[games_access] Looking for constructive feedback and comments

[Lynsey Graham]

I remember when Blizzard banned some World of Warcraft add ons.  They enabled a player with mobility issues to play the game more comfortably and generally enjoy the exploring and social aspects that the game provides.   However, it was also open to exploitation on PvP servers and battlegrounds - I can't for the life of me remember what the one was called, but it automated some rotations and reactions, such as triggering a trinket, class or racial ability to evade snaring or slowing abilities.  My husband, who's very competitive and PvP focussed, said that this was 100% the right thing to do, as it "removed the skill aspect from the game".  I think there was an auto-navigation add-on that was banned too.  
 
I think there are ways around it, after a fashion - you could have a set of servers in the same battlegroup that allow assisting add-ons, then players could make a choice.  If they were made PvE servers, then there wouldn't be any complaints about it directly unfair to other players as there would be very little world PvP.  You could still have ranked battlegrounds and arenas if all the servers in the battleground had the same add-on rules.  I wonder if it would be technically possible to stop someone with a particular add-on from entering the ranked battlegrounds or arenas?  I can fully understand why some players would find some add-ons 'unfair', but at the same time it seems unfair to prevent people from using things that allow them to enjoy a game when the competitive element is only a small part of it.
 
Slightly off-topic, but it reminds me a bit of Oscar Pistorius who qualified for the Olympics, and people complaining that it's unfair because of his blades.
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/jul/31/oscar-pistorius-should-he-compete
 
"The features can be added, as these are not e-sport games, only a small percentage of their use is for e-sports. So if there's a feature that gives an unfair advantage then the solution is just not to use that feature in a competitive game, rather than avoid implementing it all.  For example setting a handicap is not permitted in competitive Starcraft, but the feature is still included, and used in non-competitive games.
"
 
^ This.  The Gears of War games have a variety of difficulty settings for the single player and co-op multiplayer modes, but there's no difference in competitive multiplayer.  There is matchmaking though, and standard and 'ranked' competitive multiplayer.  
 
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hamilton
Sent: 05 April 2012 15:48
To: games_access at igda.org
Subject: Re: [games_access] Looking for constructive feedback and comments
 
The features can be added, as these are not e-sport games, only a small percentage of their use is for e-sports. So if there's a feature that gives an unfair advantage then the solution is just not to use that feature in a competitive game, rather than avoid implementing it all. For example setting a handicap is not permitted in competitive Starcraft, but the feature is still included, and used in non-competitive games.
 
> Some game accessibility features can be misused to get unfair advantages in a competitive game.We do not have a solution for this.We cannot request companys to add game accessibility features (that can be misused)in games that are used in eSport
> 
> Sandra
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120405/e5948cd8/attachment.htm>