


_______________________________________________
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






More information about the games_access mailing list