From eelke.folmer at gmail.com  Fri Jun  1 02:05:12 2012
From: eelke.folmer at gmail.com (Eelke Folmer)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 23:05:12 -0700
Subject: [games_access] Goal Ball - Hunt
In-Reply-To: <F800E112924C4AE89CCB29E8C78340D9@OneSwitchPC>
References: <F800E112924C4AE89CCB29E8C78340D9@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CANMzimH4TqKqfn3+rwNFNgrQcLWjR=0Ns1=YnR7dH9LBRj+YFQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Barrie,

I mentored a group of undergrads last year that for their senior project
made a goalball that you can play with wii remotes. See:
http://www.zephyrstudios.com/iv/index.html

Best Eelke


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> Hi all,
>
> I've been looking for a computer game version of the Paralympic sport
> "GoalBall". I'm sure I remember mention of an audiogame version somewhere,
> but at the moment I can only find reference to "Goal Ball One on One", but
> no game to play.
>
> Hope someone can help out there...
>
> Barrie
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Best, Eelke

Eelke Folmer
Assistant Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Nevada, Reno
http://www.eelke.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120531/37c6fcbe/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Fri Jun  1 05:03:05 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 10:03:05 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Goal Ball - Hunt
In-Reply-To: <CANMzimH4TqKqfn3+rwNFNgrQcLWjR=0Ns1=YnR7dH9LBRj+YFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F800E112924C4AE89CCB29E8C78340D9@OneSwitchPC>
	<CANMzimH4TqKqfn3+rwNFNgrQcLWjR=0Ns1=YnR7dH9LBRj+YFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C5CA71443F247C88E4EE0B9D42A8D52@OneSwitchPC>

Thanks, Eelke. Should have remembered that! Brilliant.

Barrie


From: Eelke Folmer 
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 7:05 AM
To: Barrie Ellis ; IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] Goal Ball - Hunt


Hi Barrie,  


I mentored a group of undergrads last year that for their senior project made a goalball that you can play with wii remotes. See: 
http://www.zephyrstudios.com/iv/index.html


Best Eelke



On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  Hi all,

  I've been looking for a computer game version of the Paralympic sport "GoalBall". I'm sure I remember mention of an audiogame version somewhere, but at the moment I can only find reference to "Goal Ball One on One", but no game to play.

  Hope someone can help out there...

  Barrie


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Best, Eelke

Eelke Folmer                         
Assistant Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Nevada, Reno  
http://www.eelke.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120601/06d6c3e5/attachment.htm>

From javier.mairena at gmail.com  Sat Jun  2 06:19:49 2012
From: javier.mairena at gmail.com (Javier Mairena)
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 12:19:49 +0200
Subject: [games_access] JVA2012 - Accessible game design contest
In-Reply-To: <4FC7B9AF.5030906@cnam.fr>
References: <4FC657A5.2090603@cnam.fr> <4FC7B9AF.5030906@cnam.fr>
Message-ID: <CAO1r=jjgGihGg+RZeSuh=DmiBRb2163yzT0gueskv8tPdPT6Pw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Jerome,

Thanks for the notice, I just played the winner game and is really funny
and well designed :)
It's a pity that is only in French, but I can understand how to play, and
keyboard configuration for the man isn't good for qwerty keyboards, but can
be played.

Good game!! :)

On 31 May 2012 20:34, Jerome Dupire <dupire at cnam.fr> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I want to share an (French...) on-going event: the accessible game
> design contest "JVA2012" that I organised, along with a scientific
> conference on technical aids for impaired people
> (http://handicap2012.cnam.fr)
>
> A call for participation was made at the end of 2011.
> Finally, 16 teams reached the deadline (May, 17th) with a prototype.
> A jury rated the games and voted for the 5 best ones on Thursday, 24th
> of this month.
> The first of them wins the Jury's Prize. It's a game called "Evil Blind
> Mutant Monster Attack"
> Here are the results:http://handicap2012.**cnam.fr/?page=concours<http://handicap2012.cnam.fr/?page=concours> (in
> French...). The winning game is available for free download.
>
> These 5 finalists are still fighting for the "Public's Prize"
> They will be available for the public on 3 sites near Paris during June.
> You can find all the informations about this on the previous page (still
> in French...sorry)
> If you are near or in Paris, France please come and visit us !
>
> This was ( is ) the first attempt for this contest.
> I want to make it happen every year from now.
> Of course, the next edition will be (truely) international with a call
> for participation and a dedicated website available in different langages.
>
> Please keep this event in mind for 2013 !
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerome Dupire, Ph.D.
> CNAM - CEDRIC - ILJ
> 292, rue St Martin
> 75003 Paris
> dupire at cnam.fr
> http://interaction3d.fr
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/**mailman/listinfo/games_access<http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access>
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120602/25ae4a9f/attachment.htm>

From jerome.dupire at cnam.fr  Sat Jun  2 06:35:04 2012
From: jerome.dupire at cnam.fr (Jerome Dupire)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:35:04 +0200
Subject: [games_access] JVA2012 - Accessible game design contest
In-Reply-To: <CAO1r=jjgGihGg+RZeSuh=DmiBRb2163yzT0gueskv8tPdPT6Pw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FC657A5.2090603@cnam.fr> <4FC7B9AF.5030906@cnam.fr>
	<CAO1r=jjgGihGg+RZeSuh=DmiBRb2163yzT0gueskv8tPdPT6Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FC9EC58.3020702@cnam.fr>

Hi Javier,
Thanks for the feedback :)
I'll forward your message to the game designers.
Hope they can add a player profil with a key mapping feature and 
localisation.
And...I promise: for 2013, everything will be accessible in different 
languages.
Cheers,
Jerome
Le 02/06/2012 12:19, Javier Mairena a ?crit :
> Hi Jerome,
>
> Thanks for the notice, I just played the winner game and is really 
> funny and well designed :)
> It's a pity that is only in French, but I can understand how to play, 
> and keyboard configuration for the man isn't good for qwerty 
> keyboards, but can be played.
>
> Good game!! :)
>
> On 31 May 2012 20:34, Jerome Dupire <dupire at cnam.fr 
> <mailto:dupire at cnam.fr>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     I want to share an (French...) on-going event: the accessible game
>     design contest "JVA2012" that I organised, along with a scientific
>     conference on technical aids for impaired people
>     (http://handicap2012.cnam.fr)
>
>     A call for participation was made at the end of 2011.
>     Finally, 16 teams reached the deadline (May, 17th) with a prototype.
>     A jury rated the games and voted for the 5 best ones on Thursday, 24th
>     of this month.
>     The first of them wins the Jury's Prize. It's a game called "Evil
>     Blind
>     Mutant Monster Attack"
>     Here are the results:http://handicap2012.cnam.fr/?page=concours  (in
>     French...). The winning game is available for free download.
>
>     These 5 finalists are still fighting for the "Public's Prize"
>     They will be available for the public on 3 sites near Paris during
>     June.
>     You can find all the informations about this on the previous page
>     (still
>     in French...sorry)
>     If you are near or in Paris, France please come and visit us !
>
>     This was ( is ) the first attempt for this contest.
>     I want to make it happen every year from now.
>     Of course, the next edition will be (truely) international with a call
>     for participation and a dedicated website available in different
>     langages.
>
>     Please keep this event in mind for 2013 !
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Jerome Dupire, Ph.D.
>     CNAM - CEDRIC - ILJ
>     292, rue St Martin
>     75003 Paris
>     dupire at cnam.fr <mailto:dupire at cnam.fr>
>     http://interaction3d.fr
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     games_access mailing list
>     games_access at igda.org <mailto:games_access at igda.org>
>     http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>     The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120602/535a416f/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Wed Jun  6 10:56:25 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 16:56:25 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Berlin 19. Sep,
	Topic: Serious Games in Work and Game Accessibility
Message-ID: <002701cd43f4$8c8833b0$a5989b10$@de>

Hi,

there will be a congress in Berlin, Germany.

The topic is barriers in work / at the workplace.
I recommended the topic Serious Games.

Now they look for someone who can make a presentation
about Serious Games for Work (assessement, education, training, ...)
and of course also about Accessibility in this area.

It seems to be important that this person does also
represent an organisation.

Language: I think it should be german?
But we can check this.

My contact will be back from holiday at 18, Juny.


With best regards,
Sandra



From jtorrente at e-ucm.es  Wed Jun  6 10:58:41 2012
From: jtorrente at e-ucm.es (Javier Torrente (E-UCM))
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 16:58:41 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Call for feedback! The Blind Faith Games project -
 accessible games for Android
Message-ID: <CAGrF7j3fLPJVN2Qt9AWBYsyqMhorpbe3hb7GgOPQ+ta3NRAFDw@mail.gmail.com>

*The e-UCM research group from Complutense University of Madrid has
published early results from the Blind Faith Games (BFG) student project
developed by Gloria Pozuelo and Javier ?lvarez under the supervision of
Baltasar Fern?ndez-Manj?n and Javier Torrente.
The goal of the project is to develop a toolset that facilitates the
development of accessible games for blind people for Android smartphones
and tablets. So far three games have already been developed using this
toolkit, which are available for download from Google
Play<https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=e-UCM>(
https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=e-UCM). All the information
of the project is also available at http://en.blind-faith-games.e-ucm.es.
The project is now immersed in a preliminary usability evaluation phase.
For that reason, we are kindly requesting all people interested to
contribute by trying out the games and fulfilling a short evaluation
questionnaire
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEo0ZE80cEw5Mlg1bWJpbjJFcm1UeUE6MQ#gid=0where
they can also leave their feedback. This evaluation form is also
available from the applications main menu and there is an offline version (
http://e-adventure.e-ucm.es/bfg/form.docx) that you can return by e-mail to
jtorrente at fdi.ucm.es. Feedback from blind users or experts in
usability/accessibility are specially welcome!
Thanks to all of you for helping us in improving the accessibility of our
games!*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120606/13f05a0c/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Thu Jun  7 04:11:22 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:11:22 +0100
Subject: [games_access] JVA2012 - Accessible game design contest
In-Reply-To: <4FC7B9AF.5030906@cnam.fr>
References: <4FC657A5.2090603@cnam.fr> <4FC7B9AF.5030906@cnam.fr>
Message-ID: <76E2662D9A154F0DB558472F37D395BA@OneSwitchPC>

Great news, Jerome. Really good to hear. Are more of the games going to be 
made available on-line do you know?

Barrie

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jerome Dupire" <dupire at cnam.fr>
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 7:34 PM
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] JVA2012 - Accessible game design contest

> Hi everyone,
>
> I want to share an (French...) on-going event: the accessible game
> design contest "JVA2012" that I organised, along with a scientific
> conference on technical aids for impaired people
> (http://handicap2012.cnam.fr)
>
> A call for participation was made at the end of 2011.
> Finally, 16 teams reached the deadline (May, 17th) with a prototype.
> A jury rated the games and voted for the 5 best ones on Thursday, 24th
> of this month.
> The first of them wins the Jury's Prize. It's a game called "Evil Blind
> Mutant Monster Attack"
> Here are the results:http://handicap2012.cnam.fr/?page=concours  (in
> French...). The winning game is available for free download.
>
> These 5 finalists are still fighting for the "Public's Prize"
> They will be available for the public on 3 sites near Paris during June.
> You can find all the informations about this on the previous page (still
> in French...sorry)
> If you are near or in Paris, France please come and visit us !
>
> This was ( is ) the first attempt for this contest.
> I want to make it happen every year from now.
> Of course, the next edition will be (truely) international with a call
> for participation and a dedicated website available in different langages.
>
> Please keep this event in mind for 2013 !
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerome Dupire, Ph.D.
> CNAM - CEDRIC - ILJ
> 292, rue St Martin
> 75003 Paris
> dupire at cnam.fr
> http://interaction3d.fr
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org 



From sandra_uhling at web.de  Thu Jun  7 14:54:34 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 20:54:34 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring
Message-ID: <000001cd44de$fc99f8b0$f5cdea10$@de>

Hello,

do we have some information about the feedback
of the gamers for player tailoring?
I am wondering if they do not use it any more.
It looks like that there will be also no option for
automatic aiming. 

I liked player tailoring. 
The balancing was bad on difficult level, because Lara 
was healing automatically, so I did not need any medipack.
But this balancing could have been fixed. It was not a problem
of the player tailoring.

I do not understand why they do not understand
that they can make one standard version like they want
and offer options for people who like to adapt the game
to their needs. No one will loose anything. :-)

Best regards,
Sandra





From i_h at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  8 10:47:44 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 14:47:44 +0000
Subject: [games_access] 1. Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring (Sandra Uhling)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7.1339164004.89677.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.7.1339164004.89677.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W50089AD377AFC530217E4991F20@phx.gbl>


I've seen that proven quite conclusively, a game that (in a similar way to Dimitri's work) exposed as many existing variables as possible without overcomplicating the settings screens, giving enough options to cater for even the most profound cognitive and motor impairments. Those settings have proven extremely valuable to the minority that find them useful, but the default settings are hugely popular with everyone else - so much so that it is one of the most successful mainstream game they have ever produced.
As these kind of settings already exist on the back-end I totally agree with you.. a relatively minor bit of work to expose them results in a hugely beneficial experience for some people and at zero  enjoyment / difficultly cost to the other players.
Ian

> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 4
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 10:00:04 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 20:54:34 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <000001cd44de$fc99f8b0$f5cdea10$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> do we have some information about the feedback
> of the gamers for player tailoring?
> I am wondering if they do not use it any more.
> It looks like that there will be also no option for
> automatic aiming. 
> 
> I liked player tailoring. 
> The balancing was bad on difficult level, because Lara 
> was healing automatically, so I did not need any medipack.
> But this balancing could have been fixed. It was not a problem
> of the player tailoring.
> 
> I do not understand why they do not understand
> that they can make one standard version like they want
> and offer options for people who like to adapt the game
> to their needs. No one will loose anything. :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 4
> ********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120608/05b56986/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Fri Jun  8 10:58:18 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:58:18 +0100
Subject: [games_access] 1. Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring (Sandra Uhling)
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W50089AD377AFC530217E4991F20@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.7.1339164004.89677.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W50089AD377AFC530217E4991F20@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <765CC76275CB460BB619477E64880750@OneSwitchPC>

Ditto you both.

Barrie


From: Ian Hamilton 
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 3:47 PM
To: games_access at igda.org 
Subject: Re: [games_access] 1. Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring (Sandra Uhling)


I've seen that proven quite conclusively, a game that (in a similar way to Dimitri's work) exposed as many existing variables as possible without overcomplicating the settings screens, giving enough options to cater for even the most profound cognitive and motor impairments. Those settings have proven extremely valuable to the minority that find them useful, but the default settings are hugely popular with everyone else - so much so that it is one of the most successful mainstream game they have ever produced.


As these kind of settings already exist on the back-end I totally agree with you.. a relatively minor bit of work to expose them results in a hugely beneficial experience for some people and at zero  enjoyment / difficultly cost to the other players.


Ian


> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 4
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 10:00:04 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 20:54:34 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] Tomb Raider: Player Tailoring
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <000001cd44de$fc99f8b0$f5cdea10$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> do we have some information about the feedback
> of the gamers for player tailoring?
> I am wondering if they do not use it any more.
> It looks like that there will be also no option for
> automatic aiming. 
> 
> I liked player tailoring. 
> The balancing was bad on difficult level, because Lara 
> was healing automatically, so I did not need any medipack.
> But this balancing could have been fixed. It was not a problem
> of the player tailoring.
> 
> I do not understand why they do not understand
> that they can make one standard version like they want
> and offer options for people who like to adapt the game
> to their needs. No one will loose anything. :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 4
> ********************************************



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120608/12211922/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Fri Jun  8 11:53:59 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:53:59 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Looking for accessible Olympic games
Message-ID: <D76B89D579CC4D47B6112D77CB022000@OneSwitchPC>

Another plea for help from this invaluable list...

SpecialEffect are looking to find as many accessible (Summer) Olympics games as we can. Especially so those with simple control schemes, audio games or those that are not too hard to play nor require fast reactions.

I've posted a plea here: http://www.gamebase.info/magazine/read/london-2012-video-olympics_867.html

With our work in progress here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tEkqRNgfX7ZFap90P4yGNuxQXN9UyYZFtiLA3XIqbI8/edit?pli=1

If anyone has any ideas to add to the pot, we'd hugely appreciate them. Especially for audio-games and for the blank sections.

Have a great weekend all,

Barrie
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120608/baa37432/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Tue Jun 12 13:22:33 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 19:22:33 +0200
Subject: [games_access] IntegraMouse Video
Message-ID: <000601cd48bf$f51bb6c0$df532440$@de>

Hi,

IntegraMouse Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8jxuZ2aEUA&feature=plcp

Something nice for the EIGA Award :-)

FYI: We have good contact to LifeTool.

Best regards,
Sandra



From i_h at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 13 10:20:28 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:20:28 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 6
In-Reply-To: <mailman.17.1339596006.76143.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.17.1339596006.76143.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W7BA6BD1D532A355C4863E91F50@phx.gbl>



I'm not too up on that kind of assistive tech so don't know how it compares to the other sip/puff joysticks available, but it does look nice!
Ian
> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 6
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:00:06 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. IntegraMouse Video (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 19:22:33 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] IntegraMouse Video
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <000601cd48bf$f51bb6c0$df532440$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hi,
> 
> IntegraMouse Video
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8jxuZ2aEUA&feature=plcp
> 
> Something nice for the EIGA Award :-)
> 
> FYI: We have good contact to LifeTool.
> 
> Best regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 6
> ********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120613/10b6f85b/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Wed Jun 20 05:05:30 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:05:30 +0200
Subject: [games_access] cheating also for consoles?
Message-ID: <003a01cd4ec3$d8ace090$8a06a1b0$@de>

Hello,

I learnt that there are also cheating-stuff for consoles.
http://www.spieletipps.de/help/display/id/20/topicid/2/

Well I would say this shows that there is a need for Design for all....

Also there are some more people who use cheats:
tester, PR guys, journalists, age rating, etc ...

Why not make Design for all from the beginning? ;-)


With kind regards,
Sandra



From i_h at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 20 10:48:25 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:48:25 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <mailman.13.1340200806.78415.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.13.1340200806.78415.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W1158E777127A0458E56808191FE0@phx.gbl>


Yep totally agree. If you skip back 20 years or so to old Atari and Nintendo games it was all about brutal fixed difficultly, three lives then you're out, and as a result there was very high demand for people to hack away and find out the developers' back doors that they had put in for testing purposes. 
Since then developers have gradually started to realise that having to give up due to impossible barriers is not what makes a game fun, so now you often have check-points, choice of difficultly levels etc.. Although it's by no means there yet, at least that's one area that there has been some progress in!

> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:00:06 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. cheating also for consoles? (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:05:30 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] cheating also for consoles?
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <003a01cd4ec3$d8ace090$8a06a1b0$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I learnt that there are also cheating-stuff for consoles.
> http://www.spieletipps.de/help/display/id/20/topicid/2/
> 
> Well I would say this shows that there is a need for Design for all....
> 
> Also there are some more people who use cheats:
> tester, PR guys, journalists, age rating, etc ...
> 
> Why not make Design for all from the beginning? ;-)
> 
> 
> With kind regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> ********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120620/4a31bcd9/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Wed Jun 20 10:52:02 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:52:02 +0200
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W1158E777127A0458E56808191FE0@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.13.1340200806.78415.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W1158E777127A0458E56808191FE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <003001cd4ef4$41b26710$c5173530$@de>

Hi,

 

we need a new design point of view: Design for all from the beginning,
including accessibility of course.

I really looooove the idea to make a game unbelieveable easy to
unbelieveable difficult.

That would also be amazing for hardcore gamers J

 

Best regards,

Sandra

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Ian Hamilton
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Juni 2012 16:48
An: games_access at igda.org
Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8

 

Yep totally agree. If you skip back 20 years or so to old Atari and Nintendo
games it was all about brutal fixed difficultly, three lives then you're
out, and as a result there was very high demand for people to hack away and
find out the developers' back doors that they had put in for testing
purposes. 

 

Since then developers have gradually started to realise that having to give
up due to impossible barriers is not what makes a game fun, so now you often
have check-points, choice of difficultly levels etc.. Although it's by no
means there yet, at least that's one area that there has been some progress
in!

> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:00:06 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. cheating also for consoles? (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:05:30 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] cheating also for consoles?
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <003a01cd4ec3$d8ace090$8a06a1b0$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I learnt that there are also cheating-stuff for consoles.
> http://www.spieletipps.de/help/display/id/20/topicid/2/
> 
> Well I would say this shows that there is a need for Design for all....
> 
> Also there are some more people who use cheats:
> tester, PR guys, journalists, age rating, etc ...
> 
> Why not make Design for all from the beginning? ;-)
> 
> 
> With kind regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> ********************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120620/1fd3e97f/attachment.htm>

From lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com  Wed Jun 20 11:44:40 2012
From: lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com (Lynsey Graham)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:44:40 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <003001cd4ef4$41b26710$c5173530$@de>
References: <mailman.13.1340200806.78415.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W1158E777127A0458E56808191FE0@phx.gbl>
	<003001cd4ef4$41b26710$c5173530$@de>
Message-ID: <e4fdb77e-b9e4-44bd-befe-34415a4d5f1d@blitzgamesstudios.com>

It's very difficult to get right - for a lot of action games, the sliding scale from easy to hard is normally:
 
Easy: Player has lots of health, enemies have low health, player hits hard, enemies hit soft
 
Medium: Player has less health, enemies have more, enemies take less damage from player attacks, enemies hit harder
 
Hard: Player has low health, enemies have high health, enemies require a lot damage from the player, player has to evade enemy attacks
 
This goes some level towards addressing difficulty level, but is a very basic way of doing it. For example, God of War (like Devil May Cry) would automatically lower the difficulty if you died a certain number of times, so the enemies would be easier.  Which was fine... if you kept on dying to enemies.  However, if you were good at the combat but stuck on the infernal spiked rotating pillars for two hours, it didn't really help much.
 
There are a few games that have taken a better approach - Street Fighter has always been pretty good with the adjustable speeds, handicaps and difficulties, but the recent versions have also included a simple mode to allow players to perform moves that would normally require complex button combinations. Silent Hill 2 allowed you to change the puzzle and combat difficulties separately.  World of Warcraft has three different raid difficulties where the boss tactics and abilities differ.  
 
I think developers are coming around to the idea of making their cater to a wider audience, such as Warcraft having different levels of raiding complexity, Jennifer Hepler from Bioware saying that she wishes there was a method of skipping combat sections so she could focus on the narrative/RPG parts of the game, just as many games allow people who are only interested in combat to skip cutscenes, and LA Noire having skippable action sections, etc.
 
It's interesting about the Xploder systems - the modern ones aren't cheats as such, but game saves, so although they'll allow you to access any previously unlocked content they won't actually alter the difficulty.  As it says on their site:
 
Q: I bought the Xploder Cheat Saves for XBOX 360, but I cannot find any cheats.
A: This is software designed to manage Game Saves (Cheat Saves) not Cheat Codes. Some of the game saves do have 'cheat-like' features. For example, you may start the game with all weapons, have all levels unlocked etc.
 
So it's not so much 'cheating' in that it's not altering the mechanics of the game experience itself - rather, it's essentially the same as getting someone else to play the game through for you. It only makes it easier to play if the game has been designed to allow a second play on the same difficulty through with any unlocked items.  Which is different from the older generation Xploder systems that would let you change the game experience itself by providing infinite health/time/ammo, or altering the speed.  :(  
 
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Sandra Uhling
Sent: 20 June 2012 15:52
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
 
Hi,
 
we need a new design point of view: Design for all from the beginning, including accessibility of course.
I really looooove the idea to make a game unbelieveable easy to unbelieveable difficult.
That would also be amazing for hardcore gamers J
 
Best regards,
Sandra
 
Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Juni 2012 16:48
An: games_access at igda.org
Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
 
Yep totally agree. If you skip back 20 years or so to old Atari and Nintendo games it was all about brutal fixed difficultly, three lives then you're out, and as a result there was very high demand for people to hack away and find out the developers' back doors that they had put in for testing purposes. 
 
Since then developers have gradually started to realise that having to give up due to impossible barriers is not what makes a game fun, so now you often have check-points, choice of difficultly levels etc.. Although it's by no means there yet, at least that's one area that there has been some progress in!
> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:00:06 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. cheating also for consoles? (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:05:30 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] cheating also for consoles?
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <003a01cd4ec3$d8ace090$8a06a1b0$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I learnt that there are also cheating-stuff for consoles.
> http://www.spieletipps.de/help/display/id/20/topicid/2/
> 
> Well I would say this shows that there is a need for Design for all....
> 
> Also there are some more people who use cheats:
> tester, PR guys, journalists, age rating, etc ...
> 
> Why not make Design for all from the beginning? ;-)
> 
> 
> With kind regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> ********************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120620/8ba816a7/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Wed Jun 20 13:57:40 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:57:40 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
In-Reply-To: <e4fdb77e-b9e4-44bd-befe-34415a4d5f1d@blitzgamesstudios.com>
References: <mailman.13.1340200806.78415.games_access@igda.org><DUB116-W1158E777127A0458E56808191FE0@phx.gbl><003001cd4ef4$41b26710$c5173530$@de>
	<e4fdb77e-b9e4-44bd-befe-34415a4d5f1d@blitzgamesstudios.com>
Message-ID: <FDBDD2638CCE456C8F443DD5F597A4F5@OneSwitchPC>

Linking in with this, I've just been trying out Rockstar's first Xbox 360 game (a table-tennis game). On the easiest setting, I've barely won a point yet. It's stupidly hard on easy. This is where a lot of mainstream developers get it so wrong. Many just can't see beyond a very narrow range of difficulty level adjustment. Some are seeing the light as you say, Lynsey, which is positive. Not enough though.

Perhaps our mantra should be there's no such thing as too easy (for many players).

And just in defence of Atari, I think at their best, they really did take difficulty levels into account. The VCS version of Ms. Pac-Man allowed you to choose how many ghosts you went up against from one to four (simple, but so effective). This was one of their games with a "Special Feature" accessibility option. Missile Command allowed you to play the game slowed right down. Most games had easier versions, and a way to tweak things to make play fairer. The simple controls helped a lot too of course. Even in the arcade I think they did some great things, such as Marble Madness having 60/90 seconds to play no matter how bad you were at it, and skipping you forward a little bit when you struggled too much at times (maybe that's my imagination).

Something that may make developers think, is that for some players, using emulators with pirated versions of their games, are the only way to play them at a more bearable tempo/difficulty level. MAME is brilliant using the Cheats to make play easier.

Barrie






From: Lynsey Graham 
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 4:44 PM
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List' 
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8


It's very difficult to get right - for a lot of action games, the sliding scale from easy to hard is normally:

 

Easy: Player has lots of health, enemies have low health, player hits hard, enemies hit soft

 

Medium: Player has less health, enemies have more, enemies take less damage from player attacks, enemies hit harder

 

Hard: Player has low health, enemies have high health, enemies require a lot damage from the player, player has to evade enemy attacks

 

This goes some level towards addressing difficulty level, but is a very basic way of doing it. For example, God of War (like Devil May Cry) would automatically lower the difficulty if you died a certain number of times, so the enemies would be easier.  Which was fine... if you kept on dying to enemies.  However, if you were good at the combat but stuck on the infernal spiked rotating pillars for two hours, it didn't really help much.

 

There are a few games that have taken a better approach - Street Fighter has always been pretty good with the adjustable speeds, handicaps and difficulties, but the recent versions have also included a simple mode to allow players to perform moves that would normally require complex button combinations. Silent Hill 2 allowed you to change the puzzle and combat difficulties separately.  World of Warcraft has three different raid difficulties where the boss tactics and abilities differ.  

 

I think developers are coming around to the idea of making their cater to a wider audience, such as Warcraft having different levels of raiding complexity, Jennifer Hepler from Bioware saying that she wishes there was a method of skipping combat sections so she could focus on the narrative/RPG parts of the game, just as many games allow people who are only interested in combat to skip cutscenes, and LA Noire having skippable action sections, etc.

 

It's interesting about the Xploder systems - the modern ones aren't cheats as such, but game saves, so although they'll allow you to access any previously unlocked content they won't actually alter the difficulty.  As it says on their site:

 

Q: I bought the Xploder Cheat Saves for XBOX 360, but I cannot find any cheats.
A: This is software designed to manage Game Saves (Cheat Saves) not Cheat Codes. Some of the game saves do have 'cheat-like' features. For example, you may start the game with all weapons, have all levels unlocked etc.

 

So it's not so much 'cheating' in that it's not altering the mechanics of the game experience itself - rather, it's essentially the same as getting someone else to play the game through for you. It only makes it easier to play if the game has been designed to allow a second play on the same difficulty through with any unlocked items.  Which is different from the older generation Xploder systems that would let you change the game experience itself by providing infinite health/time/ammo, or altering the speed.  :(  

 

From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Sandra Uhling
Sent: 20 June 2012 15:52
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8

 

Hi,

 

we need a new design point of view: Design for all from the beginning, including accessibility of course.

I really looooove the idea to make a game unbelieveable easy to unbelieveable difficult.

That would also be amazing for hardcore gamers J

 

Best regards,

Sandra

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Juni 2012 16:48
An: games_access at igda.org
Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8

 

Yep totally agree. If you skip back 20 years or so to old Atari and Nintendo games it was all about brutal fixed difficultly, three lives then you're out, and as a result there was very high demand for people to hack away and find out the developers' back doors that they had put in for testing purposes. 

 

Since then developers have gradually started to realise that having to give up due to impossible barriers is not what makes a game fun, so now you often have check-points, choice of difficultly levels etc.. Although it's by no means there yet, at least that's one area that there has been some progress in!

> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:00:06 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. cheating also for consoles? (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:05:30 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] cheating also for consoles?
> To: "IGDA GA-SIG Emailliste" <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <003a01cd4ec3$d8ace090$8a06a1b0$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I learnt that there are also cheating-stuff for consoles.
> http://www.spieletipps.de/help/display/id/20/topicid/2/
> 
> Well I would say this shows that there is a need for Design for all....
> 
> Also there are some more people who use cheats:
> tester, PR guys, journalists, age rating, etc ...
> 
> Why not make Design for all from the beginning? ;-)
> 
> 
> With kind regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 8
> ********************************************



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120620/e11eb2a0/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Thu Jun 21 06:14:47 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>

Hello,

I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.

Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
lost.

For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....

It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.


I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
Serious Games:
* the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
(e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
* the gamers needs this skills
(e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)

AND of course it should be possible.
(e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game) 


Best regards,
Sandra




From jtorrente at e-ucm.es  Thu Jun 21 10:04:27 2012
From: jtorrente at e-ucm.es (Javier Torrente (E-UCM))
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:04:27 +0200
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Sandra,

What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.

Regards,

Javier

2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>

> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
>        games_access at igda.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        games_access-request at igda.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        games_access-owner at igda.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
>        <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
> I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.
>
> Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
> to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
> lost.
>
> For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
> as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
> Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....
>
> It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
> interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.
>
>
> I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
> Serious Games:
> * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
> (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
> * the gamers needs this skills
> (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)
>
> AND of course it should be possible.
> (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
> *********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/9aa76b0d/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Thu Jun 21 10:07:18 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:07:18 +0200
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
	<CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002101cd4fb7$2c951670$85bf4350$@de>

Hi,

it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J

But this is not only because of the paper.

It is a general problem.

 

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Javier Torrente (E-UCM)
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:04
An: games_access at igda.org
Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11

 

Hi Sandra,

 

What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.

 

Regards,

 

Javier

2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>

Send games_access mailing list submissions to
       games_access at igda.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       games_access-request at igda.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       games_access-owner at igda.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
       <games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

Hello,

I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.

Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
lost.

For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....

It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.


I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
Serious Games:
* the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
(e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
* the gamers needs this skills
(e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)

AND of course it should be possible.
(e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)


Best regards,
Sandra




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
*********************************************

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/9c6d3603/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Thu Jun 21 10:52:31 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:52:31 +0100
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
In-Reply-To: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
References: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
Message-ID: <0BC01F33088D4DC5A4AA0152EF0B11C0@OneSwitchPC>

I must be honest, Sandra, that I'm not sure if I quite follow everything 
you're saying, and without reading the paper, I'll only be making guesses. 
However, personally I think all games should have a reasonably practicable 
level of accessibility myself.

I do think it wrong that a game should only offer a way in through a very 
complicated control interface. Likewise I do believe that all new and public 
buildings should have wheelchair access.

I also think Tomb Raider could be made blind accessible, with a lot of 
additional assist modes (there is an audiogame inspired by Tomb Raider that 
exists - but I'm thinking more along the lines of Space Invaders for Blind - 
where both games are playable simultaneously). Certainly wouldn't be an easy 
thing to achieve, but I believe it's do-able, likewise a one-switch Tomb 
Raider is also a possibility.

Barrie





--------------------------------------------------
From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:14 AM
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share

> Hello,
>
> I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.
>
> Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
> to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
> lost.
>
> For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
> as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
> Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....
>
> It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
> interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.
>
>
> I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
> Serious Games:
> * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
> (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
> * the gamers needs this skills
> (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)
>
> AND of course it should be possible.
> (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org 



From sandra_uhling at web.de  Thu Jun 21 11:01:00 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:01:00 +0200
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
In-Reply-To: <0BC01F33088D4DC5A4AA0152EF0B11C0@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
	<0BC01F33088D4DC5A4AA0152EF0B11C0@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <000101cd4fbe$ac981140$05c833c0$@de>

Hi Barrie,

is it about "reasonable". Games are still commercial.
There is business behind. And we cannot request something
that cannot be paid. (This is also part of the CRPD)

A game that will be used only by seeing people
does not need a support for blind people.


Tomb Raider is jumping in free direction.
Special the new one, where you have an open world.
That will very difficult to realise with normal business.
I do not think that you can request them to try it.

How would a one switch Tomb Raider look like?

Best regards,
Sandra


-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Barrie Ellis
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:53
An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [games_access] something important I want to share

I must be honest, Sandra, that I'm not sure if I quite follow everything 
you're saying, and without reading the paper, I'll only be making guesses. 
However, personally I think all games should have a reasonably practicable 
level of accessibility myself.

I do think it wrong that a game should only offer a way in through a very 
complicated control interface. Likewise I do believe that all new and public

buildings should have wheelchair access.

I also think Tomb Raider could be made blind accessible, with a lot of 
additional assist modes (there is an audiogame inspired by Tomb Raider that 
exists - but I'm thinking more along the lines of Space Invaders for Blind -

where both games are playable simultaneously). Certainly wouldn't be an easy

thing to achieve, but I believe it's do-able, likewise a one-switch Tomb 
Raider is also a possibility.

Barrie





--------------------------------------------------
From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:14 AM
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share

> Hello,
>
> I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.
>
> Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
> to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
> lost.
>
> For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
> as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
> Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....
>
> It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
> interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.
>
>
> I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
> Serious Games:
> * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
> (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
> * the gamers needs this skills
> (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)
>
> AND of course it should be possible.
> (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org 

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



From steve at ablegamers.com  Thu Jun 21 14:48:42 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:48:42 -0400
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <002101cd4fb7$2c951670$85bf4350$@de>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
	<CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101cd4fb7$2c951670$85bf4350$@de>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg@mail.gmail.com>

I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility is
not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to use
accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider
swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just need
to remove the ones we can.

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:

>  Hi,****
>
> it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J****
>
> But this is not only because of the paper.****
>
> It is a general problem.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *Von:* games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
> *Im Auftrag von *Javier Torrente (E-UCM)
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:04
> *An:* games_access at igda.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Sandra,****
>
> ** **
>
> What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> Javier****
>
> 2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>****
>
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
>        games_access at igda.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        games_access-request at igda.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        games_access-owner at igda.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
>        <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
> I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.
>
> Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
> to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
> lost.
>
> For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
> as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
> Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....
>
> It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
> interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.
>
>
> I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
> Serious Games:
> * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
> (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
> * the gamers needs this skills
> (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)
>
> AND of course it should be possible.
> (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
> *************************************************
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/7a85a0b4/attachment.htm>

From jrporter at uw.edu  Thu Jun 21 15:16:23 2012
From: jrporter at uw.edu (John R. Porter)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:23 -0700
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
	<CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101cd4fb7$2c951670$85bf4350$@de>
	<CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADWyad90p1x_zAd7_et0sW+TU9rd6BSrZQ-Rctd6foNhP24aEw@mail.gmail.com>

I agree, and think it's really an issue of pragmatics. Would it be nice if
someone could wave a magic wand and make every game completely accessible
to everyone? Sure, of course it would. But that's a totally unrealistic
goal, and because of that, it's somewhat limited in its usefulness.

It's easy (and something that happens often in academia) to fall into the
trap of focusing too hard on trying to find a "magic bullet" solution and
say that the only right answer is one that totally evens the playing field
for everyone. But that sort of conversation is more philosophical than
practical. It would be like if all physicists spent the last 50 years
exclusively trying to discover the Grand Unified Theory, and didn't bother
to solve any of the more discrete challenges -- we'd have a lot of
arguments and heady publications, but not a lot of useful discoveries to
show for it.

Instead, we need to start by acknowledging that this is an imperfect
scenario. Game experiences are too varied, and the spectrum of human
capabilities so wide, that you can't make *everyone* happy. For games to be
as complex and entertaining as some players want, other players will
invariably be isolated from native participation (and that's where the job
of assistive technology researchers like myself come into play, as this is
the gap we have to bridge). That's of course not to say that the
responsibility falls off of game developers, because the success of
assistive technologies is wholly dependent on how much they are willing to
work with us and compromise. But that said, Universal Design is an
extremely challenging prospect in any design field, and maybe most so in
gaming.

Trying to maximize the ability for *as many people as possible* to play *the
games they want to play*, but realizing that it's an issue that will never
be *completely* solved, is a much better aspiration.

At least that's my two cents...

-John

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:

> I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility
> is not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to use
> accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider
> swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just need
> to remove the ones we can.
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>
>>  Hi,****
>>
>> it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J****
>>
>> But this is not only because of the paper.****
>>
>> It is a general problem.****
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/4bbe2371/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Fri Jun 22 06:42:13 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:42:13 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org><CAGrF7j3WRMaLiS9aTsDxvJr_bKVvgpVYesQnmCWC3wfrYKPCMQ@mail.gmail.com><002101cd4fb7$2c951670$85bf4350$@de>
	<CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B9E8CAC528D04D77B59C6BCEF21C2495@OneSwitchPC>

I don't think that's an unpopular stand point at all, Steve. I agree with what you said. I'm not aware of anyone who is saying that all games should be universally accessible. My examples of one-switch and blind accessible Tomb Raider are just to say that it is possible.

The access laws in the UK press for reasonably practicable change (in public services). I strongly believe that similar legislation for games would bring about faster and more effective change. Developer altruism and seeing how greater access has the potential to broadening their business model will only take this cause so far.

What would help in the meantime is a common cause, backed by a growing collective voice. Fragmented we are so much weaker than we should be. If AbleGamers think they can do it all, or SpecialEffect, or the GASIG, or AccessAble Games, etc. etc. - then they are severely deluded. In numbers, we will make faster and more powerful progress.

I do think if we can all endorse a Game Accessibility Guidelines set-up, and push it (perhaps pushing our own agendas with it a little too - such as One switch games from my side) - I think we'll start to feel like a more coherent movement, but one that respects that we do have different outlooks on things like legislation, how far to go and so on.

We need to keep helping developers to understand about barriers, and the benefits of removing them with an idea of how hard it will be to implement. But one set of root guidelines will stop us looking the fragmented bunch we are at the minute.

Barrie




From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:48 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11


I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility is not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to use accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just need to remove the ones we can.


On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

  Hi,

  it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J

  But this is not only because of the paper.

  It is a general problem.





  Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Javier Torrente (E-UCM)
  Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:04
  An: games_access at igda.org
  Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11



  Hi Sandra,



  What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.



  Regards,



  Javier

  2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>

  Send games_access mailing list submissions to
         games_access at igda.org

  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
         http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
         games_access-request at igda.org

  You can reach the person managing the list at
         games_access-owner at igda.org

  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
  than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


  Today's Topics:

    1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)


  ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Message: 1
  Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
  From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
  Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
  To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
         <games_access at igda.org>
  Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
  Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

  Hello,

  I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.

  Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
  to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
  lost.

  For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
  as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
  Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....

  It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
  interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.


  I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
  Serious Games:
  * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
  (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
  * the gamers needs this skills
  (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)

  AND of course it should be possible.
  (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)


  Best regards,
  Sandra




  ------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

  End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
  *********************************************




  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/6f4ec0ff/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 22 07:04:01 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: 22 Jun 2012 04:04:01 -0700
Subject: [games_access]
	=?utf-8?q?games=5Faccess_Digest=2C_Vol_101=2C_Issu?=
	=?utf-8?q?e_13?=
Message-ID: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>


Despite how under fire it has often come for being vague, for my money UK accessibility law nailed it, by obliging people to make  reasonable adjustments. It's that 'reasonable' part that's important, although it can be abused it allows some flexibility and common sense for things that aren't sensible to implement.. in the case of games, things that would damage the core mechanic. 

So while a game be definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game), what we can achieve is avoiding -unneccessary- barriers, and at present there are an extraordinary number of those.

What's worked very well for me in the past has been getting developers to step back from the grand vision and think about which skills their mechanic is meant to be a test of. Eg. if its a FPS then its a test of motor and visual skills, so a high level of accessibility won't be possible for those areas.. for for hearing and cognitive it should be. On the other hand, a quiz game should be able to achieve a very good level of motor and visual accessibility.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/73433d98/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Fri Jun 22 08:18:41 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:18:41 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
In-Reply-To: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
References: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <trinity-f852f807-6b99-42be-81cf-056bf9387bb1-1340367521433@3capp-webde-bs49.dlan.cinetic.de>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/577e583c/attachment.htm>

From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Fri Jun 22 08:28:12 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:28:12 +0300
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
In-Reply-To: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
References: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>

Hello all (sorry in advance for my lengthy e-mail), 

I would also like to share some of my thoughts about this subject since I disagree with some of the things mentioned in the conversation.

---
First of all, accessibility is not synonymous to ?people with permanent physical disabilities?  and probably this misconception is the root of most of the problems that we discuss about all of these years. It is not a marginal issue that concerns some niche groups of our society. It is a mainstream issue concerning the majority of people. 

Probably the historical reason for this misconception is that, in the past video game players constituted a rather coherent closed group with little variation regarding their characteristics such as age, skills, interests, even gender. Accessibility was not much of an issue, mainly because if you faced any accessibility problems, you simply would not become a ?game-player?.  From this point forward, things begun looking like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Since most games were created either by ?game-players? or in order to appeal to ?game-players?, even when more people (literally) started coming into play, game designers instead of trying to expand their notion of what is a video game and how people can (or like) to play it, continued reproducing the same recipe that was conceived to be appealing to ?game-players?. And this is the main reason why currently, although game companies have at their disposal highly advanced software and hardware technologies and vast human and material resources, still fail to considerably expand their target markets. 

Thus, in my opinion,  the biggest mistake of most game development companies is that they try hard to sell more games to the same people, instead of trying to find ways of selling the same games to more people. For example, typically I would not be considered as a person with a particular disability, but still there are several video games (as well as hardware components) with which I (would) face considerable accessibility problems.

---

About the ?reasonable? approach. My main concern is who decides what is reasonable and by which means. For example, there was a time when it was considered reasonable that blind people should be confined to their home. As most of you already know there are people out there that it is reasonable that there is no reason for a person who cannot use his hands to play a video game. Anyway, I will not get this any further?

---

About Ian?s comment that ?a game by definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game)?. I think that there is a misunderstanding here between ?barrier? and ?challenge?. Games need to provide ?challenge? not ?barriers?. What constitutes a challenge may considerably vary for each distinct player and to some extend it is highly correlated with all previous conversations about game difficulty.

Furthermore, games do not tests skills. Skills are the means that players employ to overcome challenges. In my opinion, games (except in special cases) are mainly meant to provide entertaining experiences. Thus, the means (or skills if you prefer) people employ to achieve that should not be mistaken as their goal. Why should it matter if I play an FPS using Kinect, a mouse, a (virtual) keyboard, on switch, speech commands, mind waves? Or if I play with my eyes open or shut? It is still the same game with the same goal (find the treasure, kill the monsters, steal the cars, ...) 

---

OK I will pause here for now, so that some people may actually read it... 



Cheers,

Dimitris



From oneswitch at gmail.com  Fri Jun 22 09:13:01 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:13:01 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
In-Reply-To: <001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
	<001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <E66851336DBE45F08FCA64813806EC00@OneSwitchPC>

Hi Dimitris,

>From my side, I consider a disabled person as someone who can't do something that they want to do. So for me, of course this can mean any one of us 6 billion or so human beings in the world. If that person finds a way to be enabled in doing the thing they want/need to, then in respect of that thing, then they are no longer a disabled person. So in this respect, I'm talking about people who want to play games, but the barriers in the games are disabling them, frequently to an extremely frustrating extent.

Personally, I fully agree that many more game developers need to broaden their outlook on the market, and how inclusive their games are. I think most people would agree with that too. I just don't pushing that point alone is going to bring about a sea change.

As for what is reasonable, basic legislation seems very possible to me. This is worth a look US wise: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3101/text. Why not set a standard that games that need subtitles/captions  get it. Why not push for colour-blind friendly design? Why not push for simpler control schemes? Why not push for support for those who can't read? Then point people to extra stuff you can do to help even more people.

I can't speak for Ian on Barrier-Free, but from my stand-point, a fully barrier-free game may be possible, but only to a very limited point. And that really is an academic/existential argument that won't solve the most pressing problems.

Barrie


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 1:28 PM
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13

> Hello all (sorry in advance for my lengthy e-mail), 
> 
> I would also like to share some of my thoughts about this subject since I disagree with some of the things mentioned in the conversation.
> 
> ---
> First of all, accessibility is not synonymous to ?people with permanent physical disabilities?  and probably this misconception is the root of most of the problems that we discuss about all of these years. It is not a marginal issue that concerns some niche groups of our society. It is a mainstream issue concerning the majority of people. 
> 
> Probably the historical reason for this misconception is that, in the past video game players constituted a rather coherent closed group with little variation regarding their characteristics such as age, skills, interests, even gender. Accessibility was not much of an issue, mainly because if you faced any accessibility problems, you simply would not become a ?game-player?.  From this point forward, things begun looking like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Since most games were created either by ?game-players? or in order to appeal to ?game-players?, even when more people (literally) started coming into play, game designers instead of trying to expand their notion of what is a video game and how people can (or like) to play it, continued reproducing the same recipe that was conceived to be appealing to ?game-players?. And this is the main reason why currently, although game companies have at their disposal highly advanced software and hardware technologies and vast human and material resources, still fail to considerably expand their target markets. 
> 
> Thus, in my opinion,  the biggest mistake of most game development companies is that they try hard to sell more games to the same people, instead of trying to find ways of selling the same games to more people. For example, typically I would not be considered as a person with a particular disability, but still there are several video games (as well as hardware components) with which I (would) face considerable accessibility problems.
> 
> ---
> 
> About the ?reasonable? approach. My main concern is who decides what is reasonable and by which means. For example, there was a time when it was considered reasonable that blind people should be confined to their home. As most of you already know there are people out there that it is reasonable that there is no reason for a person who cannot use his hands to play a video game. Anyway, I will not get this any further?
> 
> ---
> 
> About Ian?s comment that ?a game by definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game)?. I think that there is a misunderstanding here between ?barrier? and ?challenge?. Games need to provide ?challenge? not ?barriers?. What constitutes a challenge may considerably vary for each distinct player and to some extend it is highly correlated with all previous conversations about game difficulty.
> 
> Furthermore, games do not tests skills. Skills are the means that players employ to overcome challenges. In my opinion, games (except in special cases) are mainly meant to provide entertaining experiences. Thus, the means (or skills if you prefer) people employ to achieve that should not be mistaken as their goal. Why should it matter if I play an FPS using Kinect, a mouse, a (virtual) keyboard, on switch, speech commands, mind waves? Or if I play with my eyes open or shut? It is still the same game with the same goal (find the treasure, kill the monsters, steal the cars, ...) 
> 
> ---
> 
> OK I will pause here for now, so that some people may actually read it... 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dimitris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/823c953c/attachment.htm>

From eleanor at 7128.com  Fri Jun 22 10:16:30 2012
From: eleanor at 7128.com (Eleanor Robinson)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:16:30 -0400
Subject: [games_access] games access
Message-ID: <4FE47E3E.6010904@7128.com>

Hi - I agree with most of you that not all games can be accessible to 
all people.  BUT, they can be more accessible than they currently are.  
A combination of accommodations that are not excessively costly to 
include would improve accessibility for many.  Variable speeds, 
re-mappable controls, color blind accommodation, and pre-sets like 
auto-aiming and so forth could make a game much more playable.  Closed 
captioning for speech and meaningful sounds for the deaf, and audio 
descriptions for the  blind would be more expensive, but doable.

One of the things I feel strongly would help developers to think about 
accessibility would be to label games as to their accessibility.  If 
developers had to say a game was not accessible to (whatever), they 
would be more inclined to build in something that would improve the 
accessibility to that group.  It also would encourage thinking about 
what accommodations might improve the accessibility.

I do agree that our efforts should be focused on making games  
accessible to more people, not looking for the silver bullet of 
universal accessibility.  I think we should also focus on the fact that 
making games more flexible in their play, increases the appeal of the 
games and increases the revenue for those games.  And we, as gamers, 
need to take care of ourselves and others as we age and make sure we can 
still play the games we want to because they have that flexibility we 
need in order to see, hear and manipulate the controls.

Eleanor Robinson
7-128 Software


From i_h at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 22 13:54:55 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:54:55 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 14
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2247.1340370785.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.2247.1340370785.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W10F83353A97D4F65402F891FC0@phx.gbl>


>From a legal point of view accessibility specifically refers to disabilities alone (the games industry perspective that it has nothing to do with disability and instead means low barrier to entry doesn't help matters at all).
As far as I can see you can't really have an absolute minimum required standard as no matter how simple and basic the thing involved there will always be some game mechanic that doesn't fit with it.. like a music quiz where some of the questions were about trying to guess what the difficult to hear lyrics are, including subtitles/captions for that would completely break it. There will always be some grounds for exemption.
The problem is that from a developer's point of view when you're just after straight answers/guidance, if things are talked about in terms of absolutes and it turns out there's actually an exception, that then completely invalidates everything. If one thig doesn't apply, then how are you to know which of the others apply? Instead though if there's a basic level which is strongly recommended rather than absolutely required for all games then that is definitely achievable, especially when developers realise that they're already doing a decent chunk of it already. 
Reaching wider audiences, especially those that dont have much competition, can be a powerful argument but only really for indies, who are more willing to take a punt in exchange for the chance to stand out from the crowd. For the bigger players we need some concrete facts and figures to back up the speculation on how much it's potentially worth, and build a proper business case.. but unlike other industries that's easy enough to achieve, just need the right analytics in place.
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:28:12 +0300
> From: "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
> 	<games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="UTF-8"
> 
> Hello all (sorry in advance for my lengthy e-mail), 
> 
> I would also like to share some of my thoughts about this subject since I disagree with some of the things mentioned in the conversation.
> 
> ---
> First of all, accessibility is not synonymous to ?people with permanent physical disabilities?  and probably this misconception is the root of most of the problems that we discuss about all of these years. It is not a marginal issue that concerns some niche groups of our society. It is a mainstream issue concerning the majority of people. 
> 
> Probably the historical reason for this misconception is that, in the past video game players constituted a rather coherent closed group with little variation regarding their characteristics such as age, skills, interests, even gender. Accessibility was not much of an issue, mainly because if you faced any accessibility problems, you simply would not become a ?game-player?.  From this point forward, things begun looking like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Since most games were created either by ?game-players? or in order to appeal to ?game-players?, even when more people (literally) started coming into play, game designers instead of trying to expand their notion of what is a video game and how people can (or like) to play it, continued reproducing the same recipe that was conceived to be appealing to ?game-players?. And this is the main reason why currently, although game companies have at their disposal highly advanced software and hardware technologies and vast human and mate
>  rial resources, still fail to considerably expand their target markets. 
> 
> Thus, in my opinion,  the biggest mistake of most game development companies is that they try hard to sell more games to the same people, instead of trying to find ways of selling the same games to more people. For example, typically I would not be considered as a person with a particular disability, but still there are several video games (as well as hardware components) with which I (would) face considerable accessibility problems.
> 
> ---
> 
> About the ?reasonable? approach. My main concern is who decides what is reasonable and by which means. For example, there was a time when it was considered reasonable that blind people should be confined to their home. As most of you already know there are people out there that it is reasonable that there is no reason for a person who cannot use his hands to play a video game. Anyway, I will not get this any further?
> 
> ---
> 
> About Ian?s comment that ?a game by definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game)?. I think that there is a misunderstanding here between ?barrier? and ?challenge?. Games need to provide ?challenge? not ?barriers?. What constitutes a challenge may considerably vary for each distinct player and to some extend it is highly correlated with all previous conversations about game difficulty.
> 
> Furthermore, games do not tests skills. Skills are the means that players employ to overcome challenges. In my opinion, games (except in special cases) are mainly meant to provide entertaining experiences. Thus, the means (or skills if you prefer) people employ to achieve that should not be mistaken as their goal. Why should it matter if I play an FPS using Kinect, a mouse, a (virtual) keyboard, on switch, speech commands, mind waves? Or if I play with my eyes open or shut? It is still the same game with the same goal (find the treasure, kill the monsters, steal the cars, ...) 
> 
> ---
> 
> OK I will pause here for now, so that some people may actually read it... 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dimitris
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:13:01 +0100
> From: "Barrie Ellis" <oneswitch at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List"
> 	<games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <E66851336DBE45F08FCA64813806EC00 at OneSwitchPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Hi Dimitris,
> 
> >From my side, I consider a disabled person as someone who can't do something that they want to do. So for me, of course this can mean any one of us 6 billion or so human beings in the world. If that person finds a way to be enabled in doing the thing they want/need to, then in respect of that thing, then they are no longer a disabled person. So in this respect, I'm talking about people who want to play games, but the barriers in the games are disabling them, frequently to an extremely frustrating extent.
> 
> Personally, I fully agree that many more game developers need to broaden their outlook on the market, and how inclusive their games are. I think most people would agree with that too. I just don't pushing that point alone is going to bring about a sea change.
> 
> As for what is reasonable, basic legislation seems very possible to me. This is worth a look US wise: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3101/text. Why not set a standard that games that need subtitles/captions  get it. Why not push for colour-blind friendly design? Why not push for simpler control schemes? Why not push for support for those who can't read? Then point people to extra stuff you can do to help even more people.
> 
> I can't speak for Ian on Barrier-Free, but from my stand-point, a fully barrier-free game may be possible, but only to a very limited point. And that really is an academic/existential argument that won't solve the most pressing problems.
> 
> Barrie
> 
> 

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/33eb0289/attachment.htm>

From blazeeagle at suddenlink.net  Fri Jun 22 18:42:44 2012
From: blazeeagle at suddenlink.net (blazeeagle at suddenlink.net)
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 18:42:44 -0400
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.11.1340287205.38893.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <02054585148E431E9F1D03B097B4E751@Aarons>

You make valid points Sandra.

Designing games to be as accessible as reasonably possible from their 
conception seems reasonable. This includes adjustable difficulty level. With 
level of difficulty options built into each game, Gamers who aren't disabled 
& desire an extremely high difficulty setting can pick a high difficulty 
setting from each games options menu.

This will allow disabled gamers the ability to set each game to their 
ability & skill level.



BlazeEagle

-----Original Message----- 
From: games_access-request at igda.org
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 10:00 AM
To: games_access at igda.org
Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11

Send games_access mailing list submissions to
games_access at igda.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
games_access-request at igda.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
games_access-owner at igda.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
<games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello,

I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.

Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
lost.

For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....

It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.


I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
Serious Games:
* the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
(e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
* the gamers needs this skills
(e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)

AND of course it should be possible.
(e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)


Best regards,
Sandra




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
********************************************* 



From blazeeagle at suddenlink.net  Sat Jun 23 04:35:22 2012
From: blazeeagle at suddenlink.net (blazeeagle at suddenlink.net)
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 04:35:22 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Gaming Accessibility Limitations - was - Re:
	games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2162.1340361738.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.2162.1340361738.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <078EA81D243541D09E125377B4F8DD7D@Aarons>

I also agree.

Striving for broader overall accessibility is the mission because total 
accessibility isn?t possible.

Being disabled myself, I?ve learned that while more can be done to improve 
greater overall accessibility, There?s obviously limits to how much can be 
done, especially because disabilities are so varied.

I truly appreciate all the efforts gaming disability organizations such as 
Able Gamers are making to make games generally more accessible.


BlazeEagle

-----Original Message----- 
From: games_access-request at igda.org
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 6:42 AM
To: games_access at igda.org
Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13

Send games_access mailing list submissions to
games_access at igda.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
games_access-request at igda.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
games_access-owner at igda.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11 (Steve Spohn)
   2. Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11 (John R. Porter)
   3. Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11 (Barrie Ellis)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:48:42 -0400
From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID:
<CABrM+MUbKVaaPKF07pg6ZFsTOSnGh5-cnRwYkXOOxsNgEqEdtg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility is
not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to use
accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider
swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just need
to remove the ones we can.

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:

>  Hi,****
>
> it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J****
>
> But this is not only because of the paper.****
>
> It is a general problem.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *Von:* games_access-bounces at igda.org 
> [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
> *Im Auftrag von *Javier Torrente (E-UCM)
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:04
> *An:* games_access at igda.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Sandra,****
>
> ** **
>
> What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> Javier****
>
> 2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>****
>
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
>        games_access at igda.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        games_access-request at igda.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        games_access-owner at igda.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
>        <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
> I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.
>
> Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
> to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
> lost.
>
> For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
> as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
> Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....
>
> It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
> interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.
>
>
> I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
> Serious Games:
> * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
> (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
> * the gamers needs this skills
> (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)
>
> AND of course it should be possible.
> (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
> *************************************************
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
| Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/7a85a0b4/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:23 -0700
From: "John R. Porter" <jrporter at uw.edu>
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID:
<CADWyad90p1x_zAd7_et0sW+TU9rd6BSrZQ-Rctd6foNhP24aEw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

I agree, and think it's really an issue of pragmatics. Would it be nice if
someone could wave a magic wand and make every game completely accessible
to everyone? Sure, of course it would. But that's a totally unrealistic
goal, and because of that, it's somewhat limited in its usefulness.

It's easy (and something that happens often in academia) to fall into the
trap of focusing too hard on trying to find a "magic bullet" solution and
say that the only right answer is one that totally evens the playing field
for everyone. But that sort of conversation is more philosophical than
practical. It would be like if all physicists spent the last 50 years
exclusively trying to discover the Grand Unified Theory, and didn't bother
to solve any of the more discrete challenges -- we'd have a lot of
arguments and heady publications, but not a lot of useful discoveries to
show for it.

Instead, we need to start by acknowledging that this is an imperfect
scenario. Game experiences are too varied, and the spectrum of human
capabilities so wide, that you can't make *everyone* happy. For games to be
as complex and entertaining as some players want, other players will
invariably be isolated from native participation (and that's where the job
of assistive technology researchers like myself come into play, as this is
the gap we have to bridge). That's of course not to say that the
responsibility falls off of game developers, because the success of
assistive technologies is wholly dependent on how much they are willing to
work with us and compromise. But that said, Universal Design is an
extremely challenging prospect in any design field, and maybe most so in
gaming.

Trying to maximize the ability for *as many people as possible* to play *the
games they want to play*, but realizing that it's an issue that will never
be *completely* solved, is a much better aspiration.

At least that's my two cents...

-John

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:

> I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility
> is not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to 
> use
> accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider
> swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just 
> need
> to remove the ones we can.
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling 
> <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>
>>  Hi,****
>>
>> it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J****
>>
>> But this is not only because of the paper.****
>>
>> It is a general problem.****
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | 
> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | 
> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120621/4bbe2371/attachment.htm>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:42:13 +0100
From: "Barrie Ellis" <oneswitch at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List"
<games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID: <B9E8CAC528D04D77B59C6BCEF21C2495 at OneSwitchPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

I don't think that's an unpopular stand point at all, Steve. I agree with 
what you said. I'm not aware of anyone who is saying that all games should 
be universally accessible. My examples of one-switch and blind accessible 
Tomb Raider are just to say that it is possible.

The access laws in the UK press for reasonably practicable change (in public 
services). I strongly believe that similar legislation for games would bring 
about faster and more effective change. Developer altruism and seeing how 
greater access has the potential to broadening their business model will 
only take this cause so far.

What would help in the meantime is a common cause, backed by a growing 
collective voice. Fragmented we are so much weaker than we should be. If 
AbleGamers think they can do it all, or SpecialEffect, or the GASIG, or 
AccessAble Games, etc. etc. - then they are severely deluded. In numbers, we 
will make faster and more powerful progress.

I do think if we can all endorse a Game Accessibility Guidelines set-up, and 
push it (perhaps pushing our own agendas with it a little too - such as One 
switch games from my side) - I think we'll start to feel like a more 
coherent movement, but one that respects that we do have different outlooks 
on things like legislation, how far to go and so on.

We need to keep helping developers to understand about barriers, and the 
benefits of removing them with an idea of how hard it will be to implement. 
But one set of root guidelines will stop us looking the fragmented bunch we 
are at the minute.

Barrie




From: Steve Spohn
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:48 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11


I might be be the unpopular one here, but our jobs in game accessibility is 
not to make every game accessible to every disability. Our job is to use 
accessible gaming as a tool to help more disabled gamers get into a wider 
swath of games. We cannot save the world from having barriers, we just need 
to remove the ones we can.


On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> 
wrote:

  Hi,

  it is a paper: ?do not give to others? J

  But this is not only because of the paper.

  It is a general problem.





  Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] 
Im Auftrag von Javier Torrente (E-UCM)
  Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2012 16:04
  An: games_access at igda.org
  Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11



  Hi Sandra,



  What paper is it? It would be interesting to have a look.



  Regards,



  Javier

  2012/6/21 <games_access-request at igda.org>

  Send games_access mailing list submissions to
         games_access at igda.org

  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
         http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
         games_access-request at igda.org

  You can reach the person managing the list at
         games_access-owner at igda.org

  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
  than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


  Today's Topics:

    1. something important I want to share (Sandra Uhling)


  ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Message: 1
  Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:14:47 +0200
  From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
  Subject: [games_access] something important I want to share
  To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
         <games_access at igda.org>
  Message-ID: <001801cd4f96$b2171bc0$16455340$@de>
  Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

  Hello,

  I read a paper and I do not agree with the content.

  Every gamer should be able (and has the right for this)
  to play the game they like. Also when the game experience is changed or
  lost.

  For example DDR. It should be ok to play it like you want
  as long as it is fun (ok you should not hurt others of course)
  Play with a pad, keyboard, hand pad, ....

  It is wrong to think that a game need a special complex
  interface or it has to be difficulty. That is bad thinking.


  I found only three reasons "against" Accessibility.
  Serious Games:
  * the barrier is part of the aim, it is needed
  (e.g. color check, you do not need sound information here)
  * the gamers needs this skills
  (e.g. a fireman has to be able to see)

  AND of course it should be possible.
  (e.g. Tomb Raider for blind is not possible without making a second game)


  Best regards,
  Sandra




  ------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

  End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 11
  *********************************************




  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120622/6f4ec0ff/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
********************************************* 



From sandra_uhling at web.de  Sat Jun 23 09:39:58 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:39:58 +0200
Subject: [games_access] What is the target group of games?
In-Reply-To: <001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <col0-p4-eas79CD6D0352C24AFA99A6C991FC0@phx.gbl>
	<001801cd5072$7e5d4cf0$7b17e6d0$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <001801cd5145$af548e80$0dfdab80$@de>

Hello Dimitris,

i love your first two sections.
I talked with game developers they said that they develop for a certain target group.
And this is the big problem.

E.g. imagine a game like Tomb Raider.
What is the target group? There is not special target group, like marketing defines it.
The only part that is the same is: they love Tomb Raider. And that is all.
(And do not forget the beginners :-) )

Also when you have a certain target group. Of course there can be gamers with a disability
in this group. 

In my study one person said: person with disability are not our target group.
That is bad. Sounds like taking the target group and say to all person with a disability
sorry, but you are out. This is like German separation. That is bad and sucks.
But this is the imagination of the people.

Maybe our message should be: there is huge varity of gamers.
(Why do all these cheats programs, tools exists???)


Best regards,
Sandra


-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Dimitris Grammenos
Gesendet: Freitag, 22. Juni 2012 14:28
An: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13

Hello all (sorry in advance for my lengthy e-mail), 

I would also like to share some of my thoughts about this subject since I disagree with some of the things mentioned in the conversation.

---
First of all, accessibility is not synonymous to ?people with permanent physical disabilities?  and probably this misconception is the root of most of the problems that we discuss about all of these years. It is not a marginal issue that concerns some niche groups of our society. It is a mainstream issue concerning the majority of people. 

Probably the historical reason for this misconception is that, in the past video game players constituted a rather coherent closed group with little variation regarding their characteristics such as age, skills, interests, even gender. Accessibility was not much of an issue, mainly because if you faced any accessibility problems, you simply would not become a ?game-player?.  From this point forward, things begun looking like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Since most games were created either by ?game-players? or in order to appeal to ?game-players?, even when more people (literally) started coming into play, game designers instead of trying to expand their notion of what is a video game and how people can (or like) to play it, continued reproducing the same recipe that was conceived to be appealing to ?game-players?. And this is the main reason why currently, although game companies have at their disposal highly advanced software and hardware technologies and vast human and material resources, still fail to considerably expand their target markets. 

Thus, in my opinion,  the biggest mistake of most game development companies is that they try hard to sell more games to the same people, instead of trying to find ways of selling the same games to more people. For example, typically I would not be considered as a person with a particular disability, but still there are several video games (as well as hardware components) with which I (would) face considerable accessibility problems.

---

About the ?reasonable? approach. My main concern is who decides what is reasonable and by which means. For example, there was a time when it was considered reasonable that blind people should be confined to their home. As most of you already know there are people out there that it is reasonable that there is no reason for a person who cannot use his hands to play a video game. Anyway, I will not get this any further?

---

About Ian?s comment that ?a game by definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game)?. I think that there is a misunderstanding here between ?barrier? and ?challenge?. Games need to provide ?challenge? not ?barriers?. What constitutes a challenge may considerably vary for each distinct player and to some extend it is highly correlated with all previous conversations about game difficulty.

Furthermore, games do not tests skills. Skills are the means that players employ to overcome challenges. In my opinion, games (except in special cases) are mainly meant to provide entertaining experiences. Thus, the means (or skills if you prefer) people employ to achieve that should not be mistaken as their goal. Why should it matter if I play an FPS using Kinect, a mouse, a (virtual) keyboard, on switch, speech commands, mind waves? Or if I play with my eyes open or shut? It is still the same game with the same goal (find the treasure, kill the monsters, steal the cars, ...) 

---

OK I will pause here for now, so that some people may actually read it... 



Cheers,

Dimitris

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



From i_h at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 23 10:28:04 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:28:04 +0000
Subject: [games_access] What is the target group of games? (Sandra
	Uhling)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5.1340460004.56651.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.5.1340460004.56651.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W21ED1B21D4054D5EE4FE5891E30@phx.gbl>



Games do generally have a specific target audience, the target audience for the first Tomb Raider game was 15-26 year old males. 
I'd be stunned if there was a game design doc anywhere that said that the target audience was eg. '18-35 but excluding anyone with any kind of disability', that comment they made in the study sounds like an off the cuff one made through lack of awareness, not an actual policy, I've heard denial like that all the time from developers, it's a pretty common initial reaction.
But clearly yes if you have for example a defined target audience of 18-35 males and have a game mechanic in which you need to be able to tell red from green, then you're instantly missing a major chunk of that target. 
At risk of sounding like a broken record though, although this all seems perfect sense, really it's just conjecture which doesn't stand up against denial (such as this recent example: "our players don't want remappable controls") and doesn't wash as a business case.. so on top we also need hard figures for how much features cost to develop Vs how many people used them Vs how much each player was worth. 
If you can demonstrate that a feature is profitable the the execs will take an interest and you'll have top-down pressure as well as bottom-up. Not everything can have analytics attached, but you only need a few good examples to start to demonstrate that accessibility is profitable.

> 
>    1. What is the target group of games? (Sandra Uhling)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:39:58 +0200
> From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> Subject: [games_access] What is the target group of games?
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
> 	<games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001801cd5145$af548e80$0dfdab80$@de>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="UTF-8"
> 
> Hello Dimitris,
> 
> i love your first two sections.
> I talked with game developers they said that they develop for a certain target group.
> And this is the big problem.
> 
> E.g. imagine a game like Tomb Raider.
> What is the target group? There is not special target group, like marketing defines it.
> The only part that is the same is: they love Tomb Raider. And that is all.
> (And do not forget the beginners :-) )
> 
> Also when you have a certain target group. Of course there can be gamers with a disability
> in this group. 
> 
> In my study one person said: person with disability are not our target group.
> That is bad. Sounds like taking the target group and say to all person with a disability
> sorry, but you are out. This is like German separation. That is bad and sucks.
> But this is the imagination of the people.
> 
> Maybe our message should be: there is huge varity of gamers.
> (Why do all these cheats programs, tools exists???)
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Sandra
> 
> 
> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Dimitris Grammenos
> Gesendet: Freitag, 22. Juni 2012 14:28
> An: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
> Betreff: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 13
> 
> Hello all (sorry in advance for my lengthy e-mail), 
> 
> I would also like to share some of my thoughts about this subject since I disagree with some of the things mentioned in the conversation.
> 
> ---
> First of all, accessibility is not synonymous to ?people with permanent physical disabilities?  and probably this misconception is the root of most of the problems that we discuss about all of these years. It is not a marginal issue that concerns some niche groups of our society. It is a mainstream issue concerning the majority of people. 
> 
> Probably the historical reason for this misconception is that, in the past video game players constituted a rather coherent closed group with little variation regarding their characteristics such as age, skills, interests, even gender. Accessibility was not much of an issue, mainly because if you faced any accessibility problems, you simply would not become a ?game-player?.  From this point forward, things begun looking like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Since most games were created either by ?game-players? or in order to appeal to ?game-players?, even when more people (literally) started coming into play, game designers instead of trying to expand their notion of what is a video game and how people can (or like) to play it, continued reproducing the same recipe that was conceived to be appealing to ?game-players?. And this is the main reason why currently, although game companies have at their disposal highly advanced software and hardware technologies and vast human and mate
>  rial resources, still fail to considerably expand their target markets. 
> 
> Thus, in my opinion,  the biggest mistake of most game development companies is that they try hard to sell more games to the same people, instead of trying to find ways of selling the same games to more people. For example, typically I would not be considered as a person with a particular disability, but still there are several video games (as well as hardware components) with which I (would) face considerable accessibility problems.
> 
> ---
> 
> About the ?reasonable? approach. My main concern is who decides what is reasonable and by which means. For example, there was a time when it was considered reasonable that blind people should be confined to their home. As most of you already know there are people out there that it is reasonable that there is no reason for a person who cannot use his hands to play a video game. Anyway, I will not get this any further?
> 
> ---
> 
> About Ian?s comment that ?a game by definition can't be barrier free (without any barriers it's just a toy or narrative rather than a game)?. I think that there is a misunderstanding here between ?barrier? and ?challenge?. Games need to provide ?challenge? not ?barriers?. What constitutes a challenge may considerably vary for each distinct player and to some extend it is highly correlated with all previous conversations about game difficulty.
> 
> Furthermore, games do not tests skills. Skills are the means that players employ to overcome challenges. In my opinion, games (except in special cases) are mainly meant to provide entertaining experiences. Thus, the means (or skills if you prefer) people employ to achieve that should not be mistaken as their goal. Why should it matter if I play an FPS using Kinect, a mouse, a (virtual) keyboard, on switch, speech commands, mind waves? Or if I play with my eyes open or shut? It is still the same game with the same goal (find the treasure, kill the monsters, steal the cars, ...) 
> 
> ---
> 
> OK I will pause here for now, so that some people may actually read it... 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dimitris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 16
> *********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120623/236fcfd5/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Sun Jun 24 10:28:47 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 16:28:47 +0200
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis of
	disability?
Message-ID: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>

Hi,

do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
disability? 


I have only this:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
9

Does someone have information about the result?
Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

Best regards,
Sandra 



From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 14:21:41 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 14:21:41 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis of
	disability?
In-Reply-To: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>

It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it
is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
> disability?
>
>
> I have only this:
>
> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
> 9
>
> Does someone have information about the result?
> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>



-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/1bdd5eeb/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 14:45:36 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:45:36 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
	ofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6C9EA9FB20C84E0E962F65F6C4DFA469@OneSwitchPC>

It was thrown out, but with quite some empathy for the case from the judge in summing up from my recollection. I think the issue was that the law was too weak. Would be worth tracking down the summation if you can find it, as I think it's quite illuminating from memory.

Barrie



From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

  Hi,

  do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
  disability?


  I have only this:
  http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
  9

  Does someone have information about the result?
  Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

  Best regards,
  Sandra

  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/8b56670c/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 14:47:40 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:47:40 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
	ofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>

Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

  Hi,

  do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
  disability?


  I have only this:
  http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
  9

  Does someone have information about the result?
  Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

  Best regards,
  Sandra

  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/0a056ba6/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 15:03:36 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:03:36 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
	ofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>

I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally
deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I
can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that
it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to
bring about change.

Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
consequence of the law, is acceptable?

I think that is a bit of a double standard.

Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
> ofdisability?
>
> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it
> is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
>> disability?
>>
>>
>> I have only this:
>>
>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
>> 9
>>
>> Does someone have information about the result?
>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sandra
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/749dbaa3/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 15:14:51 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:14:51 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
	basisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de><CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com><D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>

My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place, very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or think it unfair.

The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous discussions.

Barrie







From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?


I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to bring about change.  


Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the law, is acceptable?


I think that is a bit of a double standard. 


Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


  From: Steve Spohn 
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
  Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


  It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


  On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

    Hi,

    do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
    disability?


    I have only this:
    http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
    9

    Does someone have information about the result?
    Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

    Best regards,
    Sandra

    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






  -- 
  Steve Spohn 
  Editor-In-Chief
  The AbleGamers Foundation
  AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/5b3091b6/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 15:43:29 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:43:29 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
	basisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MUR+JLRidn1X8g-+uhM_gFhuJCDuBaS=tVOrDPUJNS3EA@mail.gmail.com>

I agree that we will differ on this one, but I have to call strawman on
your argument. By that logic the only reason we don't murder people is
because the 10 Commandments tell us not to. I have CC'd the most passionate
person I know about this argument. Maybe he can change your mind.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
>
> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
> or think it unfair.
>
> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
> with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
> wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
>
> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
> discussions.
>
> Barrie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
>
> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally
> deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I
> can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that
> it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to
> bring about change.
>
> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
>
> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
>
> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>>
>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
>> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
>> ofdisability?
>>
>> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it
>> is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
>> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
>>> disability?
>>>
>>>
>>> I have only this:
>>>
>>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
>>> 9
>>>
>>> Does someone have information about the result?
>>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Sandra
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Spohn
>> Editor-In-Chief
>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/f990095d/attachment.htm>

From jrporter at uw.edu  Sun Jun 24 15:58:01 2012
From: jrporter at uw.edu (John R. Porter)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 12:58:01 -0700
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
	basisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com>

Barrie,

You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the
Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push
for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter
argument has to do with the efficacy of *legislation*, not *judgments*.
There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are *not* one and
the same.

Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are
carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to
myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might
at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out,
and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to
them (or at least not much).

Lawsuits, on the other hand, are *never* received well except by those
attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in
very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly
begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The
resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be
"fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing
more."

Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes
that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally
practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties
and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.

Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal
judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce
the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and
far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this
particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such
a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant
to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect
throughout the entire game industry.

-John

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
>
> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
> or think it unfair.
>
> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
> with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
> wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
>
> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
> discussions.
>
> Barrie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
>
> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally
> deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I
> can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that
> it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to
> bring about change.
>
> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
>
> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
>
> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>>
>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
>> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
>> ofdisability?
>>
>> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it
>> is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
>> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
>>> disability?
>>>
>>>
>>> I have only this:
>>>
>>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
>>> 9
>>>
>>> Does someone have information about the result?
>>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Sandra
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Spohn
>> Editor-In-Chief
>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/5619655e/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 24 16:00:18 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:00:18 +0000
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis of
	disability?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3223.1340564618.94576.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.3223.1340564618.94576.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W93ECF5C0DA9C14541D29DE91E20@phx.gbl>


(apologies if this isn't readable, my line breaks often get stripped out from the mailing list for some reason)

Agreed that it did a great deal of damage. It can and does work very well in both web and construction but for gaming it's far too early, at the moment what's needed is purely advocacy and education / awareness raising.

Legislation doesn't really start to have value until it's established as standard industry best practice, at which point it's a useful way to persuade organisations who are insistent on lagging behind. Cases very rarely go through the courts, they're settled out of court by the offending organisation fixing the issue.

Here's a pretty high profile example from the web industry:

http://www.mediaaccess.org.au/transcript-update-on-the-disney-access-court-case


Certainly in the UK in the past year or two there has been an increase in agencies and private companies (as opposed to public sector) putting effort into accessibility, coinciding with more legal action, such as this -

http://www.rnib.org.uk/livingwithsightloss/copingwithsightloss/parentsplace/news/insightmagazine/news/pages/legal_battle_airline.aspx


The climate around this kind of action (for web in the UK) is pretty different now, even just few years ago it was exactly as Steve is describing, reactions along the lines of anger and denial. It's only due to awareness and best practices spreading and accessibility becoming more seen as the norm that things like this can have a positive impact, encouraging some of the remaining slackers to put in a bit more effort due to the possibility of bad publicity. To see where things go from there look at construction, they now have accessibility pretty nailed (or at ahead of web and massively ahead of games). They've had far longer than web and games to get to where they are, but legislation was an essential part of it... at the right time.

The real area of difference between the other industries and games is the inability to have a set level of universal accessibility for games, but then that's where things like reasonable adjustment come in.

So just to emphasise as I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea, the above is describing the status quo in web and construction industries, not what should be happening right now for games. Although legal action over inaccessible games is now possible in most countries in the world due to culture/society/recreation human rights breaches under the UNCRPD, until there's wider awareness and majority voluntary uptake it's not a productive route to pursue.

So I'd agree with both Steve and Barrie - no it doesn't have to cause more harm than good -long term-, but yes it does at the present time, where it clashes directly with our current goal of advocacy. It can't work on its own, I'm sure Scott will have some ideas on this but as far as I can tell, to have the best chance for cultural change across an entire industry it needs to come from multiple angles, so also from top down from publishers and bottom up from developers. 

Ian
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/425ee334/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 24 16:16:50 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:16:50 +0000
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis of
 disability?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3249.1340568020.94576.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.3249.1340568020.94576.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W3482F3A4AA8BEECC83593791E20@phx.gbl>


Lobbying and open dialogue can only go so far, you can't reach everyone that way. There's just one bit missing from what you've said, which is the benefit to the wider industry, not just between the parties involved in the action. I've personally dealt with corporations whos legal teams now insist on AA accessibility driven by the possibility of  bad publicity generated through an out of court settlement. Without any cases being brought, legislation has no teeth. Why bother complying if there's zero risk of anything  happening either way? Just see the current state of cookie law over here, although the law has been in place for over a year and the grace deadline has now passed, the general attitude seems to be to just to sit around and wait to see what happens.On a quite different note but still something I personally find pretty interesting is Film Victoria's take on it, straddling between legislation and advocacy - making public game development grants conditional to meeting accessibility criteria. Carrot instead of stick.

-------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 12:58:01 -0700
> From: "John R. Porter" <jrporter at uw.edu>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> 	basisofdisability?
> To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> 
> Barrie,
> 
> You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the
> Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push
> for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter
> argument has to do with the efficacy of *legislation*, not *judgments*.
> There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are *not* one and
> the same.
> 
> Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are
> carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to
> myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might
> at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out,
> and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to
> them (or at least not much).
> 
> Lawsuits, on the other hand, are *never* received well except by those
> attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in
> very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly
> begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The
> resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be
> "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing
> more."
> 
> Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes
> that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally
> practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties
> and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.
> 
> Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal
> judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce
> the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and
> far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this
> particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such
> a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant
> to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect
> throughout the entire game industry.
> 
> -John
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/1ae6b4e7/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 16:28:17 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 21:28:17 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
	thebasisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de><CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com><D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC><CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com><E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
	<CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC>

Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating. I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each other. Not nice.

I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that well, I grant you.

All the best,

Barrie





From: John R. Porter 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on thebasisofdisability?


Barrie,

You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter argument has to do with the efficacy of legislation, not judgments. There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are not one and the same.

Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out, and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to them (or at least not much).

Lawsuits, on the other hand, are never received well except by those attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing more."

Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.

Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect throughout the entire game industry. 

-John


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

  In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place, very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or think it unfair.

  The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

  Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous discussions.

  Barrie







  From: Steve Spohn 
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
  Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?


  I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to bring about change.  


  Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the law, is acceptable?


  I think that is a bit of a double standard. 


  Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.


  On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

    Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


    From: Steve Spohn 
    Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
    To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
    Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


    It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


    On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

      Hi,

      do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
      disability?


      I have only this:
      http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
      9

      Does someone have information about the result?
      Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

      Best regards,
      Sandra

      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






    -- 
    Steve Spohn 
    Editor-In-Chief
    The AbleGamers Foundation
    AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







  -- 
  Steve Spohn 
  Editor-In-Chief
  The AbleGamers Foundation
  AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/9007ac61/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 17:07:31 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 17:07:31 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
	thebasisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
	<CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MW7qNARLESVPnoNzgA1vHmzf2ARLB6rkbTCcXdAKC=FuA@mail.gmail.com>

I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making
huge change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago
before any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers
even knew accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they
know, now developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will
effect change without the need for legislation.

What we are doing is working.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge
> change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that
> law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted
> some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations
> vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful
> stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating.
> I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each
> other. Not nice.
>
> I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides
> pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that
> well, I grant you.
>
> All the best,
>
> Barrie
>
>
>
>
>  *From:* John R. Porter <jrporter at uw.edu>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
> thebasisofdisability?
>
> Barrie,
>
> You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the
> Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push
> for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter
> argument has to do with the efficacy of *legislation*, not *judgments*.
> There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are *not* one and
> the same.
>
> Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are
> carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to
> myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might
> at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out,
> and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to
> them (or at least not much).
>
> Lawsuits, on the other hand, are *never* received well except by those
> attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in
> very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly
> begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The
> resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be
> "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing
> more."
>
> Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes
> that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally
> practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties
> and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.
>
> Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal
> judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce
> the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and
> far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this
> particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such
> a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant
> to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect
> throughout the entire game industry.
>
> -John
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> **
>> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
>>
>> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
>> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
>> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
>> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
>> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
>> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
>> or think it unfair.
>>
>> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
>> with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
>> wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
>> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
>>
>> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
>> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
>> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
>> discussions.
>>
>> Barrie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
>>  *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
>> basisofdisability?
>>
>> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to
>> personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated
>> with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit
>> fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are
>> not the way to bring about change.
>>
>> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
>> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
>> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
>> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
>> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
>> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
>>
>> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
>>
>> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
>> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>>>
>>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
>>> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
>>> ofdisability?
>>>
>>> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as
>>> it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
>>> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
>>>> disability?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have only this:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
>>>> 9
>>>>
>>>> Does someone have information about the result?
>>>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Sandra
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> games_access mailing list
>>>> games_access at igda.org
>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Spohn
>>> Editor-In-Chief
>>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Spohn
>> Editor-In-Chief
>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/c161aa42/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 17:25:26 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:25:26 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info label
In-Reply-To: <4FE47E3E.6010904@7128.com>
References: <4FE47E3E.6010904@7128.com>
Message-ID: <6F2CA09B2CA446369FFD94C75105C1E8@OneSwitchPC>

Changing the subject back to a good one Eleanor made on a Game Accessibility labelling system... Hope people might find this of interest:

http://www.gamebase.info/magazine/read/game-accessibility-information-symbol_881.html 




Presently, it's a pilot system sitting with SpecialEffect, but I'm hopeful I can persuade them to free it up for anyone to use, with guidance on how best to use it.

Best wishes all,

Barrie


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Eleanor Robinson" <eleanor at 7128.com>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 3:16 PM
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] games access

> Hi - I agree with most of you that not all games can be accessible to 
> all people.  BUT, they can be more accessible than they currently are.  
> A combination of accommodations that are not excessively costly to 
> include would improve accessibility for many.  Variable speeds, 
> re-mappable controls, color blind accommodation, and pre-sets like 
> auto-aiming and so forth could make a game much more playable.  Closed 
> captioning for speech and meaningful sounds for the deaf, and audio 
> descriptions for the  blind would be more expensive, but doable.
> 
> One of the things I feel strongly would help developers to think about 
> accessibility would be to label games as to their accessibility.  If 
> developers had to say a game was not accessible to (whatever), they 
> would be more inclined to build in something that would improve the 
> accessibility to that group.  It also would encourage thinking about 
> what accommodations might improve the accessibility.
> 
> I do agree that our efforts should be focused on making games  
> accessible to more people, not looking for the silver bullet of 
> universal accessibility.  I think we should also focus on the fact that 
> making games more flexible in their play, increases the appeal of the 
> games and increases the revenue for those games.  And we, as gamers, 
> need to take care of ourselves and others as we age and make sure we can 
> still play the games we want to because they have that flexibility we 
> need in order to see, hear and manipulate the controls.
> 
> Eleanor Robinson
> 7-128 Software
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 60px-SQUARE-GAinfo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2237 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 160px-SQUARE-GAinfo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5806 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment-0001.png>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 17:28:35 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:28:35 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination
	onthebasisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MW7qNARLESVPnoNzgA1vHmzf2ARLB6rkbTCcXdAKC=FuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de><CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com><D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC><CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com><E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC><CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com><4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MW7qNARLESVPnoNzgA1vHmzf2ARLB6rkbTCcXdAKC=FuA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6CE4B6B86B7B424AA8A088B5D55D6CB1@OneSwitchPC>

Oh, and didn't want to seem rude. Of course there are some great and important efforts going on. No doubt about it.


From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:07 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Cc: Scott Puckett 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination onthebasisofdisability?


I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making huge change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago before any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers even knew accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they know, now developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will effect change without the need for legislation. 


What we are doing is working.



On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating. I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each other. Not nice.

  I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that well, I grant you.

  All the best,

  Barrie





  From: John R. Porter 
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
  Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on thebasisofdisability?


  Barrie,

  You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter argument has to do with the efficacy of legislation, not judgments. There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are not one and the same.

  Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out, and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to them (or at least not much).

  Lawsuits, on the other hand, are never received well except by those attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing more."

  Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.

  Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect throughout the entire game industry. 

  -John


  On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

    My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

    In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place, very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or think it unfair.

    The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

    Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous discussions.

    Barrie







    From: Steve Spohn 
    Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
    To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
    Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?


    I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to bring about change.  


    Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the law, is acceptable?


    I think that is a bit of a double standard. 


    Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.


    On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

      Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


      From: Steve Spohn 
      Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
      To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
      Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


      It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


      On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

        Hi,

        do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
        disability?


        I have only this:
        http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
        9

        Does someone have information about the result?
        Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

        Best regards,
        Sandra

        _______________________________________________
        games_access mailing list
        games_access at igda.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
        The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






      -- 
      Steve Spohn 
      Editor-In-Chief
      The AbleGamers Foundation
      AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







    -- 
    Steve Spohn 
    Editor-In-Chief
    The AbleGamers Foundation
    AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/82d9a5c4/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 17:31:18 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 17:31:18 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination
	onthebasisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <6CE4B6B86B7B424AA8A088B5D55D6CB1@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
	<CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MW7qNARLESVPnoNzgA1vHmzf2ARLB6rkbTCcXdAKC=FuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<6CE4B6B86B7B424AA8A088B5D55D6CB1@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MXWaihb0SjADkArYwttmMLYYmO+wPc6zF32m+EiU2Y_bQ@mail.gmail.com>

No doubt I wish we could push a magic button and make it all work today,
but some things take time.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> Oh, and didn't want to seem rude. Of course there are some great and
> important efforts going on. No doubt about it.
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:07 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Cc:* Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination
> onthebasisofdisability?
>
> I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making
> huge change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago
> before any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers
> even knew accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they
> know, now developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will
> effect change without the need for legislation.
>
> What we are doing is working.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>> Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge
>> change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that
>> law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted
>> some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations
>> vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful
>> stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating.
>> I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each
>> other. Not nice.
>>
>> I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides
>> pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that
>> well, I grant you.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Barrie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  *From:* John R. Porter <jrporter at uw.edu>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
>>  *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
>> thebasisofdisability?
>>
>> Barrie,
>>
>> You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the
>> Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push
>> for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter
>> argument has to do with the efficacy of *legislation*, not *judgments*.
>> There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are *not* one
>> and the same.
>>
>> Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are
>> carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to
>> myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might
>> at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out,
>> and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to
>> them (or at least not much).
>>
>> Lawsuits, on the other hand, are *never* received well except by those
>> attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in
>> very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly
>> begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The
>> resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be
>> "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing
>> more."
>>
>> Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes
>> that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally
>> practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties
>> and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.
>>
>> Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal
>> judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce
>> the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and
>> far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this
>> particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such
>> a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant
>> to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect
>> throughout the entire game industry.
>>
>> -John
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
>>>
>>> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
>>> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
>>> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
>>> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
>>> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
>>> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
>>> or think it unfair.
>>>
>>> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and
>>> yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If
>>> it wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
>>> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
>>>
>>> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
>>> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
>>> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
>>> discussions.
>>>
>>> Barrie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
>>>  *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
>>> basisofdisability?
>>>
>>> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to
>>> personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated
>>> with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit
>>> fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are
>>> not the way to bring about change.
>>>
>>> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
>>> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
>>> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
>>> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
>>> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
>>> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
>>>
>>> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
>>>
>>> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
>>> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>>> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>>>>
>>>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
>>>> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
>>>> ofdisability?
>>>>
>>>> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as
>>>> it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
>>>> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
>>>>> disability?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have only this:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
>>>>> 9
>>>>>
>>>>> Does someone have information about the result?
>>>>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Sandra
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> games_access mailing list
>>>>> games_access at igda.org
>>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Steve Spohn
>>>> Editor-In-Chief
>>>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>>>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>>>
>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> games_access mailing list
>>>> games_access at igda.org
>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> games_access mailing list
>>>> games_access at igda.org
>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Spohn
>>> Editor-In-Chief
>>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/e88b8c8a/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Sun Jun 24 17:34:18 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:34:18 +0100
Subject: [games_access] suits about discriminationonthebasisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MXWaihb0SjADkArYwttmMLYYmO+wPc6zF32m+EiU2Y_bQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de><CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com><D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC><CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com><E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC><CADWyad9E1JeCEZardOTF+egNJ3_X3aLx9-q7XFwyiJAJbFqL-Q@mail.gmail.com><4AD9F8F6FA2F4194BCB0749438D1C13E@OneSwitchPC><CABrM+MW7qNARLESVPnoNzgA1vHmzf2ARLB6rkbTCcXdAKC=FuA@mail.gmail.com><6CE4B6B86B7B424AA8A088B5D55D6CB1@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXWaihb0SjADkArYwttmMLYYmO+wPc6zF32m+EiU2Y_bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <13579E92F4F24558908CAC156CFE687E@OneSwitchPC>

Amen.


From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:31 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Cc: Scott Puckett 
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discriminationonthebasisofdisability?


No doubt I wish we could push a magic button and make it all work today, but some things take time.


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  Oh, and didn't want to seem rude. Of course there are some great and important efforts going on. No doubt about it.


  From: Steve Spohn 
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:07 PM
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
  Cc: Scott Puckett 
  Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination onthebasisofdisability?


  I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making huge change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago before any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers even knew accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they know, now developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will effect change without the need for legislation. 


  What we are doing is working.



  On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

    Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating. I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each other. Not nice.

    I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that well, I grant you.

    All the best,

    Barrie





    From: John R. Porter 
    Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
    To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
    Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on thebasisofdisability?


    Barrie,

    You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter argument has to do with the efficacy of legislation, not judgments. There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are not one and the same.

    Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out, and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to them (or at least not much).

    Lawsuits, on the other hand, are never received well except by those attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing more."

    Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.

    Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect throughout the entire game industry. 

    -John


    On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

      My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

      In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place, very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or think it unfair.

      The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

      Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous discussions.

      Barrie







      From: Steve Spohn 
      Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
      To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
      Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?


      I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to bring about change.  


      Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the law, is acceptable?


      I think that is a bit of a double standard. 


      Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.


      On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

        Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


        From: Steve Spohn 
        Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
        To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
        Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis ofdisability?


        It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 


        On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

          Hi,

          do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
          disability?


          I have only this:
          http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
          9

          Does someone have information about the result?
          Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

          Best regards,
          Sandra

          _______________________________________________
          games_access mailing list
          games_access at igda.org
          http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
          The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






        -- 
        Steve Spohn 
        Editor-In-Chief
        The AbleGamers Foundation
        AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




------------------------------------------------------------------------


        _______________________________________________
        games_access mailing list
        games_access at igda.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
        The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



        _______________________________________________
        games_access mailing list
        games_access at igda.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
        The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







      -- 
      Steve Spohn 
      Editor-In-Chief
      The AbleGamers Foundation
      AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







  -- 
  Steve Spohn 
  Editor-In-Chief
  The AbleGamers Foundation
  AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/1e6b5f70/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 24 17:39:45 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 21:39:45 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 22
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3285.1340572053.94576.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.3285.1340572053.94576.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W14F149275F661C7D9FAA3D91E20@phx.gbl>


Couldn't agree more, the past year in particular has seen huge leaps and it's only due to the passion of all involved, something that discussions like this are good demonstrations of. Just a question of where the roadmap things come that's all, and we've got the luxury of other industries' experience to draw from for that.
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 17:07:31 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
> 	thebasisofdisability?
> To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Cc: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> 
> I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making
> huge change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago
> before any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers
> even knew accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they
> know, now developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will
> effect change without the need for legislation.
> 
> What we are doing is working.
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > **
> > Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge
> > change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that
> > law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted
> > some important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations
> > vs. access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful
> > stuff will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating.
> > I just wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each
> > other. Not nice.
> >
> > I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides
> > pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that
> > well, I grant you.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Barrie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  *From:* John R. Porter <jrporter at uw.edu>
> > *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
> > *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> > *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on
> > thebasisofdisability?
> >
> > Barrie,
> >
> > You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the
> > Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push
> > for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter
> > argument has to do with the efficacy of *legislation*, not *judgments*.
> > There's obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are *not* one and
> > the same.
> >
> > Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are
> > carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to
> > myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might
> > at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out,
> > and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to
> > them (or at least not much).
> >
> > Lawsuits, on the other hand, are *never* received well except by those
> > attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in
> > very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly
> > begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The
> > resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be
> > "fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing
> > more."
> >
> > Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes
> > that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally
> > practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties
> > and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.
> >
> > Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal
> > judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce
> > the same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and
> > far between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this
> > particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such
> > a grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant
> > to drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect
> > throughout the entire game industry.
> >
> > -John
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
> >>
> >> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
> >> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
> >> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
> >> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
> >> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
> >> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
> >> or think it unfair.
> >>
> >> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
> >> with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
> >> wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
> >> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
> >>
> >> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
> >> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
> >> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
> >> discussions.
> >>
> >> Barrie
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> >> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
> >>  *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> >> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> >> basisofdisability?
> >>
> >> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to
> >> personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated
> >> with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit
> >> fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are
> >> not the way to bring about change.
> >>
> >> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
> >> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
> >> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
> >> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
> >> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
> >> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
> >>
> >> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
> >>
> >> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
> >> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> **
> >>> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
> >>>
> >>>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> >>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
> >>> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
> >>> ofdisability?
> >>>
> >>> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as
> >>> it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
> >>> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
> >>>> disability?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have only this:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
> >>>> 9
> >>>>
> >>>> Does someone have information about the result?
> >>>> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Sandra
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> games_access mailing list
> >>>> games_access at igda.org
> >>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Steve Spohn
> >>> Editor-In-Chief
> >>> The AbleGamers Foundation
> >>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
> >>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
> >>>
> >>>  ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> games_access mailing list
> >>> games_access at igda.org
> >>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> games_access mailing list
> >>> games_access at igda.org
> >>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Steve Spohn
> >> Editor-In-Chief
> >> The AbleGamers Foundation
> >> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
> >>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
> >>
> >>  ------------------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> games_access mailing list
> >> games_access at igda.org
> >> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> games_access mailing list
> >> games_access at igda.org
> >> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>
> >>
> >  ------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > games_access mailing list
> > games_access at igda.org
> > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > games_access mailing list
> > games_access at igda.org
> > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/c161aa42/attachment.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 22
> *********************************************
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/fa5bbff2/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Sun Jun 24 18:58:14 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:14 -0400
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
	basisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <1340574973.86165.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>
	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MUR+JLRidn1X8g-+uhM_gFhuJCDuBaS=tVOrDPUJNS3EA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1340574973.86165.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A@mail.gmail.com>

Here Here!

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
> Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
> might want to take a bio-break before continuing).
>
> My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
> consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
> infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
> management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
> classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
> disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
> I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
> actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of
> the Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
> consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
> attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
> whatever) for accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
> vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
> Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
> paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
> I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
> only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
> in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
> experience and expertise.
>
> So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
> are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
> Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. Think
> about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
> lots of copies.
>
> Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When
> I was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what
> I thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything
> he knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
> lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
> typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
> comes later).
>
> With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
> accessibility in video games is a bad idea.
>
> 1. Free market
> The typical conservative argument is that the market will solve
> everything. This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of
> ideas, but for purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is
> that, given two equally popular and interesting games, the free market
> dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> doing so. Thus, the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation
> or litigation, and is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't
> believe the free market will solve everything, or even most things, but I
> do believe that spreading the word about highly accessible games which
> are also good - and that is a KEY point - will bring additional attention
> to that game and result in positive reinforcement for the developer,
> encouraging them to make more games that are more accessible. Everyone
> likes to be told they're doing a good job. Positive reinforcement, from an
> organizational change perspective, is the way to address this to realize
> long-term benefits. Accessible games sell more, inaccessible games sell
> less, the market rewards those who make their games accessible.
>
> 2. Reasonable accommodation
> The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty simple:
>
> "Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination
> requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.
> They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural
> standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to
> policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people
> with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access
> requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in
> existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or
> expense, given the public accommodation's resources." (
> http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)
>
> There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:
>
> "Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
> operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
> theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
> shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
> recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."
>
> You'll notice that none of these things are video games.
>
> The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
> requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and
> services (i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and
> services are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if
> readily achievable."
>
> This is likely where most ADA claims for video games would be made,
> although it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly
> multiplayer, although that might be a stretch.
>
> You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows
> a similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
> is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall
> sending a few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a
> lot people. More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4
> Dead which indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it
> allowed someone who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and
> reasonably well. I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set
> out to engineer the game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play
> it, but it happened so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is
> reasonable to attempt to legislate such an outcome.
>
> 3. Chilling effect
> And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
> Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
> developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash
> grab, as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
> developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
> time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
> chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
> a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
> punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
> landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a
> form of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with
> The Oatmeal shows.
>
> The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation
> (for more on public accommodations, read this:
> http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dlj),
> one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the telecommunications
> part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the dismissal:
> http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf). Looking at
> the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't pass the
> smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not reasonable, nor
> is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both reasonable and
> practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless litigation
> that would likely have ended development of all but the most highly
> capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
> perhaps even those.
>
> It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development,
> and actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
> advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
> that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
> communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
> the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how not
> to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
> not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what
> lawsuits do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their
> entire point and reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to
> debate that point, I have direct experience with this matter from my
> journalism days, when I was sued for libel while other news outlets
> reporting on the same events were not, likely due to the individual's
> perception that I likely didn't have a law firm standing at the ready. What
> he found was worse - a journalist with an actual background in
> constitutional law. I represented myself. It was fun. And he dropped the
> case pretty quickly.)
>
> 4. The Harrison Bergeron effect
> This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
> intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
> that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
> aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
> analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
> have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
> Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
> practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
> the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to take kids to school.
> Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
> enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
> that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
> legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
> indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal
> law at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has
> to step in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you
> seem to think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice
> by comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to
> death or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video
> game doesn't have a particular feature set is offensive and insulting on
> its face.
>
> But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive
> your ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
> discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the
> Battle Of Hastings.
>
> With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason
> we don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation,
> that legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it
> means, or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this
> litigation will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt
> for an attorney to pay off student loans or cash in with a big win (see the
> comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
> experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
> in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
> terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
> smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
> against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
> a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
> valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
> likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
> time all of that settled down to a normal level (which means the boundaries
> would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
> meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
> Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
> games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
> art.
>
> And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
> people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
> Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.
>
> And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had
> to adhere to a specific list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
> alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how
> much I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them
> should be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility
> in gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.
>
> Let's be really blunt here.
>
> Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
> give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
> it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know.
> But I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another
> father can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk
> just fine had to slow down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short,
> expect that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I
> think that it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by
> everyone. My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or
> any game that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.).
> Legislating accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and
> Kinect control systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an
> idea is patently absurd.
>
> The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be a
> reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
> games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
> accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I
> think any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an
> absolute idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples,
> but we can only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through
> innovation and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is
> something new and we're learning more about what they work and how to make
> them accessible every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller
> scheme like the one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish
> more developers would use it, but legislating that means that developers
> would ONLY do that and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out
> something that worked better.
>
> My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned
> is that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it.
> That's where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with
> have a one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is
> natively accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they
> already solved the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really
> use thumbsticks on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so
> he didn't have that problem anymore.
>
> When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is that
> technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
> its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
> Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
> because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
> don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
> don't think about it again.
>
> So.
>
> Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
> way to handle it.
>
> But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.
>
> I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time
> I'm face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about it
> with specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to
> improve accessibility without taking away from gameplay.
>
> But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
> is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they
> have the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me?
> I'd rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
> important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
> in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
> the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
> play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without regulation or
> legislation.
>
> So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
> worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
> know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
> part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
> federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
> people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
> mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
> actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
> legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
> aren't necessary.
>
> It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen
> quickly. It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new
> way of thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget
> it, and it becomes part of what they do.
>
> And that's where we are right now.
>
> Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.
>
> It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)
>
> Regards and other such things.
>
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Cc:* Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>; Mark Barlet <
> mark at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 2:43 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
>
> I agree that we will differ on this one, but I have to call strawman on
> your argument. By that logic the only reason we don't murder people is
> because the 10 Commandments tell us not to. I have CC'd the most passionate
> person I know about this argument. Maybe he can change your mind.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> **
> My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.
>
> In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
> very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access"
> to people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far
> too expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a
> shop that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
> positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now,
> or think it unfair.
>
> The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
> with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
> wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
> racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.
>
> Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
> accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
> so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
> discussions.
>
> Barrie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
>
> I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally
> deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I
> can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that
> it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to
> bring about change.
>
> Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
> videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking
> to developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to
> stop in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers,
> particularly indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the
> consequence of the law, is acceptable?
>
> I think that is a bit of a double standard.
>
> Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
> developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> **
> Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.
>
>  *From:* Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
> *To:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
> ofdisability?
>
> It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it
> is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile
> after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
> disability?
>
>
> I have only this:
>
> http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
> 9
>
> Does someone have information about the result?
> Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?
>
> Best regards,
> Sandra
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
> ------------------------------
>  _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>  ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> | AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/a5671b1c/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 24 20:51:44 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 00:51:44 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3311.1340578696.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.3311.1340578696.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W210C2E90862A4B06379ED591E10@phx.gbl>


Hi Scott, good to hear from you, another UK reply for you -

The thing is, the majority (115/196) of the countries in the world have now signed up to putting exactly that legislation in place, by ratifying the UNCRPD and recognising equal access to culture, recreation, leisure and sport as a basic right, which is obviously quite a significant step on from the ADA. Many countries already have the legislation in place, including the UK. Ours (the equalities act) incrementally came into effect between Oct 2010 and April 2011.

So for lots of us, rather than a question of if, the legislation is already here, so it's a question of when and in what circumstances litigation is beneficial and how best to handle it. When the point comes when there is such wide awareness and general good practice across the industry that it is actually useful (and that time categorically isn't now, all that can be achieved now is unfairly singling out people who don't know any better and generating lots of bad feeling and negative press in the process) the 'reasonable' thing will help enormously.

I can't in any way speak for the USA but that's how it works over here at least, there are no set criteria to work to that would ban the Wii or homogenise game mechanics, just governmental best practice recommendations for which standards and guidelines to work to (for web, it's BS8878 & WCAG). It's completely impossible to be sued for not being AA compliant. You can however be sued if there are adaptations you could have made but haven't, without any reasonable justification. 

For people with small budgets, cost is a reasonable justification, for web at least there certainly haven't been any small studios shutting up shop due to accessibility litigation fears. It's the same general sweeping law across every industry, and all types of discrimination (age/sex/race etc too).. non-compliance with standards is not illegal, but unreasonable inequality and discrimination is. 

Realistically litigation is extremely rare, when it does happen it's people / advocacy groups taking on large wealthy corporations who have absolutely no excuse and are deliberately dragging their heels. That approach has only started to work now that the sector is mature enough that organisations like that are the minority.

For the current state of the industry though, I completely agree with what you're saying. This in particular:

> > the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so.


There are other means of positive re-enforcement, AbleGamers' GOTY award for example is fantastic and we need to see things that brought across into mainstream awards such as BAFTA, but more than anything else, the above is what is needed to get publishers' interest, a concrete business case demonstrating the exact profitability involved is vital. That can only be achieved with analytics, that's what we all need to be pushing for alongside the usual developer advocacy / education. It's pretty much all that I seem to bang on about, so apologies, but it really is important. 

Even more important again in fact. A concrete business case has been the holy grail for accessibility in other industries too, but it's next to impossible to calculate an accurate one. Games however are uniquely positioned to do it one thanks to the kind of analytics that are not only possible but already standard practice. So if the concrete business case for accessibility can be established for games then that data can be used to back up efforts in industries too, meaning benefit for an incredible number of people, effects being felt across a much wider spectrum than just the games industry.

Ian


> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:16 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: suits about discrimination on the	basisofdisability?
>       (Steve Spohn)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:14 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> 	basisofdisability?
> To: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Mark Barlet <mark at ablegamers.com>,	IGDA Games Accessibility SIG
> 	Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Here Here!
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
> > Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
> > might want to take a bio-break before continuing).
> >
> > My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
> > consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
> > infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
> > management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
> > classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
> > disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
> > I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
> > actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of
> > the Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
> > consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
> > attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
> > whatever) for accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
> > vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
> > Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
> > paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
> > I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
> > only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
> > in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
> > experience and expertise.
> >
> > So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
> > are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
> > Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. Think
> > about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
> > lots of copies.
> >
> > Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When
> > I was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what
> > I thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything
> > he knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
> > lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
> > typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
> > comes later).
> >
> > With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
> > accessibility in video games is a bad idea.
> >
> > 1. Free market
> > The typical conservative argument is that the market will solve
> > everything. This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of
> > ideas, but for purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is
> > that, given two equally popular and interesting games, the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. Thus, the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation
> > or litigation, and is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't
> > believe the free market will solve everything, or even most things, but I
> > do believe that spreading the word about highly accessible games which
> > are also good - and that is a KEY point - will bring additional attention
> > to that game and result in positive reinforcement for the developer,
> > encouraging them to make more games that are more accessible. Everyone
> > likes to be told they're doing a good job. Positive reinforcement, from an
> > organizational change perspective, is the way to address this to realize
> > long-term benefits. Accessible games sell more, inaccessible games sell
> > less, the market rewards those who make their games accessible.
> >
> > 2. Reasonable accommodation
> > The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty simple:
> >
> > "Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination
> > requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.
> > They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural
> > standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to
> > policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people
> > with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access
> > requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in
> > existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or
> > expense, given the public accommodation's resources." (
> > http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)
> >
> > There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:
> >
> > "Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
> > operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
> > theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
> > shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
> > recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."
> >
> > You'll notice that none of these things are video games.
> >
> > The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
> > requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and
> > services (i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and
> > services are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if
> > readily achievable."
> >
> > This is likely where most ADA claims for video games would be made,
> > although it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly
> > multiplayer, although that might be a stretch.
> >
> > You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows
> > a similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
> > is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall
> > sending a few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a
> > lot people. More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4
> > Dead which indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it
> > allowed someone who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and
> > reasonably well. I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set
> > out to engineer the game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play
> > it, but it happened so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is
> > reasonable to attempt to legislate such an outcome.
> >
> > 3. Chilling effect
> > And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
> > Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
> > developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash
> > grab, as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
> > developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
> > time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
> > chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
> > a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
> > punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
> > landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a
> > form of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with
> > The Oatmeal shows.
> >
> > The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation
> > (for more on public accommodations, read this:
> > http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dlj),
> > one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the telecommunications
> > part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the dismissal:
> > http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf). Looking at
> > the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't pass the
> > smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not reasonable, nor
> > is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both reasonable and
> > practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless litigation
> > that would likely have ended development of all but the most highly
> > capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
> > perhaps even those.
> >
> > It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development,
> > and actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
> > advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
> > that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
> > communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
> > the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how not
> > to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
> > not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what
> > lawsuits do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their
> > entire point and reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to
> > debate that point, I have direct experience with this matter from my
> > journalism days, when I was sued for libel while other news outlets
> > reporting on the same events were not, likely due to the individual's
> > perception that I likely didn't have a law firm standing at the ready. What
> > he found was worse - a journalist with an actual background in
> > constitutional law. I represented myself. It was fun. And he dropped the
> > case pretty quickly.)
> >
> > 4. The Harrison Bergeron effect
> > This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
> > intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
> > that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
> > aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
> > analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
> > have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
> > Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
> > practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
> > the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to take kids to school.
> > Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
> > enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
> > that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
> > legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
> > indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal
> > law at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has
> > to step in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you
> > seem to think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice
> > by comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to
> > death or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video
> > game doesn't have a particular feature set is offensive and insulting on
> > its face.
> >
> > But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive
> > your ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
> > discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the
> > Battle Of Hastings.
> >
> > With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason
> > we don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation,
> > that legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it
> > means, or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this
> > litigation will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt
> > for an attorney to pay off student loans or cash in with a big win (see the
> > comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
> > experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
> > in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
> > terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
> > smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
> > against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
> > a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
> > valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
> > likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
> > time all of that settled down to a normal level (which means the boundaries
> > would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
> > meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
> > Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
> > games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
> > art.
> >
> > And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
> > people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
> > Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.
> >
> > And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had
> > to adhere to a specific list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
> > alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how
> > much I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them
> > should be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility
> > in gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.
> >
> > Let's be really blunt here.
> >
> > Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
> > give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
> > it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know.
> > But I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another
> > father can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk
> > just fine had to slow down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short,
> > expect that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I
> > think that it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by
> > everyone. My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or
> > any game that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.).
> > Legislating accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and
> > Kinect control systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an
> > idea is patently absurd.
> >
> > The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be a
> > reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
> > games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
> > accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I
> > think any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an
> > absolute idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples,
> > but we can only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through
> > innovation and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is
> > something new and we're learning more about what they work and how to make
> > them accessible every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller
> > scheme like the one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish
> > more developers would use it, but legislating that means that developers
> > would ONLY do that and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out
> > something that worked better.
> >
> > My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned
> > is that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it.
> > That's where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with
> > have a one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is
> > natively accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they
> > already solved the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really
> > use thumbsticks on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so
> > he didn't have that problem anymore.
> >
> > When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is that
> > technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
> > its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
> > Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
> > because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
> > don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
> > don't think about it again.
> >
> > So.
> >
> > Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
> > way to handle it.
> >
> > But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.
> >
> > I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time
> > I'm face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about it
> > with specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to
> > improve accessibility without taking away from gameplay.
> >
> > But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
> > is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they
> > have the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me?
> > I'd rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
> > important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
> > in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
> > the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
> > play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without regulation or
> > legislation.
> >
> > So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
> > worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
> > know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
> > part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
> > federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
> > people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
> > mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
> > actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
> > legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
> > aren't necessary.
> >
> > It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen
> > quickly. It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new
> > way of thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget
> > it, and it becomes part of what they do.
> >
> > And that's where we are right now.
> >
> > Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.
> >
> > It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)
> >
> > Regards and other such things.
> >
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120625/8d65982d/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Mon Jun 25 01:01:49 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 06:01:49 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W210C2E90862A4B06379ED591E10@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.3311.1340578696.94575.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W210C2E90862A4B06379ED591E10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <5374DA3691D243D180E61861114BDBBC@OneSwitchPC>

Hello Scott (and list),

I meant absolutely no offence over the segregated buses comment, and apologies to you/anyone else if it came across as glib. However, I'd just as soon make a parallel to the Suffragettes fighting for the vote, and how things have panned out since they got it. The legislation is no panacea, but it does send out a strong message. And that message to me, is such an important one to make and have in place in a multi-cultural world where many people see others as inherently inferior.

Maybe that's still a glib comparison, but I think within 50 years, maybe 100 years, it will be video games that allow us all to run (believably) with our daughters, whether we are physically disabled, on the other side of the world, or have all grown up. I think games will become progressively important to us (as they have been for the last 40+ years). Maybe that comes across as bonkers, I don't know - but I think a virtual park will slowly become little different in many peoples minds to a real park. A public accommodation... Being shut out of these virtual worlds may become more and more of a human rights issue. We're on that path. But again, I really don't come on this list to offend anyone, so I am sorry if I did/do.

Re. all points that seem to be around fears of legal heavy-handedness stifling creativity, and killing fun, I think Ian's summed it all up pretty perfectly. Thanks for putting it better than I ever would have. 

And finally being the stubborn git I am, I've not changed my mind. Doesn't mean we don't still all share the fundamental of wanting to see greater access in games.

Kind wishes,

Barrie

p.s. Small point on motion-tracking games - This may be obvious, but if more Wii games had followed Mario Kart's ability to use a choice of controller (Wii-remote or classic controller) - many more people would have been able to play it who are otherwise disabled. This thanks to the significant range of off-the-shelf and D.I.Y. solutions. More positively, it seems that more and more Kinect games are now also playable using a traditional Joypad controller. To me this doesn't kill a game or experience, no more than playing Wii Punch Out!! with Wii remote and nunchuk, or just the Wii remote in NES joypad style does - and is something I believe we should all push for. Also, if the iPad allowed you to emulate gestures and touch using a mouse and/or keyboard, many more people still could access the machine. The old one-size does not fit all, regarding controllers line. This line doesn't stop people making innovative controllers. 




From: Ian Hamilton 
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 1:51 AM
To: games_access at igda.org ; puckett101 at yahoo.com 
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27


Hi Scott, good to hear from you, another UK reply for you - 




The thing is, the majority (115/196) of the countries in the world have now signed up to putting exactly that legislation in place, by ratifying the UNCRPD and recognising equal access to culture, recreation, leisure and sport as a basic right, which is obviously quite a significant step on from the ADA. Many countries already have the legislation in place, including the UK. Ours (the equalities act) incrementally came into effect between Oct 2010 and April 2011.




So for lots of us, rather than a question of if, the legislation is already here, so it's a question of when and in what circumstances litigation is beneficial and how best to handle it. When the point comes when there is such wide awareness and general good practice across the industry that it is actually useful (and that time categorically isn't now, all that can be achieved now is unfairly singling out people who don't know any better and generating lots of bad feeling and negative press in the process) the 'reasonable' thing will help enormously.




I can't in any way speak for the USA but that's how it works over here at least, there are no set criteria to work to that would ban the Wii or homogenise game mechanics, just governmental best practice recommendations for which standards and guidelines to work to (for web, it's BS8878 & WCAG). It's completely impossible to be sued for not being AA compliant. You can however be sued if there are adaptations you could have made but haven't, without any reasonable justification. 




For people with small budgets, cost is a reasonable justification, for web at least there certainly haven't been any small studios shutting up shop due to accessibility litigation fears. It's the same general sweeping law across every industry, and all types of discrimination (age/sex/race etc too).. non-compliance with standards is not illegal, but unreasonable inequality and discrimination is. 




Realistically litigation is extremely rare, when it does happen it's people / advocacy groups taking on large wealthy corporations who have absolutely no excuse and are deliberately dragging their heels. That approach has only started to work now that the sector is mature enough that organisations like that are the minority.




For the current state of the industry though, I completely agree with what you're saying. This in particular:




> > the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. 




There are other means of positive re-enforcement, AbleGamers' GOTY award for example is fantastic and we need to see things that brought across into mainstream awards such as BAFTA, but more than anything else, the above is what is needed to get publishers' interest, a concrete business case demonstrating the exact profitability involved is vital. That can only be achieved with analytics, that's what we all need to be pushing for alongside the usual developer advocacy / education. It's pretty much all that I seem to bang on about, so apologies, but it really is important. 




Even more important again in fact. A concrete business case has been the holy grail for accessibility in other industries too, but it's next to impossible to calculate an accurate one. Games however are uniquely positioned to do it one thanks to the kind of analytics that are not only possible but already standard practice. So if the concrete business case for accessibility can be established for games then that data can be used to back up efforts in industries too, meaning benefit for an incredible number of people, effects being felt across a much wider spectrum than just the games industry.




Ian






> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:16 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?
> (Steve Spohn)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:14 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
> To: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Mark Barlet <mark at ablegamers.com>, IGDA Games Accessibility SIG
> Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Here Here!
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
> > Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
> > might want to take a bio-break before continuing).
> >
> > My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
> > consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
> > infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
> > management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
> > classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
> > disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
> > I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
> > actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of
> > the Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
> > consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
> > attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
> > whatever) for accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
> > vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
> > Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
> > paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
> > I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
> > only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
> > in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
> > experience and expertise.
> >
> > So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
> > are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
> > Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. Think
> > about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
> > lots of copies.
> >
> > Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When
> > I was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what
> > I thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything
> > he knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
> > lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
> > typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
> > comes later).
> >
> > With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
> > accessibility in video games is a bad idea.
> >
> > 1. Free market
> > The typical conservative argument is that the market will solve
> > everything. This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of
> > ideas, but for purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is
> > that, given two equally popular and interesting games, the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. Thus, the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation
> > or litigation, and is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't
> > believe the free market will solve everything, or even most things, but I
> > do believe that spreading the word about highly accessible games which
> > are also good - and that is a KEY point - will bring additional attention
> > to that game and result in positive reinforcement for the developer,
> > encouraging them to make more games that are more accessible. Everyone
> > likes to be told they're doing a good job. Positive reinforcement, from an
> > organizational change perspective, is the way to address this to realize
> > long-term benefits. Accessible games sell more, inaccessible games sell
> > less, the market rewards those who make their games accessible.
> >
> > 2. Reasonable accommodation
> > The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty simple:
> >
> > "Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination
> > requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.
> > They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural
> > standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to
> > policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people
> > with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access
> > requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in
> > existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or
> > expense, given the public accommodation's resources." (
> > http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)
> >
> > There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:
> >
> > "Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
> > operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
> > theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
> > shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
> > recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."
> >
> > You'll notice that none of these things are video games.
> >
> > The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
> > requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and
> > services (i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and
> > services are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if
> > readily achievable."
> >
> > This is likely where most ADA claims for video games would be made,
> > although it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly
> > multiplayer, although that might be a stretch.
> >
> > You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows
> > a similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
> > is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall
> > sending a few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a
> > lot people. More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4
> > Dead which indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it
> > allowed someone who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and
> > reasonably well. I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set
> > out to engineer the game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play
> > it, but it happened so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is
> > reasonable to attempt to legislate such an outcome.
> >
> > 3. Chilling effect
> > And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
> > Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
> > developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash
> > grab, as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
> > developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
> > time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
> > chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
> > a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
> > punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
> > landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a
> > form of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with
> > The Oatmeal shows.
> >
> > The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation
> > (for more on public accommodations, read this:
> > http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dlj),
> > one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the telecommunications
> > part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the dismissal:
> > http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf). Looking at
> > the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't pass the
> > smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not reasonable, nor
> > is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both reasonable and
> > practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless litigation
> > that would likely have ended development of all but the most highly
> > capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
> > perhaps even those.
> >
> > It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development,
> > and actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
> > advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
> > that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
> > communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
> > the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how not
> > to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
> > not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what
> > lawsuits do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their
> > entire point and reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to
> > debate that point, I have direct experience with this matter from my
> > journalism days, when I was sued for libel while other news outlets
> > reporting on the same events were not, likely due to the individual's
> > perception that I likely didn't have a law firm standing at the ready. What
> > he found was worse - a journalist with an actual background in
> > constitutional law. I represented myself. It was fun. And he dropped the
> > case pretty quickly.)
> >
> > 4. The Harrison Bergeron effect
> > This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
> > intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
> > that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
> > aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
> > analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
> > have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
> > Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
> > practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
> > the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to take kids to school.
> > Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
> > enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
> > that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
> > legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
> > indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal
> > law at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has
> > to step in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you
> > seem to think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice
> > by comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to
> > death or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video
> > game doesn't have a particular feature set is offensive and insulting on
> > its face.
> >
> > But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive
> > your ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
> > discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the
> > Battle Of Hastings.
> >
> > With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason
> > we don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation,
> > that legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it
> > means, or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this
> > litigation will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt
> > for an attorney to pay off student loans or cash in with a big win (see the
> > comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
> > experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
> > in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
> > terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
> > smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
> > against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
> > a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
> > valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
> > likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
> > time all of that settled down to a normal level (which means the boundaries
> > would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
> > meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
> > Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
> > games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
> > art.
> >
> > And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
> > people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
> > Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.
> >
> > And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had
> > to adhere to a specific list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
> > alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how
> > much I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them
> > should be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility
> > in gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.
> >
> > Let's be really blunt here.
> >
> > Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
> > give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
> > it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know.
> > But I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another
> > father can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk
> > just fine had to slow down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short,
> > expect that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I
> > think that it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by
> > everyone. My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or
> > any game that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.).
> > Legislating accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and
> > Kinect control systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an
> > idea is patently absurd.
> >
> > The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be a
> > reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
> > games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
> > accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I
> > think any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an
> > absolute idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples,
> > but we can only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through
> > innovation and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is
> > something new and we're learning more about what they work and how to make
> > them accessible every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller
> > scheme like the one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish
> > more developers would use it, but legislating that means that developers
> > would ONLY do that and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out
> > something that worked better.
> >
> > My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned
> > is that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it.
> > That's where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with
> > have a one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is
> > natively accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they
> > already solved the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really
> > use thumbsticks on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so
> > he didn't have that problem anymore.
> >
> > When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is that
> > technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
> > its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
> > Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
> > because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
> > don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
> > don't think about it again.
> >
> > So.
> >
> > Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
> > way to handle it.
> >
> > But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.
> >
> > I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time
> > I'm face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about it
> > with specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to
> > improve accessibility without taking away from gameplay.
> >
> > But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
> > is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they
> > have the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me?
> > I'd rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
> > important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
> > in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
> > the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
> > play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without regulation or
> > legislation.
> >
> > So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
> > worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
> > know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
> > part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
> > federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
> > people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
> > mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
> > actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
> > legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
> > aren't necessary.
> >
> > It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen
> > quickly. It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new
> > way of thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget
> > it, and it becomes part of what they do.
> >
> > And that's where we are right now.
> >
> > Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.
> >
> > It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)
> >
> > Regards and other such things.
> >



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120625/6491d5e8/attachment.htm>

From blazeeagle at suddenlink.net  Mon Jun 25 03:53:19 2012
From: blazeeagle at suddenlink.net (blazeeagle at suddenlink.net)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 03:53:19 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info label
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3286.1340573318.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.3286.1340573318.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <4CEFFE3AC30F456CB08780B8D703D3E6@Aarons>

That symbol is an excellent idea! By having a wheelchair sitting on a 
gamepad, It shows that a game has accessibility options specific to disabled 
GAMERS.

BlazeEagle

-----Original Message----- 
From: games_access-request at igda.org
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:28 PM
To: games_access at igda.org
Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 23

Send games_access mailing list submissions to
games_access at igda.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
games_access-request at igda.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
games_access-owner at igda.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Game Accessibility Info label (Barrie Ellis)
   2. Re: suits about discrimination onthebasisofdisability?
      (Barrie Ellis)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:25:26 +0100
From: "Barrie Ellis" <oneswitch at gmail.com>
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info label
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List"
<games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID: <6F2CA09B2CA446369FFD94C75105C1E8 at OneSwitchPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Changing the subject back to a good one Eleanor made on a Game Accessibility 
labelling system... Hope people might find this of interest:

http://www.gamebase.info/magazine/read/game-accessibility-information-symbol_881.html




Presently, it's a pilot system sitting with SpecialEffect, but I'm hopeful I 
can persuade them to free it up for anyone to use, with guidance on how best 
to use it.

Best wishes all,

Barrie


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Eleanor Robinson" <eleanor at 7128.com>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 3:16 PM
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] games access

> Hi - I agree with most of you that not all games can be accessible to
> all people.  BUT, they can be more accessible than they currently are.
> A combination of accommodations that are not excessively costly to
> include would improve accessibility for many.  Variable speeds,
> re-mappable controls, color blind accommodation, and pre-sets like
> auto-aiming and so forth could make a game much more playable.  Closed
> captioning for speech and meaningful sounds for the deaf, and audio
> descriptions for the  blind would be more expensive, but doable.
>
> One of the things I feel strongly would help developers to think about
> accessibility would be to label games as to their accessibility.  If
> developers had to say a game was not accessible to (whatever), they
> would be more inclined to build in something that would improve the
> accessibility to that group.  It also would encourage thinking about
> what accommodations might improve the accessibility.
>
> I do agree that our efforts should be focused on making games
> accessible to more people, not looking for the silver bullet of
> universal accessibility.  I think we should also focus on the fact that
> making games more flexible in their play, increases the appeal of the
> games and increases the revenue for those games.  And we, as gamers,
> need to take care of ourselves and others as we age and make sure we can
> still play the games we want to because they have that flexibility we
> need in order to see, hear and manipulate the controls.
>
> Eleanor Robinson
> 7-128 Software
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 2237 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 5806 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/096191b2/attachment-0003.png>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:28:35 +0100
From: "Barrie Ellis" <oneswitch at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination
onthebasisofdisability?
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List"
<games_access at igda.org>
Cc: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6CE4B6B86B7B424AA8A088B5D55D6CB1 at OneSwitchPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Oh, and didn't want to seem rude. Of course there are some great and 
important efforts going on. No doubt about it.


From: Steve Spohn
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:07 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Cc: Scott Puckett
Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination 
onthebasisofdisability?


I think AG, SE with individuals like John and Ian pushing we ARE making huge 
change.  Look at the accessibility landscape today versus years ago before 
any of us got into the fight. Heck, I don't think most developers even knew 
accessibility existed before we started this movement. Now they know, now 
developers are starting to care and now is the time where we will effect 
change without the need for legislation.


What we are doing is working.



On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  Perhaps I'm just more impatient, but I believe there will be no huge 
change without some legislation. One angry and frustrated man, taking that 
law-suit did cause anger, annoyance and resistance. It also highlighted some 
important issues to my mind (access rights to public accommodations vs. 
access rights to virtual public accommodations). I think some useful stuff 
will come from that eventually. And agreed, lawsuits are irritating. I just 
wince looking at Apple and Samsung taking constant bites out of each other. 
Not nice.

  I'm actually far less dogmatic than I may come across, can see both sides 
pretty clearly, and have empathy for both. I don't always express it that 
well, I grant you.

  All the best,

  Barrie





  From: John R. Porter
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:58 PM
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on 
thebasisofdisability?


  Barrie,

  You're absolutely correct that the DDA (and the ADA on this side of the 
Atlantic) were hugely, and positively, influential developments in the push 
for accessibility. However, it's necessary to point out that your counter 
argument has to do with the efficacy of legislation, not judgments. There's 
obviously a certain amount of overlap, but they are not one and the same.

  Positive changes are brought about through legislation because they are 
carefully constructed umbrella statements that are universally applied to 
myriad different entities at the time of their passing. Some entities might 
at first be frustrated by their impositions, but no one feels singled out, 
and more importantly there isn't an air of aggressiveness or negativity to 
them (or at least not much).

  Lawsuits, on the other hand, are never received well except by those 
attempting to file them. Sometimes, they can be successful and result in 
very small amounts of positive change, but that change is incredibly 
begrudging and accompanied by a great deal of engendered ill will. The 
resulting attitude of people on the receiving end of a lawsuit tend to be 
"fine, we'll give you exactly what we are forced to, and absolutely nothing 
more."

  Lobbying and open dialogs, while they are of course much slower processes 
that might not have the flash and publicity of legal action, are generally 
practices that produce a more amiable relationship between involved parties 
and results that are most beneficial to everyone involved.

  Now, there are always exceptions (i.e. the cases of overlap). Legal 
judgments that set precedent can be incredibly effective as they produce the 
same type of blanket applicability as legislation. These are few and far 
between, though, and I wouldn't count on them being very common in this 
particular field of concern. Because digital entertainment is already such a 
grey area in the eyes of the law, any judge would be extremely hesitant to 
drop their gavel in such a way that threatened to cause a ripple effect 
throughout the entire game industry.

  -John


  On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> 
wrote:

    My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

    In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place, 
very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to 
people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too 
expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop 
that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a 
positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or 
think it unfair.

    The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and 
yes with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it 
wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have 
racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

    Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account 
accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes 
so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous 
discussions.

    Barrie







    From: Steve Spohn
    Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM
    To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
    Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the 
basisofdisability?


    I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to 
personally deal with developers every day in a number of things associated 
with AG, I can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit 
fearing that it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not 
the way to bring about change.


    Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out 
videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to 
developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop 
in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly 
indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the 
law, is acceptable?


    I think that is a bit of a double standard.


    Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the 
developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.


    On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> 
wrote:

      Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.


      From: Steve Spohn
      Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM
      To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
      Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis 
ofdisability?


      It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as 
it is not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile 
after this law suit. It did more harm than anything.


      On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> 
wrote:

        Hi,

        do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
        disability?


        I have only this:
        http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
        9

        Does someone have information about the result?
        Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

        Best regards,
        Sandra

        _______________________________________________
        games_access mailing list
        games_access at igda.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
        The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






      -- 
      Steve Spohn
      Editor-In-Chief
      The AbleGamers Foundation
      AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter




--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



      _______________________________________________
      games_access mailing list
      games_access at igda.org
      http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
      The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







    -- 
    Steve Spohn
    Editor-In-Chief
    The AbleGamers Foundation
    AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org







-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120624/82d9a5c4/attachment.htm>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 23
********************************************* 



From sandra_uhling at web.de  Mon Jun 25 07:47:39 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 13:47:39 +0200
Subject: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
	basisofdisability?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001201cd5215$ab6905f0$023b11d0$@de>	<CABrM+MWTAReOyWCL7dBWF+4miNKhGHnPtUp4Mq2Ajktf3U0EkQ@mail.gmail.com>	<D4ECF81D8538499BA2894ADDCBA3D689@OneSwitchPC>	<CABrM+MXBoA_2Rgbsq=R3cWkuHpr8YdY-pp81ZLB2-d08Dfho8g@mail.gmail.com>	<E6C5D5E31E524A93BAA05CBBFA066D48@OneSwitchPC>	<CABrM+MUR+JLRidn1X8g-+uhM_gFhuJCDuBaS=tVOrDPUJNS3EA@mail.gmail.com>	<1340574973.86165.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a401cd52c8$5499e100$fdcda300$@de>

Hi,

 

here are some thoughts:

* the CRPD cares also if something is "reasonable"

** not everything has to be done

* the CRPD gives examples but does not exclude something (games are part of
it)

* measures does not have to be a law, it can be also tax support and
support, consulting for more accessibility
* of course games cannot be accessible to all

* CRPD contains also points that request research, we need this (special for
silver gamer)

* CRPD request development of guidelines for design for all 

* accessibility features should be an option (not standard)

 

There are different cases for games and education games!

So we have to be careful for this.

 

Best regards,

Sandra

 

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Steve Spohn
Gesendet: Montag, 25. Juni 2012 00:58
An: Scott Puckett
Cc: Mark Barlet; IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
basisofdisability?

 

Here Here!

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:

I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
might want to take a bio-break before continuing).

 

My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of the
Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
whatever) for accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
experience and expertise.

 

So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. Think
about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
lots of copies.

 

Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When I
was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what I
thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything he
knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
comes later).

 

With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
accessibility in video games is a bad idea.

 

1. Free market

The typical conservative argument is that the market will solve everything.
This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of ideas, but for
purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is that, given two
equally popular and interesting games, the free market dictates that the
accessible game will sell more copies than the one which is less accessible
because gamers who need accommodations will buy that title. This is a
radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic argument here is
that people who need accommodations will buy the accessible title,
generating revenue for the company that made it, which in turn encourages
greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and realize they can
also make more money by providing accommodations and begin doing so. Thus,
the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation or litigation, and
is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't believe the free market
will solve everything, or even most things, but I do believe that spreading
the word about highly accessible games which are also good - and that is a
KEY point - will bring additional attention to that game and result in
positive reinforcement for the developer, encouraging them to make more
games that are more accessible. Everyone likes to be told they're doing a
good job. Positive reinforcement, from an organizational change perspective,
is the way to address this to realize long-term benefits. Accessible games
sell more, inaccessible games sell less, the market rewards those who make
their games accessible.

 

2. Reasonable accommodation

The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty simple:

 

"Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination requirements
that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment. They also must
comply with specific requirements related to architectural standards for new
and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and
procedures; effective communication with people with hearing, vision, or
speech disabilities; and other access requirements. Additionally, public
accommodations must remove barriers in existing buildings where it is easy
to do so without much difficulty or expense, given the public
accommodation's resources." (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)

 

There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:

 

"Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."

 

You'll notice that none of these things are video games.

 

The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and services
(i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and services are
accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if readily
achievable."

 

This is likely where most ADA claims for video games would be made, although
it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly multiplayer,
although that might be a stretch.

 

You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows a
similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall sending a
few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a lot people.
More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4 Dead which
indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it allowed someone
who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and reasonably well.
I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set out to engineer the
game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play it, but it happened
so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is reasonable to attempt to
legislate such an outcome.

 

3. Chilling effect

And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash grab,
as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a form
of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with The
Oatmeal shows.

 

The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation (for
more on public accommodations, read this:
http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090
<http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dl
j> &context=dlj), one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the
telecommunications part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the
dismissal: http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf).
Looking at the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't
pass the smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not
reasonable, nor is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both
reasonable and practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless
litigation that would likely have ended development of all but the most
highly capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
perhaps even those.

 

It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development, and
actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how
not to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what lawsuits
do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their entire point and
reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to debate that point, I
have direct experience with this matter from my journalism days, when I was
sued for libel while other news outlets reporting on the same events were
not, likely due to the individual's perception that I likely didn't have a
law firm standing at the ready. What he found was worse - a journalist with
an actual background in constitutional law. I represented myself. It was
fun. And he dropped the case pretty quickly.)

 

4. The Harrison Bergeron effect

This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to take kids to school.
Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal law
at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has to step
in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you seem to
think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice by
comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to death
or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video game
doesn't have a particular feature set is offensive and insulting on its
face.

 

But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive your
ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the Battle
Of Hastings.

 

With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason we
don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation, that
legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it means,
or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this litigation
will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt for an
attorney to pay off student loans or cash in with a big win (see the
comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
time all of that settled down to a normal level (which means the boundaries
would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
art.

 

And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.

 

And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had to
adhere to a specific list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how much
I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them should
be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility in
gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.

 

Let's be really blunt here.

 

Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know. But
I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another father
can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk just
fine had to slow down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short, expect
that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I think that
it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by everyone.
My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or any game
that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.). Legislating
accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and Kinect control
systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an idea is patently
absurd.

 

The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be a
reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I think
any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an absolute
idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples, but we can
only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through innovation
and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is something new
and we're learning more about what they work and how to make them accessible
every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller scheme like the
one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish more developers
would use it, but legislating that means that developers would ONLY do that
and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out something that worked
better.

 

My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned is
that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it. That's
where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with have a
one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is natively
accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they already solved
the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really use thumbsticks
on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so he didn't have
that problem anymore.

 

When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is that
technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
don't think about it again.

 

So.

 

Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
way to handle it.

 

But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.

 

I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time I'm
face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about it with
specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to improve
accessibility without taking away from gameplay. 

 

But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they have
the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me? I'd
rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without regulation or
legislation.

 

So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
aren't necessary.

 

It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen quickly.
It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new way of
thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget it, and it
becomes part of what they do.

 

And that's where we are right now.

 

Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.

 

It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)

 

Regards and other such things.

 

  _____  

From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org> 
Cc: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>; Mark Barlet <mark at ablegamers.com> 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 2:43 PM


Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
basisofdisability?

 

I agree that we will differ on this one, but I have to call strawman on your
argument. By that logic the only reason we don't murder people is because
the 10 Commandments tell us not to. I have CC'd the most passionate person I
know about this argument. Maybe he can change your mind.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

My counter argument to that is pretty simple I think.

 

In the UK, until the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act came into place,
very few shops made any effort to provide "reasonably practicable access" to
people such as wheelchair users. They complained that it would be far too
expensive. All these years later, you'd be very hard pressed to find a shop
that doesn't have wheelchair access. The legislation really has made a
positive and lasting difference, and few people would worry about it now, or
think it unfair.

 

The reasonably practicable element is where good reason comes in (and yes
with some grey areas). There's no pointing a gun to people's head. If it
wasn't for anti-discrimination laws coming in, you'd probably still have
racially segregated buses in the US, and such like around the world.

 

Yes, developers worry, but if everyone has to take into account
accessibility, it's far less of a worry. Altrusism and education only goes
so far. I think we'll have to agree to differ though Steve, from previous
discussions.

 

Barrie

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Steve <mailto:steve at ablegamers.com>  Spohn 

Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 8:03 PM

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

Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
basisofdisability?

 

I would like to hear your counterargument. Being that I have to personally
deal with developers every day in a number of things associated with AG, I
can tell you that many of them had trepidation after that suit fearing that
it may be the first of such lawsuits. Laws and lawsuits are not the way to
bring about change.  

 

Hell, some people used to say the tactics AbleGamers uses (pointing out
videogame flaws in accessibility, doing reviews, and God for bid, talking to
developers directly) were bullying tactics and repeatedly asked us to stop
in favor of doing studies. Yet trying to force developers, particularly
indies, to make adaptations to their product or face the consequence of the
law, is acceptable?

 

I think that is a bit of a double standard. 

 

Walking down the road of virtually pointing a gun in the face of the
developers saying "add a colorblind mode or else" is a very slippery slope.

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

Also would say that it doing more harm than good is up for dispute.

 

From: Steve <mailto:steve at ablegamers.com>  Spohn 

Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:21 PM

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


Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the basis
ofdisability?

 

It was thrown out. Also, many of AG SE & SIG condemned the law suit as it is
not a good way to bring about change. Many devs clammed up for awhile after
this law suit. It did more harm than anything. 

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>
wrote:

Hi,

do we have a list with suits about discrimination on the basis of
disability?


I have only this:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online-623933
9

Does someone have information about the result?
Was ist because it was no "public service" or/and error in form?

Best regards,
Sandra

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org





 

-- 
Steve Spohn 

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

  _____  

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org <http://igda-gasig.org/> 


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org <http://igda-gasig.org/> 





 

-- 
Steve Spohn 

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

  _____  

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org <http://igda-gasig.org/> 


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org <http://igda-gasig.org/> 





 

-- 
Steve Spohn

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

 





 

-- 
Steve Spohn

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120625/4eafbdbf/attachment.htm>

From eleanor at 7128.com  Mon Jun 25 14:30:49 2012
From: eleanor at 7128.com (Eleanor Robinson)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:30:49 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Label
Message-ID: <4FE8AE59.30101@7128.com>

While I like the wheelchair/controller symbol for accessibility, my 
feeling is that you have to in addition say WHAT accommodations are 
present.  Display of that label alone does not tell a deaf person if 
closed captions or equivalent are present, or a blind person if self 
voicing or screen reader hooks are present in the game.  If a game has 
accommodations for color blindness, but no flexibility in controls, it 
is still not accessible to many who are motion impaired.

I suggest we support the use of the symbol, WITH a simple statement 
below or to one side of the symbol as to the accommodations that are 
present in the game.

Eleanor Robinson
7-128 Software


From oneswitch at gmail.com  Mon Jun 25 14:44:18 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 19:44:18 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Label
In-Reply-To: <4FE8AE59.30101@7128.com>
References: <4FE8AE59.30101@7128.com>
Message-ID: <2AA5CD56552C4EAD9B05B26A9E5F2363@OneSwitchPC>

Thanks Eleanor,

My hope is that developers/publishers would use the symbol that quickly 
points people to a deeper level of information. That might be there right 
next to the symbol as you suggest. It might be a quick link to their own 
page of info cribbed from GameBase (for the moment). It might be to jump to 
a review that has all that info.

The tricky thing is in developing a load of icons to represent such a broad 
range of accessibility features. Maybe this is a stepping stone to that. 
Meanwhile, you can still get to info for a broad range of abilities via the 
linked information.

Best wishes,

Barrie


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Eleanor Robinson" <eleanor at 7128.com>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 7:30 PM
To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Label

> While I like the wheelchair/controller symbol for accessibility, my 
> feeling is that you have to in addition say WHAT accommodations are 
> present.  Display of that label alone does not tell a deaf person if 
> closed captions or equivalent are present, or a blind person if self 
> voicing or screen reader hooks are present in the game.  If a game has 
> accommodations for color blindness, but no flexibility in controls, it is 
> still not accessible to many who are motion impaired.
>
> I suggest we support the use of the symbol, WITH a simple statement below 
> or to one side of the symbol as to the accommodations that are present in 
> the game.
>
> Eleanor Robinson
> 7-128 Software
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org 



From i_h at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 26 03:21:44 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 07:21:44 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
In-Reply-To: <1340684956.85229.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.3311.1340578696.94575.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W210C2E90862A4B06379ED591E10@phx.gbl>,
	<1340684956.85229.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W68EC8355E9A9B319A5193091E00@phx.gbl>


Aha, cultural differences, now that's a valid reason to agree to disagree!

So in that case a bit more about how things are here, purely for informational purposes (esp. for other UNCRPD-bound countries, I know there are people from Greece and Germany at least on the list), and not as an illustration of how it should work in the US.

We don't have anywhere near as litigious a culture. Although it's more than it used to be, the no-win-fee adverts are restricted solely to personal injury claims, with a small sideline in compensation for miss-sold payment protection insurance, a specific very well publicised legal failing by mortgage lenders.

Again using web accessibility as an example as that has a bit more history to draw on, legislation that affected web access was first passed here in 1995 (the DDA, roughly equivalent in scope and intent to the ADA). In the 17 years that have passed the number of cases that have made it all the way through the courts to prosecution has been zero. I imagine from what you've indicated that that is quite a different story to what happened with the ADA in the USA. 

There have been plenty of threats, certainly in the early days of when I was at the BBC across their hundreds of sites & games they received threats of legal action on an almost weekly basis (since greatly reduced due to the good accessibility people they have there), but the solution has been for organisations simply to hold their hands up and fix the problems, roughly the equivalent of when the Dead Space developers released a control remapping patch. 

Occasionally organisations still refuse and things are taken further, but always settle out of court, in the same way as the recent Disney case in the USA. Certainly though no court in the land would be interesting in hearing a case in which negotiation between the claimant/defendant had already taken place and failed before legal action commenced, I've been through the process myself (not related to accessibility) and you can't just slap a summons on somone.

Since further legislation was introduced in 2010 to come in line with the newly ratified UNCRPD and extend rights to cover all types of discrimination across all industries (with a couple of obvious exceptions, such as sport), the number of cases that have been brought against the games industry has been zero. 

Again, I imagine that would be a different story in the USA, which I suppose helps to explain this, a map of the countries that have ratified the UNCRPD (all the ones in red and blue) - http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/maps/enablemap.jpg

As you can see although the USA is part of the minority that haven't ratified, it is a signatory, which means it at least agrees with it in principle, agrees not to pass any legislation that contravenes the principles of it, and is looking into how ratification & legislation might be possible. 

The thing with the UNCRPD is that it is pretty light on specifics, it's just overarching principles, general rights of equal access, and it's then down to individual countries to pass legislation that goes into the details, allowing them to take cultural differences into account. 

Although of course on that note I'll have to completely bow to your experience with and knowledge of how things work in your own culture, I'm certainly finding it an interesting and enlightening discussion, and hopefully others are too.

Ian
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:29:16 -0700
From: puckett101 at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
To: i_h at hotmail.com; games_access at igda.org
CC: steve at ablegamers.com; mark at ablegamers.com

Replying to Barrie and Ian's emails, in that order.
First.
Barrie, your comparison is, at best, inaccurate and trivializing another essential struggle in human history. The desire for accessible entertainment is nothing similar to an entire gender trying to obtain the legal right to have a say in who is elected and therefore able to pass legislation affecting that gender. In terms of disability rights and advocacy, the closest equivalent struggle would be trying to gain access to government buildings like courthouses without having to suffer the indignity of being carried up several flights of stairs or having to crawl up those stairs (like George Lane in 2004; more info here: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2004/01/offramp.html). Likewise, the
 struggle to not be permanently institutionalized due to disability is similar to civil rights and suffrage.
But we aren't talking about that. We're talking about video games, not people being forced to crawl up flights of stairs while the judge hearing their case watches and laughs at them. We're talking about entertainment, and while developers can and should do better with accessibility, drawing histrionic and fundamentally inaccurate comparisons between accessibility in games and struggles for basic access to essential elements of citizenship that were denied for centuries and are still problems today weakens the argument for accessibility in gaming because it invites exactly this sort of criticism. Instead of creating an environment in which other groups can support our advocacy for greater access to entertainment because it's a reasonable goal, such comparisons actively create conflict because there is a vast difference
 between people who were beaten and killed trying to obtain a basic, fundamental right and the desire of another group to have greater access to a form of entertainment.
In short, please stop drawing these comparisons. It doesn't help your case and, in fact, actually hurts it because it shows a clear misunderstanding of the struggles that people went through and are still going through in trying to achieve what amounts to full citizenship.
Second.
With that said.
Ian, thank you for your reasonable and sensible explanation of the legislation passed in other countries. It was both thoughtful and informative, and I appreciate you taking the time to write up that assessment. I wish that had been my introduction to the discussion because that actually made sense, explained the issues at hand and so forth.
However, there appear to be a
 number of significant differences between implementing such things in the UK and the US (and if you'd like to snicker about the political climate in the US, here is the perfect place to do so and I wouldn't hold it against you at all, although I usually just shake my head woefully at the state of things).
First and foremost is that there appears to be significantly more litigation in the US. Frankly, it's practically an industry here with ads on TV for class action suits about medication and such. Living in such a litigious environment means I see things in a very different way; in your description, it sounds as though the UK makes filing suit more difficult. If that's true, it's both a benefit and drawback because it would both protect developers from more frivolous litigation and also make it harder to bring a legitimate case before the court.
This is not true in the US. In the US, pretty much anyone
 can file suit against anyone else at any time and for any reason, regardless of how frivolous and meritless the claim may be. Even if that claim is dismissed, the defendant still incurs legal fees and loses time due to dealing with the suit. As I mentioned in my previous mail, it is often difficult to recover court costs and legal fees from plaintiffs in such a matter, but that doesn't mean that the money isn't spent. This is the problem with a case like Stern Vs. Sony Online; although it was a remarkably novel interpretation of a public accommodation, Sony still had to defend against it. It is unlikely that Sony would be able to recover court costs from the plaintiff, and there's also the public relations resulting from pursuing recovery against a disabled person. Now, Sony is big enough that it can take that hit. Despite Sony's recent troubles, dealing with a lawsuit
 like that is a trivial matter for an organization as large as Sony.
The problem arises when that lawsuit becomes 100, 1,000, or more, or it becomes a number of class action suits because someone who meets a government standard for a disability demands an accommodation that may not be technically possible, and a reasonable accommodation is subject to interpretation (everyone's definition of reasonable is different - I think Singularity should be castigated for failing to include subtitles and that MLB The Show should be lauded for somehow managing to include subtitles for a game which is wholly dynamic and situational, meaning that one situation may occur once and never again in a player's experience with the title). This may not be a concern that you have in the UK, but it's a very real concern in the US, and we have already seen it happen
 without any legislation mandating such an accommodation. That's where the chilling effect that I mentioned comes from. Perhaps in the UK, things are different, but legislation mandating such accommodations in games in the US would result in a non-trivial number of lawsuits being filed. We have a lot of lawyers here, and many of them need to pay off student loans, and I don't think there's a shortage of lawyers who would try to make a novel argument on the off chance that they get a judge to establish a career-making precedent (and loan-payoff payday). And frankly, I don't think we have any shortage of people willing to be a plaintiff in such a matter.
In short, this is a very real and pressing concern, and even laws and regulations which provide some sort of safe harbor provision don't prevent such litigation.
This is the inherent problem with any approach to any issue which assumes that one size fits
 all. Such regulation and oversight does not - and cannot - take regional variations into account. It can't address cultures, nor can (or should) it supersede local laws. This may sound strange coming from an American, but I do not believe that everyone has to do the same thing or follow the same laws or adhere to the same ideologies. While I believe everyone should be able to live free of fear or harm based on their gender or orientation or ability and so forth, that does not mean that I know - nor do I think I know - the best way to achieve that goal on a global level, nor am I arrogant enough to think that I do.
What I do know is my country, and I know that implementing legislation mandating accessibility in video games here will open the floodgates of litigation because this is what happens here. I don't think that a day goes by that I don't see an ad on TV seeking plaintiffs for class actions related to mesothelioma, SSRIs, birth control medication, anti-inflammatory medication, unfair cell phone billing practices, credit card charges and so forth. And it isn't just one ad - it's several, and it's not uncommon for me to see the same one twice. And that's ignoring the local and regional law firms which specialize in personal injury cases, and also advertise for clients. It sounds like the UK doesn't have this problem - or doesn't have it to this degree - and while that may not prove my point about one approach not being suitable for all cases or examples, it certainly supports it.

So perhaps this will work just fine for the UK. Perhaps there's nothing in it that would conflict with any laws in any of the other countries willing to put that legislation in place. That's fantastic. However, it would be a pretty significant problem here due to the litigious climate,
 the number of publishers and developers based in the US, and the large population of disabled people (the US census calculates that approximately 20% of Americans have some form of disability, and 10% - which is about 31 million people, or about half the population of the UK - have a severe disability).
So let's run some ballpark numbers. Let's assume, purely for sake of argument, that half the population of the UK was significantly disabled. That would obviously compel a need for legislation protecting those folks. Let's assume that 1% of those people were litigious - we're down to a hair over 300,000 potential plaintiffs. If we further assume that only 1% of those people could file a suit with merit that was not dismissed, we're still looking at developers defending over 3,000 separate lawsuits, assuming they aren't bundled into a class (and that's a little small for a class, completely independent of whether the disability
 accommodation at issue would warrant establishing a class).
I'm pretty sure that EA and Activision would both have difficulty defending 3,000 lawsuits, and as two of the largest publishers, they would be named as defendants in most of them. And that's just the lawsuits with merit - that doesn't include all the motions to dismiss that would be necessary for the meritless claims.
I'm sure we can agree that this is a non-trivial problem. And really, that's what we're looking at in the US. That threat would shutter a lot of developers. It would mean that smaller developers wouldn't bother with making games - they'd go do something else.
And the end result? The games we would get would, in fact, have homogenized gameplay that had survived lawsuits because
 developers would know that it's safe, that they're protected by precedent, that the lawyer who would inevitably wind up overseeing project development would approve it. Oh, what a brave new world, that has such games in it, etc. etc.
That's the future that such legislation would inevitably lead to if passed in the US. And if it exposed publishers and developers to litigation because it's been passed in other countries? I don't think you'll find that developers would opt to modify the game for regional accessibility requirements - a more likely outcome is not seeing those games released in countries where a developer or publisher might face a lawsuit due to accommodations or lack thereof.
I could be wrong, but we aren't talking about a sector where the potential reward is worth the risk (oil, for example). We're talking about an industry where the margins are already so thin that developers want to go to
 war over used game sales. Forcing additional expense onto them in the form of regionalizing games for not just content but accessibility accommodations which will require removing game sections or recoding them is likely to make them not develop for that territory.
I hope my response provides you with some insight about how things are here and the challenges such legislation would face as a result, much as your email provided me with interesting information about the accessibility climate in the UK.

Be well.
        From: Ian Hamilton
 <i_h at hotmail.com>
 To: games_access at igda.org; puckett101 at yahoo.com 
 Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:51 PM
 Subject: RE: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
   





Hi Scott, good to hear from you, another UK reply for you -

The thing is, the majority (115/196) of the countries in the world have now signed up to putting exactly that legislation in place, by ratifying the UNCRPD and recognising equal access to culture, recreation, leisure and sport as a basic right, which is obviously quite a significant step on from the ADA. Many countries already have the legislation in place, including the UK. Ours (the equalities act) incrementally came into effect between Oct 2010 and April 2011.

So for lots of us, rather than a question of if, the legislation is already here, so it's a question of when and in what circumstances litigation is beneficial and how best to handle it. When the
 point comes when there is such wide awareness and general good practice across the industry that it is actually useful (and that time categorically isn't now, all that can be achieved now is unfairly singling out people who don't know any better and generating lots of bad feeling and negative press in the process) the 'reasonable' thing will help enormously.

I can't in any way speak for the USA but that's how it works over here at least, there are no set criteria to work to that would ban the Wii or homogenise game mechanics, just governmental best practice recommendations for which standards and guidelines to work to (for web, it's BS8878 & WCAG). It's completely impossible to be sued for not being AA compliant. You can however be sued if there are adaptations you could have made
 but haven't, without any reasonable justification. 

For people with small budgets, cost is a reasonable justification, for web at least there certainly haven't been any small studios shutting up shop due to accessibility litigation fears. It's the same general sweeping law across every industry, and all types of discrimination (age/sex/race etc too).. non-compliance with standards is not illegal, but unreasonable inequality and discrimination is. 

Realistically litigation is extremely rare, when it does happen it's people / advocacy groups taking on large wealthy corporations who have absolutely no excuse and are deliberately dragging their heels. That approach has only started to
 work now that the sector is mature enough that organisations like that are the minority.

For the current state of the industry though, I completely agree with what you're saying. This in particular:

> > the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and
 begin
> > doing so.


There are other means of positive re-enforcement, AbleGamers' GOTY award for example is fantastic and we need to see things that brought across into mainstream awards such as BAFTA, but more than anything else, the above is what is needed to get publishers' interest, a concrete business case demonstrating the exact profitability involved is vital. That can only be achieved with analytics, that's what we all need to be pushing for alongside the usual developer advocacy / education. It's pretty much all that I seem to bang on about, so apologies, but it really is important. 

Even more important again in fact. A concrete business case has been the
 holy grail for accessibility in other industries too, but it's next to impossible to calculate an accurate one. Games however are uniquely positioned to do it one thanks to the kind of analytics that are not only possible but already standard practice. So if the concrete business case for accessibility can be established for games then that data can be used to back up efforts in industries too, meaning benefit for an incredible number of people, effects being felt across a much wider spectrum than just the games industry.

Ian


> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:16 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To
 subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: suits about discrimination on the	basisofdisability?
>       (Steve Spohn)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:14 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access]
 suits about discrimination on the
> 	basisofdisability?
> To: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Mark Barlet <mark at ablegamers.com>,	IGDA Games Accessibility SIG
> 	Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Here Here!
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
> > Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
> > might want to take a bio-break before continuing).
> >
>
 > My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
> > consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
> > infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
> > management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
> > classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
> > disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
> > I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
> > actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of
> > the Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
> > consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
> > attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
> > whatever) for
 accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
> > vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
> > Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
> > paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
> > I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
> > only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
> > in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
> > experience and expertise.
> >
> > So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
> > are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
> > Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead
 Redemption, etc. Think
> > about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
> > lots of copies.
> >
> > Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When
> > I was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what
> > I thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything
> > he knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
> > lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
> > typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
> > comes later).
> >
> > With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
> > accessibility in video games is a bad idea.
> >
> > 1. Free market
> > The typical conservative argument is that the market will
 solve
> > everything. This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of
> > ideas, but for purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is
> > that, given two equally popular and interesting games, the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. Thus, the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation
> >
 or litigation, and is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't
> > believe the free market will solve everything, or even most things, but I
> > do believe that spreading the word about highly accessible games which
> > are also good - and that is a KEY point - will bring additional attention
> > to that game and result in positive reinforcement for the developer,
> > encouraging them to make more games that are more accessible. Everyone
> > likes to be told they're doing a good job. Positive reinforcement, from an
> > organizational change perspective, is the way to address this to realize
> > long-term benefits. Accessible games sell more, inaccessible games sell
> > less, the market rewards those who make their games accessible.
> >
> > 2. Reasonable accommodation
> > The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty
 simple:
> >
> > "Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination
> > requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.
> > They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural
> > standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to
> > policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people
> > with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access
> > requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in
> > existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or
> > expense, given the public accommodation's resources." (
> > http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)
> >
> > There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:
> >
> > "Public accommodations are
 private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
> > operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
> > theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
> > shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
> > recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."
> >
> > You'll notice that none of these things are video games.
> >
> > The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
> > requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and
> > services (i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and
> > services are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if
> > readily achievable."
> >
> > This is likely where most ADA claims for video
 games would be made,
> > although it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly
> > multiplayer, although that might be a stretch.
> >
> > You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows
> > a similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
> > is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall
> > sending a few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a
> > lot people. More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4
> > Dead which indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it
> > allowed someone who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and
> > reasonably well. I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set
> > out
 to engineer the game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play
> > it, but it happened so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is
> > reasonable to attempt to legislate such an outcome.
> >
> > 3. Chilling effect
> > And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
> > Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
> > developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash
> > grab, as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
> > developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
> > time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
> > chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
> > a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
> > punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
> > landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a
> > form of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with
> > The Oatmeal shows.
> >
> > The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation
> > (for more on public accommodations, read this:
> > http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dlj),
> > one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the telecommunications
> > part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the dismissal:
> > http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf). Looking
 at
> > the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't pass the
> > smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not reasonable, nor
> > is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both reasonable and
> > practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless litigation
> > that would likely have ended development of all but the most highly
> > capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
> > perhaps even those.
> >
> > It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development,
> > and actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
> > advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
> > that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
> >
 communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
> > the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how not
> > to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
> > not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what
> > lawsuits do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their
> > entire point and reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to
> > debate that point, I have direct experience with this matter from my
> > journalism days, when I was sued for libel while other news outlets
> > reporting on the same events were not, likely due to the individual's
> > perception that I likely didn't have a law firm standing at the ready. What
> > he found was worse - a journalist with an actual background in
> >
 constitutional law. I represented myself. It was fun. And he dropped the
> > case pretty quickly.)
> >
> > 4. The Harrison Bergeron effect
> > This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
> > intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
> > that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
> > aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
> > analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
> > have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
> > Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
> > practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
> > the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to
 take kids to school.
> > Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
> > enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
> > that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
> > legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
> > indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal
> > law at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has
> > to step in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you
> > seem to think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice
> > by comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to
> > death or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video
> > game doesn't have a
 particular feature set is offensive and insulting on
> > its face.
> >
> > But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive
> > your ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
> > discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the
> > Battle Of Hastings.
> >
> > With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason
> > we don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation,
> > that legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it
> > means, or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this
> > litigation will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt
> > for an attorney to pay off student loans or
 cash in with a big win (see the
> > comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
> > experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
> > in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
> > terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
> > smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
> > against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
> > a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
> > valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
> > likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
> > time all of that settled down to a normal level
 (which means the boundaries
> > would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
> > meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
> > Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
> > games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
> > art.
> >
> > And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
> > people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
> > Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.
> >
> > And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had
> > to adhere to a specific
 list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
> > alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how
> > much I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them
> > should be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility
> > in gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.
> >
> > Let's be really blunt here.
> >
> > Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
> > give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
> > it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know.
> > But I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another
> > father can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk
> > just fine had to slow
 down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short,
> > expect that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I
> > think that it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by
> > everyone. My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or
> > any game that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.).
> > Legislating accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and
> > Kinect control systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an
> > idea is patently absurd.
> >
> > The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be
 a
> > reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
> > games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
> > accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I
> > think any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an
> > absolute idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples,
> > but we can only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through
> > innovation and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is
> > something new and we're learning more about what they work and how to make
> > them accessible every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller
> > scheme like the one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish
> > more developers would use it, but legislating that means that developers
>
 > would ONLY do that and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out
> > something that worked better.
> >
> > My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned
> > is that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it.
> > That's where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with
> > have a one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is
> > natively accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they
> > already solved the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really
> > use thumbsticks on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so
> > he didn't have that problem anymore.
> >
> > When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is
 that
> > technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
> > its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
> > Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
> > because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
> > don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
> > don't think about it again.
> >
> > So.
> >
> > Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
> > way to handle it.
> >
> > But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.
> >
> > I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time
> > I'm face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about
 it
> > with specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to
> > improve accessibility without taking away from gameplay.
> >
> > But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
> > is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they
> > have the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me?
> > I'd rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
> > important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
> > in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
> > the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
> > play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without
 regulation or
> > legislation.
> >
> > So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
> > worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
> > know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
> > part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
> > federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
> > people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
> > mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
> > actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
> > legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
> > aren't necessary.
> >
> > It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen
>
 > quickly. It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new
> > way of thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget
> > it, and it becomes part of what they do.
> >
> > And that's where we are right now.
> >
> > Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.
> >
> > It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)
> >
> > Regards and other such things.
> >
 		 	   		  


     		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/b73f31cf/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 26 03:27:52 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 07:27:52 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 31
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4047.1340695307.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.4047.1340695307.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W16108358D474E5B7489E8491E00@phx.gbl>


Absolutely agree with both Eleanor and Barrie here, full information is critical for potential players to be able to make an informed decision. Standardising that kind of information is a pretty monumental task though, adopting a standard symbol for the information without getting into what format the information takes is a much more achievable first step towards that.

> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 31
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 03:21:47 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> 	games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Game Accessibility Info Label (Eleanor Robinson)
>    2. Re: Game Accessibility Info Label (Barrie Ellis)
>    3. Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27 (Ian Hamilton)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:30:49 -0400
> From: Eleanor Robinson <eleanor at 7128.com>
> Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Label
> To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <4FE8AE59.30101 at 7128.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> While I like the wheelchair/controller symbol for accessibility, my 
> feeling is that you have to in addition say WHAT accommodations are 
> present.  Display of that label alone does not tell a deaf person if 
> closed captions or equivalent are present, or a blind person if self 
> voicing or screen reader hooks are present in the game.  If a game has 
> accommodations for color blindness, but no flexibility in controls, it 
> is still not accessible to many who are motion impaired.
> 
> I suggest we support the use of the symbol, WITH a simple statement 
> below or to one side of the symbol as to the accommodations that are 
> present in the game.
> 
> Eleanor Robinson
> 7-128 Software
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 19:44:18 +0100
> From: "Barrie Ellis" <oneswitch at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility Info Label
> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List"
> 	<games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <2AA5CD56552C4EAD9B05B26A9E5F2363 at OneSwitchPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
> 
> Thanks Eleanor,
> 
> My hope is that developers/publishers would use the symbol that quickly 
> points people to a deeper level of information. That might be there right 
> next to the symbol as you suggest. It might be a quick link to their own 
> page of info cribbed from GameBase (for the moment). It might be to jump to 
> a review that has all that info.
> 
> The tricky thing is in developing a load of icons to represent such a broad 
> range of accessibility features. Maybe this is a stepping stone to that. 
> Meanwhile, you can still get to info for a broad range of abilities via the 
> linked information.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Barrie
> 

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/0210b038/attachment.htm>

From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Tue Jun 26 05:25:39 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:25:39 +0300
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
Message-ID: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>

First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
conversation taking place again in our list!

Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.

1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a good
thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as
well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a
symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use
a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products
that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus
signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion is
that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get
the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly
perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities.  

2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
"mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be
played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty,
subtitles, etc. 

3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one
thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for
it, or collaboratively build it up.

4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that
gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly
becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".

5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down",
"lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for
the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is
the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is
the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this
is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully
supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it
can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
these:
- Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
- The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
- Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
format(15MB)
http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf


I'll be back for more :-)

Dimitris





From lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com  Tue Jun 26 05:39:08 2012
From: lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com (Lynsey Graham)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:39:08 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>

I think it'd be useful (certainly for 'mainstream' games) if accessibility criteria and symbols could be incorporated into the existing rating systems, such as PEGI and the ESRB, that are supposed to inform consumers of a game's suitability.

http://rashedgamedev.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_ratings_system.png

As well as being more informative for the consumer, it might raise publisher/developer awareness if there was an extra set of boxes to tick on the rating submission form.  Given that you have to check 'Yes' or 'No', it might actually embarrass some developers/publishers to realise how even the most basic accessibility measures such as subtitles and colour blind friendly mechanics have been overlooked...


-----Original Message-----
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Grammenos
Sent: 26 June 2012 10:26
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid conversation taking place again in our list!

Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.

1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a good thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion is that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities.  

2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty, subtitles, etc. 

3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for it, or collaboratively build it up.

4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".

5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down", "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
these:
- Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
- The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
- Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
format(15MB)
http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf


I'll be back for more :-)

Dimitris



_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Tue Jun 26 05:43:47 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:43:47 +0300
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
Message-ID: <001c01cd5380$2f15ce90$8d416bb0$@ics.forth.gr>

That would be great!

D.

-----Original Message-----
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Lynsey Graham
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:39 PM
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

I think it'd be useful (certainly for 'mainstream' games) if accessibility
criteria and symbols could be incorporated into the existing rating systems,
such as PEGI and the ESRB, that are supposed to inform consumers of a game's
suitability.

http://rashedgamedev.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_ratings_system.png

As well as being more informative for the consumer, it might raise
publisher/developer awareness if there was an extra set of boxes to tick on
the rating submission form.  Given that you have to check 'Yes' or 'No', it
might actually embarrass some developers/publishers to realise how even the
most basic accessibility measures such as subtitles and colour blind
friendly mechanics have been overlooked...


-----Original Message-----
From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Dimitris Grammenos
Sent: 26 June 2012 10:26
To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
conversation taking place again in our list!

Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.

1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a good
thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as
well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a
symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use
a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products
that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus
signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion is
that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get
the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly
perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities.  

2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
"mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be
played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty,
subtitles, etc. 

3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one
thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for
it, or collaboratively build it up.

4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that
gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly
becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".

5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down",
"lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for
the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is
the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is
the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this
is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully
supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it
can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
these:
- Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
- The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
- Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
format(15MB)
http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf


I'll be back for more :-)

Dimitris



_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org



From i_h at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 26 07:05:41 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:05:41 +0000
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
	(Dimitris Grammenos)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4125.1340703831.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.4125.1340703831.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W18F659F5218E819596264D91E00@phx.gbl>


Elusive business case - it's immensely simple to achieve. Record the cost of feature development, attach analytics to features, compare cost of development to usage and player value. Obviously it only applies to features that are controlled by options and only apples to features that have a significant impact on being able to play, but if all of us push for them in any games work we're associated with then we'll get some useful aggregate data pretty quickly.

Every one of those things (tracking costs, analytics, player value) is already standard practice.

Homogenizing and watering down - Dimitris, I've dropped you an email separately about having a proper chat as I've been putting your universally accessible game design principled into practice (referenced here: 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/10/something_special_makaton_out_about_universal.html ). I'm not permitted to share stats unfortunately but the end result produced some really quite astonishing statistics proving conclusively that the addition of the options produced something that was massively more popular for the entire audience, rather than diluting it.


There is a balance to be had between number of options and complexity of interface (presets / advanced helps greatly with this), but in general it just means providing a means to remove barriers that cause difficultly for a great many people, disabled or otherwise, and not removing fun or gameplay.


> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:25:39 +0300
> From: "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
> 	<games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
> conversation taking place again in our list!
> 
> Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.
> 
> 1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a good
> thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as
> well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a
> symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use
> a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products
> that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus
> signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
> For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion is
> that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get
> the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly
> perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities.  
> 
> 2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
> "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
> features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
> I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be
> played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty,
> subtitles, etc. 
> 
> 3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
> Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one
> thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for
> it, or collaboratively build it up.
> 
> 4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
> reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
> magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
> accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that
> gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly
> becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".
> 
> 5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
> this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down",
> "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for
> the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is
> the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
> multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
> prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is
> the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this
> is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully
> supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it
> can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
> these:
> - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
> - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
> Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
> - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
> format(15MB)
> http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
> Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf
> 
> 
> I'll be back for more :-)
> 
> Dimitris
> 

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/e989ae9d/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 15:59:47 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 20:59:47 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
Message-ID: <2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>

@BlazeEagle - Glad you like the symbol, I do too. It's on trial with 
SpecialEffect at the moment. Maybe it will take hold and spread if they'll 
release it, maybe not. I'm hoping at the least it will sow more seeds for 
getting a labelling system going.

Ultimately, this could be a free and loose system where anyone can use it to 
denote Game Accessibility Information, or tied up tighter in ELSPA/PEGI 
style-ee. I do know there was a lot of difference of opinion at the time of 
the symbol surfacing, but to us (with my SpecialEffect hat on now) - we 
liked this one best out of the ones we were allowed to use.

I do recognise the feelings from Sandra and Dimitris of looking for 
something slightly less disability related. However, we did open this up for 
some time, looking for the best symbol we could, and speaking for myself, I 
saw nothing better at the time. I do like a white on black version we have, 
and the 3D version quite a bit too.

What I did like about the symbol is that it can be interpreted in a number 
of ways (wheelchair user combined with joypad, laid-back gamer sitting on a 
giant joypad, person riding some steam-punk like machine).

What I liked about the way it could be used, is the potential flexibility. 
It could be placed on its own with tiny link and/or QR code to send you to 
accessibility info where space is very limited. It could be placed next to 
future access symbols. It could send you off to GameBase. Maybe one day, it 
could send you off to a database pointing you to a variety of opinions (a 
bit like Amazon maybe).

What would be really great, if there was a system people could get familiar 
with, broadly adopted, and agreed, Lynsey - it could be a positive system of 
encouraging developers/publishers to think a bit more about accessibility. 
I've always been supportive of a multi-pronged effort to improve 
accessibility.

Barrie.


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Lynsey Graham" <lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 10:39 AM
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

> I think it'd be useful (certainly for 'mainstream' games) if accessibility 
> criteria and symbols could be incorporated into the existing rating 
> systems, such as PEGI and the ESRB, that are supposed to inform consumers 
> of a game's suitability.
>
> http://rashedgamedev.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_ratings_system.png
>
> As well as being more informative for the consumer, it might raise 
> publisher/developer awareness if there was an extra set of boxes to tick 
> on the rating submission form.  Given that you have to check 'Yes' or 
> 'No', it might actually embarrass some developers/publishers to realise 
> how even the most basic accessibility measures such as subtitles and 
> colour blind friendly mechanics have been overlooked...
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] 
> On Behalf Of Dimitris Grammenos
> Sent: 26 June 2012 10:26
> To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
>
> First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid 
> conversation taking place again in our list!
>
> Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.
>
> 1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a 
> good thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit 
> misleading, as well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why 
> not using a symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra 
> capabilities - use a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those 
> labels on food products that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are 
> full of colorful plus signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be 
> advertised similarly.
> For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion 
> is that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess 
> you get the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will 
> wrongly perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific 
> disabilities.
>
> 2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to 
> "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game 
> features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of 
> view.
> I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be 
> played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable 
> difficulty, subtitles, etc.
>
> 3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
> Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one 
> thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for 
> it, or collaboratively build it up.
>
> 4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game 
> reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game 
> magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your 
> accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that 
> gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly 
> becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".
>
> 5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in 
> this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering 
> down", "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be 
> true for the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital 
> world it is the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, 
> diversity and multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way 
> you like and prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same 
> way (what is the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. 
> So, unless this is completely made clear, then just like in our list, 
> people who are fully supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about 
> the extent to which it can and should be pursued.  If you have some time 
> you can have a look at
> these:
> - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
> - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer 
> Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
> - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
> format(15MB)
> http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
> Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf
>
>
> I'll be back for more :-)
>
> Dimitris
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 


From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 16:45:16 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:45:16 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Accessible Menus
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W18F659F5218E819596264D91E00@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.4125.1340703831.94575.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W18F659F5218E819596264D91E00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <131F0371EFC246BAB4B687F90651E708@OneSwitchPC>

Really good points on watering down, and also issues on overly complex menus. I'd love to see some deeper guidance written up to help people with menus. I get the feeling that a lot of people hate creating menus for games, so some good guidance would help a lot. A few wishes...

1. The menu can be navigated using the gameplay controls. Nothing extra needed.
2. Option to have a simplified menu system. (Not seen much evidence of this, but SAAB did with a "Night Panel" button, and I remember removing the ability to quit).
3. Icons/symbols to represent key options (avoid pure text).
4. Spoken menus option.
5. Digital controls a possibility.
6. Alternative controller access to menus.

Something a number of players have issues with is in starting games, getting lost in menus and quitting accidentally. Always good to give people protection from this when possible. Especially with one-switch games from experience.

Barrie





From: Ian Hamilton 
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:05 PM
To: games_access at igda.org 
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?(Dimitris Grammenos)


Elusive business case - it's immensely simple to achieve. Record the cost of feature development, attach analytics to features, compare cost of development to usage and player value. Obviously it only applies to features that are controlled by options and only apples to features that have a significant impact on being able to play, but if all of us push for them in any games work we're associated with then we'll get some useful aggregate data pretty quickly. 




Every one of those things (tracking costs, analytics, player value) is already standard practice.




Homogenizing and watering down - Dimitris, I've dropped you an email separately about having a proper chat as I've been putting your universally accessible game design principled into practice (referenced here:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/10/something_special_makaton_out_about_universal.html ). I'm not permitted to share stats unfortunately but the end result produced some really quite astonishing statistics proving conclusively that the addition of the options produced something that was massively more popular for the entire audience, rather than diluting it.


There is a balance to be had between number of options and complexity of interface (presets / advanced helps greatly with this), but in general it just means providing a means to remove barriers that cause difficultly for a great many people, disabled or otherwise, and not removing fun or gameplay.



> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:25:39 +0300
> From: "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
> <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
> conversation taking place again in our list!
> 
> Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.
> 
> 1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility is a good
> thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as
> well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a
> symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use
> a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products
> that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus
> signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
> For example, you have "Football game" and "Football game++". The notion is
> that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get
> the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly
> perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities. 
> 
> 2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
> "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
> features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
> I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be
> played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty,
> subtitles, etc. 
> 
> 3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
> Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one
> thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for
> it, or collaboratively build it up.
> 
> 4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
> reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
> magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
> accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that
> gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly
> becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".
> 
> 5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
> this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down",
> "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for
> the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is
> the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
> multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
> prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is
> the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this
> is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully
> supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it
> can and should be pursued. If you have some time you can have a look at
> these:
> - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
> - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
> Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
> - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
> format(15MB)
> http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
> Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf
> 
> 
> I'll be back for more :-)
> 
> Dimitris
> 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/9a49bcb7/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 16:46:44 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:46:44 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>

I can tell you with my AbleGamers hat on that we were in communication with
Barrie to open up a third-party website where people could go to that saw
the mutually agreed-upon symbol that would mean that the game had been
given the seal of approval by AG or SE or Anyone (gamefwd 7-128 etc.).
After a number of e-mails and no responses from Barrie, AbleGamers walked
away from the project. (Can share with the emails with the group if you'd
like)

The important part of the discussion was a third-party non specific website
that could house reviews from all websites and allow people to thoroughly
explore the accessibility of games from many angles. So, I think specifying
that you are going to lobby for a symbol to be placed on boxes that goes to
GameBase is a bit much.

There are a couple fundamental flaws with the symbol system. First, if you
read the fine print on the website it says that the game only needs to be
reviewed by SpecialEffect. It doesn't need to be accessible, good, friendly
or easy to play, it simply means that is reviewed to some extent. That is
not helpful at a glance. Second, the symbols you used Barrie are downright
offensive. Eleanor's is a nice neutral symbol, although it still has a
wheelchair in it, but the teddy bear symbol absolutely offends me, and
every single disabled gamer I have asked so far said they would be offended
seeing a teddy bear on the box meaning that  it is accessible.

A good question for everyone to think about is why are all of the symbols
we see coming out that could mean accessibility filled with ultra-colorful,
cartoonlike and childish symbols. Not all gamers with disabilities are
children, in fact, the majority are not.

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> @BlazeEagle - Glad you like the symbol, I do too. It's on trial with
> SpecialEffect at the moment. Maybe it will take hold and spread if they'll
> release it, maybe not. I'm hoping at the least it will sow more seeds for
> getting a labelling system going.
>
> Ultimately, this could be a free and loose system where anyone can use it
> to denote Game Accessibility Information, or tied up tighter in ELSPA/PEGI
> style-ee. I do know there was a lot of difference of opinion at the time of
> the symbol surfacing, but to us (with my SpecialEffect hat on now) - we
> liked this one best out of the ones we were allowed to use.
>
> I do recognise the feelings from Sandra and Dimitris of looking for
> something slightly less disability related. However, we did open this up
> for some time, looking for the best symbol we could, and speaking for
> myself, I saw nothing better at the time. I do like a white on black
> version we have, and the 3D version quite a bit too.
>
> What I did like about the symbol is that it can be interpreted in a number
> of ways (wheelchair user combined with joypad, laid-back gamer sitting on a
> giant joypad, person riding some steam-punk like machine).
>
> What I liked about the way it could be used, is the potential flexibility.
> It could be placed on its own with tiny link and/or QR code to send you to
> accessibility info where space is very limited. It could be placed next to
> future access symbols. It could send you off to GameBase. Maybe one day, it
> could send you off to a database pointing you to a variety of opinions (a
> bit like Amazon maybe).
>
> What would be really great, if there was a system people could get
> familiar with, broadly adopted, and agreed, Lynsey - it could be a positive
> system of encouraging developers/publishers to think a bit more about
> accessibility. I've always been supportive of a multi-pronged effort to
> improve accessibility.
>
> Barrie.
>
>
> ------------------------------**--------------------
> From: "Lynsey Graham" <lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com**>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 10:39 AM
> To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org>
>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
>
>  I think it'd be useful (certainly for 'mainstream' games) if
>> accessibility criteria and symbols could be incorporated into the existing
>> rating systems, such as PEGI and the ESRB, that are supposed to inform
>> consumers of a game's suitability.
>>
>> http://rashedgamedev.files.**wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_**
>> ratings_system.png<http://rashedgamedev.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_ratings_system.png>
>>
>> As well as being more informative for the consumer, it might raise
>> publisher/developer awareness if there was an extra set of boxes to tick on
>> the rating submission form.  Given that you have to check 'Yes' or 'No', it
>> might actually embarrass some developers/publishers to realise how even the
>> most basic accessibility measures such as subtitles and colour blind
>> friendly mechanics have been overlooked...
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces@**
>> igda.org <games_access-bounces at igda.org>] On Behalf Of Dimitris Grammenos
>> Sent: 26 June 2012 10:26
>> To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
>>
>> First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
>> conversation taking place again in our list!
>>
>> Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.
>>
>> 1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a
>> good thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit
>> misleading, as well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why
>> not using a symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra
>> capabilities - use a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those
>> labels on food products that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are
>> full of colorful plus signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be
>> advertised similarly.
>> For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion
>> is that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you
>> get the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will
>> wrongly perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific
>> disabilities.
>>
>> 2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
>> "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
>> features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
>> I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can
>> be played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable
>> difficulty, subtitles, etc.
>>
>> 3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
>> Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So,
>> one thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look
>> for it, or collaboratively build it up.
>>
>> 4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
>> reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
>> magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
>> accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that
>> gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly
>> becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".
>>
>> 5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
>> this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down",
>> "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for
>> the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it
>> is the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
>> multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
>> prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is
>> the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this
>> is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully
>> supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it
>> can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
>> these:
>> - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
>> http://www.gamasutra.com/**features/20061207/grammenos_**01.shtml<http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml>
>> - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
>> Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
>> http://www.gamasutra.com/**features/20060817/grammenos_**01.shtml<http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml>
>> - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
>> format(15MB)
>> http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/**ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_**
>> Universally_Accessible_<http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_>
>> Games_and_Parallel_Game_**Universes.pdf
>>
>>
>> I'll be back for more :-)
>>
>> Dimitris
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/**mailman/listinfo/games_access<http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access>
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/**mailman/listinfo/games_access<http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access>
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>  ______________________________**_________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/**mailman/listinfo/games_access<http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access>
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>



-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/6c7c5e3b/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 17:28:08 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:28:08 +0100
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W68EC8355E9A9B319A5193091E00@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.3311.1340578696.94575.games_access@igda.org><DUB116-W210C2E90862A4B06379ED591E10@phx.gbl>,
	<1340684956.85229.YahooMailNeo@web161004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<DUB116-W68EC8355E9A9B319A5193091E00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <20AAD3E531E440DA95A37801392D2AA9@OneSwitchPC>

(see below)

I'm always quite willing to agree to disagree, and I'll always do my best to respect other people's differing views.

I've never been accused of histrionics before, which may be a mix of you not knowing me Scott, and me not expressing myself very well (not a unique occurrence). It's hard to get the true meaning of words written when you don't know the individual that wrote them (we don't know each other), nor the circumstances that they wrote them under.

What I was trying to draw was that it's not just about video games. For some people, as mentioned already, it's a right to play issue... http://switchgaming.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/article-31-right-to-play.html
Article 31
1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts.

2. States Parties shall respect and promote the right of the child to participate fully in cultural and artistic life and shall encourage the provision of appropriate and equal opportunities for cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure activity.


For some people the lack of access in the games they are aware of, and the equipment available to them, means that they have never played, and may never play (where our reach is weak). Link this to the importance of access to virtual worlds (and what they can bring, especially in the future) - and I think it's a very big issue for some, and not as trivial as it may appear. No not as violent as other causes, but I see it as, at least for some, a massively important thing. A massive frustration. And massively unfair for many. You may think I have dangerous, malformed and destructive ideas. I'm sorry but I really don't. I've not been aware of harming the movement to be honest, but a bit of healthy discussion seems a good thing. So long as it can be kept with a level of respect and courtesy.

Barrie






From: Ian Hamilton 
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:21 AM
To: puckett101 at yahoo.com ; games_access at igda.org 
Cc: mark at ablegamers.com 
Subject: Re: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27


Aha, cultural differences, now that's a valid reason to agree to disagree! 




So in that case a bit more about how things are here, purely for informational purposes (esp. for other UNCRPD-bound countries, I know there are people from Greece and Germany at least on the list), and not as an illustration of how it should work in the US.




We don't have anywhere near as litigious a culture. Although it's more than it used to be, the no-win-fee adverts are restricted solely to personal injury claims, with a small sideline in compensation for miss-sold payment protection insurance, a specific very well publicised legal failing by mortgage lenders.




Again using web accessibility as an example as that has a bit more history to draw on, legislation that affected web access was first passed here in 1995 (the DDA, roughly equivalent in scope and intent to the ADA). In the 17 years that have passed the number of cases that have made it all the way through the courts to prosecution has been zero. I imagine from what you've indicated that that is quite a different story to what happened with the ADA in the USA. 




There have been plenty of threats, certainly in the early days of when I was at the BBC across their hundreds of sites & games they received threats of legal action on an almost weekly basis (since greatly reduced due to the good accessibility people they have there), but the solution has been for organisations simply to hold their hands up and fix the problems, roughly the equivalent of when the Dead Space developers released a control remapping patch. 




Occasionally organisations still refuse and things are taken further, but always settle out of court, in the same way as the recent Disney case in the USA. Certainly though no court in the land would be interesting in hearing a case in which negotiation between the claimant/defendant had already taken place and failed before legal action commenced, I've been through the process myself (not related to accessibility) and you can't just slap a summons on somone.




Since further legislation was introduced in 2010 to come in line with the newly ratified UNCRPD and extend rights to cover all types of discrimination across all industries (with a couple of obvious exceptions, such as sport), the number of cases that have been brought against the games industry has been zero. 




Again, I imagine that would be a different story in the USA, which I suppose helps to explain this, a map of the countries that have ratified the UNCRPD (all the ones in red and blue) - http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/maps/enablemap.jpg




As you can see although the USA is part of the minority that haven't ratified, it is a signatory, which means it at least agrees with it in principle, agrees not to pass any legislation that contravenes the principles of it, and is looking into how ratification & legislation might be possible. 




The thing with the UNCRPD is that it is pretty light on specifics, it's just overarching principles, general rights of equal access, and it's then down to individual countries to pass legislation that goes into the details, allowing them to take cultural differences into account. 




Although of course on that note I'll have to completely bow to your experience with and knowledge of how things work in your own culture, I'm certainly finding it an interesting and enlightening discussion, and hopefully others are too.




Ian



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 21:29:16 -0700
From: puckett101 at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
To: i_h at hotmail.com; games_access at igda.org
CC: steve at ablegamers.com; mark at ablegamers.com


Replying to Barrie and Ian's emails, in that order.


First.


Barrie, your comparison is, at best, inaccurate and trivializing another essential struggle in human history. The desire for accessible entertainment is nothing similar to an entire gender trying to obtain the legal right to have a say in who is elected and therefore able to pass legislation affecting that gender. In terms of disability rights and advocacy, the closest equivalent struggle would be trying to gain access to government buildings like courthouses without having to suffer the indignity of being carried up several flights of stairs or having to crawl up those stairs (like George Lane in 2004; more info here: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2004/01/offramp.html). Likewise, the struggle to not be permanently institutionalized due to disability is similar to civil rights and suffrage.


But we aren't talking about that. We're talking about video games, not people being forced to crawl up flights of stairs while the judge hearing their case watches and laughs at them. We're talking about entertainment, and while developers can and should do better with accessibility, drawing histrionic and fundamentally inaccurate comparisons between accessibility in games and struggles for basic access to essential elements of citizenship that were denied for centuries and are still problems today weakens the argument for accessibility in gaming because it invites exactly this sort of criticism. Instead of creating an environment in which other groups can support our advocacy for greater access to entertainment because it's a reasonable goal, such comparisons actively create conflict because there is a vast difference between people who were beaten and killed trying to obtain a basic, fundamental right and the desire of another group to have greater access to a form of entertainment.


In short, please stop drawing these comparisons. It doesn't help your case and, in fact, actually hurts it because it shows a clear misunderstanding of the struggles that people went through and are still going through in trying to achieve what amounts to full citizenship.


Second.


With that said.


Ian, thank you for your reasonable and sensible explanation of the legislation passed in other countries. It was both thoughtful and informative, and I appreciate you taking the time to write up that assessment. I wish that had been my introduction to the discussion because that actually made sense, explained the issues at hand and so forth.


However, there appear to be a number of significant differences between implementing such things in the UK and the US (and if you'd like to snicker about the political climate in the US, here is the perfect place to do so and I wouldn't hold it against you at all, although I usually just shake my head woefully at the state of things).


First and foremost is that there appears to be significantly more litigation in the US. Frankly, it's practically an industry here with ads on TV for class action suits about medication and such. Living in such a litigious environment means I see things in a very different way; in your description, it sounds as though the UK makes filing suit more difficult. If that's true, it's both a benefit and drawback because it would both protect developers from more frivolous litigation and also make it harder to bring a legitimate case before the court.


This is not true in the US. In the US, pretty much anyone can file suit against anyone else at any time and for any reason, regardless of how frivolous and meritless the claim may be. Even if that claim is dismissed, the defendant still incurs legal fees and loses time due to dealing with the suit. As I mentioned in my previous mail, it is often difficult to recover court costs and legal fees from plaintiffs in such a matter, but that doesn't mean that the money isn't spent. This is the problem with a case like Stern Vs. Sony Online; although it was a remarkably novel interpretation of a public accommodation, Sony still had to defend against it. It is unlikely that Sony would be able to recover court costs from the plaintiff, and there's also the public relations resulting from pursuing recovery against a disabled person. Now, Sony is big enough that it can take that hit. Despite Sony's recent troubles, dealing with a lawsuit like that is a trivial matter for an organization as large as Sony.


The problem arises when that lawsuit becomes 100, 1,000, or more, or it becomes a number of class action suits because someone who meets a government standard for a disability demands an accommodation that may not be technically possible, and a reasonable accommodation is subject to interpretation (everyone's definition of reasonable is different - I think Singularity should be castigated for failing to include subtitles and that MLB The Show should be lauded for somehow managing to include subtitles for a game which is wholly dynamic and situational, meaning that one situation may occur once and never again in a player's experience with the title). This may not be a concern that you have in the UK, but it's a very real concern in the US, and we have already seen it happen without any legislation mandating such an accommodation. That's where the chilling effect that I mentioned comes from. Perhaps in the UK, things are different, but legislation mandating such accommodations in games in the US would result in a non-trivial number of lawsuits being filed. We have a lot of lawyers here, and many of them need to pay off student loans, and I don't think there's a shortage of lawyers who would try to make a novel argument on the off chance that they get a judge to establish a career-making precedent (and loan-payoff payday). And frankly, I don't think we have any shortage of people willing to be a plaintiff in such a matter.


In short, this is a very real and pressing concern, and even laws and regulations which provide some sort of safe harbor provision don't prevent such litigation.


This is the inherent problem with any approach to any issue which assumes that one size fits all. Such regulation and oversight does not - and cannot - take regional variations into account. It can't address cultures, nor can (or should) it supersede local laws. This may sound strange coming from an American, but I do not believe that everyone has to do the same thing or follow the same laws or adhere to the same ideologies. While I believe everyone should be able to live free of fear or harm based on their gender or orientation or ability and so forth, that does not mean that I know - nor do I think I know - the best way to achieve that goal on a global level, nor am I arrogant enough to think that I do.


What I do know is my country, and I know that implementing legislation mandating accessibility in video games here will open the floodgates of litigation because this is what happens here. I don't think that a day goes by that I don't see an ad on TV seeking plaintiffs for class actions related to mesothelioma, SSRIs, birth control medication, anti-inflammatory medication, unfair cell phone billing practices, credit card charges and so forth. And it isn't just one ad - it's several, and it's not uncommon for me to see the same one twice. And that's ignoring the local and regional law firms which specialize in personal injury cases, and also advertise for clients. It sounds like the UK doesn't have this problem - or doesn't have it to this degree - and while that may not prove my point about one approach not being suitable for all cases or examples, it certainly supports it.



So perhaps this will work just fine for the UK. Perhaps there's nothing in it that would conflict with any laws in any of the other countries willing to put that legislation in place. That's fantastic. However, it would be a pretty significant problem here due to the litigious climate, the number of publishers and developers based in the US, and the large population of disabled people (the US census calculates that approximately 20% of Americans have some form of disability, and 10% - which is about 31 million people, or about half the population of the UK - have a severe disability).


So let's run some ballpark numbers. Let's assume, purely for sake of argument, that half the population of the UK was significantly disabled. That would obviously compel a need for legislation protecting those folks. Let's assume that 1% of those people were litigious - we're down to a hair over 300,000 potential plaintiffs. If we further assume that only 1% of those people could file a suit with merit that was not dismissed, we're still looking at developers defending over 3,000 separate lawsuits, assuming they aren't bundled into a class (and that's a little small for a class, completely independent of whether the disability accommodation at issue would warrant establishing a class).


I'm pretty sure that EA and Activision would both have difficulty defending 3,000 lawsuits, and as two of the largest publishers, they would be named as defendants in most of them. And that's just the lawsuits with merit - that doesn't include all the motions to dismiss that would be necessary for the meritless claims.


I'm sure we can agree that this is a non-trivial problem. And really, that's what we're looking at in the US. That threat would shutter a lot of developers. It would mean that smaller developers wouldn't bother with making games - they'd go do something else.


And the end result? The games we would get would, in fact, have homogenized gameplay that had survived lawsuits because developers would know that it's safe, that they're protected by precedent, that the lawyer who would inevitably wind up overseeing project development would approve it. Oh, what a brave new world, that has such games in it, etc. etc.


That's the future that such legislation would inevitably lead to if passed in the US. And if it exposed publishers and developers to litigation because it's been passed in other countries? I don't think you'll find that developers would opt to modify the game for regional accessibility requirements - a more likely outcome is not seeing those games released in countries where a developer or publisher might face a lawsuit due to accommodations or lack thereof.


I could be wrong, but we aren't talking about a sector where the potential reward is worth the risk (oil, for example). We're talking about an industry where the margins are already so thin that developers want to go to war over used game sales. Forcing additional expense onto them in the form of regionalizing games for not just content but accessibility accommodations which will require removing game sections or recoding them is likely to make them not develop for that territory.


I hope my response provides you with some insight about how things are here and the challenges such legislation would face as a result, much as your email provided me with interesting information about the accessibility climate in the UK.



Be well.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ian Hamilton <i_h at hotmail.com>
To: games_access at igda.org; puckett101 at yahoo.com 
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:51 PM
Subject: RE: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27



Hi Scott, good to hear from you, another UK reply for you - 




The thing is, the majority (115/196) of the countries in the world have now signed up to putting exactly that legislation in place, by ratifying the UNCRPD and recognising equal access to culture, recreation, leisure and sport as a basic right, which is obviously quite a significant step on from the ADA. Many countries already have the legislation in place, including the UK. Ours (the equalities act) incrementally came into effect between Oct 2010 and April 2011.




So for lots of us, rather than a question of if, the legislation is already here, so it's a question of when and in what circumstances litigation is beneficial and how best to handle it. When the point comes when there is such wide awareness and general good practice across the industry that it is actually useful (and that time categorically isn't now, all that can be achieved now is unfairly singling out people who don't know any better and generating lots of bad feeling and negative press in the process) the 'reasonable' thing will help enormously.




I can't in any way speak for the USA but that's how it works over here at least, there are no set criteria to work to that would ban the Wii or homogenise game mechanics, just governmental best practice recommendations for which standards and guidelines to work to (for web, it's BS8878 & WCAG). It's completely impossible to be sued for not being AA compliant. You can however be sued if there are adaptations you could have made but haven't, without any reasonable justification. 




For people with small budgets, cost is a reasonable justification, for web at least there certainly haven't been any small studios shutting up shop due to accessibility litigation fears. It's the same general sweeping law across every industry, and all types of discrimination (age/sex/race etc too).. non-compliance with standards is not illegal, but unreasonable inequality and discrimination is. 




Realistically litigation is extremely rare, when it does happen it's people / advocacy groups taking on large wealthy corporations who have absolutely no excuse and are deliberately dragging their heels. That approach has only started to work now that the sector is mature enough that organisations like that are the minority.




For the current state of the industry though, I completely agree with what you're saying. This in particular:




> > the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. 




There are other means of positive re-enforcement, AbleGamers' GOTY award for example is fantastic and we need to see things that brought across into mainstream awards such as BAFTA, but more than anything else, the above is what is needed to get publishers' interest, a concrete business case demonstrating the exact profitability involved is vital. That can only be achieved with analytics, that's what we all need to be pushing for alongside the usual developer advocacy / education. It's pretty much all that I seem to bang on about, so apologies, but it really is important. 




Even more important again in fact. A concrete business case has been the holy grail for accessibility in other industries too, but it's next to impossible to calculate an accurate one. Games however are uniquely positioned to do it one thanks to the kind of analytics that are not only possible but already standard practice. So if the concrete business case for accessibility can be established for games then that data can be used to back up efforts in industries too, meaning benefit for an incredible number of people, effects being felt across a much wider spectrum than just the games industry.




Ian






> From: games_access-request at igda.org
> Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 27
> To: games_access at igda.org
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:16 -0400
> 
> Send games_access mailing list submissions to
> games_access at igda.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> games_access-request at igda.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> games_access-owner at igda.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: suits about discrimination on the basisofdisability?
> (Steve Spohn)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:58:14 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] suits about discrimination on the
> basisofdisability?
> To: Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Mark Barlet <mark at ablegamers.com>, IGDA Games Accessibility SIG
> Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CABrM+MU_vam_2La1U-vKBGkc2tzX_dYnQ+_48NnrSiBqGBkC-A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Here Here!
> 
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Scott Puckett <puckett101 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > I love getting dragged into things. Also, this is cutting into my
> > Metalocalypse viewing time, so I'll be brief (which generally means you
> > might want to take a bio-break before continuing).
> >
> > My professional background started in journalism and media, then went into
> > consulting, then tech consulting, then researching and developing network
> > infrastructure, then back to tech consulting and organizational change
> > management. My academic background includes a significant number of law
> > classes, primarily focused on constitutional law and gender law. My
> > disabilities prevented from attending law school, which is the only reason
> > I'm not throwing in a bunch of case citations here. My tech consulting
> > actually involved examining and advocating ADA compliance at the dawn of
> > the Web as we know it, and accessibility continued to be a theme in my
> > consulting practice even before I became disabled. Most people who pay
> > attention to such things know that if you design interfaces (Web sites,
> > whatever) for accessibility, a side effect of that is that they are often
> > vastly and measurably more usable by people who are not disabled. IIRC,
> > Jakob Nielsen wrote a fair bit about that, but it's been some years since I
> > paid much attention to that sort of thing. I'm not sharing this to say that
> > I'm some sort of Internet tough guy, I'm only mentioning these things - and
> > only the relevant parts - to establish my experience with this subject and
> > in this field, and to explain that it is both professional and academic
> > experience and expertise.
> >
> > So let's establish some ground rules here. Let's begin by assuming that we
> > are discussing games of equal quality and public interest. Think Call Of
> > Duty, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Battlefield 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. Think
> > about the big selling titles that every gamer knows about and which ship
> > lots of copies.
> >
> > Let's also remember that technology moves much faster than law does. When
> > I was doing my student teaching almost two decades ago, a kid asked me what
> > I thought of the Internet. I told him then that it would change everything
> > he knew. The law is still catching up to that. It always has to because
> > lawmakers first have to be aware of a technology, at which point they
> > typically start trying to regulate it (actually trying to understand it
> > comes later).
> >
> > With that in mind, let's begin looking at some reasons why legislating
> > accessibility in video games is a bad idea.
> >
> > 1. Free market
> > The typical conservative argument is that the market will solve
> > everything. This isn't too different from John Milton's marketplace of
> > ideas, but for purposes of this discussion, all we need to understand is
> > that, given two equally popular and interesting games, the free market
> > dictates that the accessible game will sell more copies than the one which
> > is less accessible because gamers who need accommodations will buy that
> > title. This is a radically simplified expression of the idea, but the basic
> > argument here is that people who need accommodations will buy the
> > accessible title, generating revenue for the company that made it, which in
> > turn encourages greater accessibility. Other developers will see that and
> > realize they can also make more money by providing accommodations and begin
> > doing so. Thus, the change occurs without need of legislation, regulation
> > or litigation, and is driven entirely by market forces. Now, I don't
> > believe the free market will solve everything, or even most things, but I
> > do believe that spreading the word about highly accessible games which
> > are also good - and that is a KEY point - will bring additional attention
> > to that game and result in positive reinforcement for the developer,
> > encouraging them to make more games that are more accessible. Everyone
> > likes to be told they're doing a good job. Positive reinforcement, from an
> > organizational change perspective, is the way to address this to realize
> > long-term benefits. Accessible games sell more, inaccessible games sell
> > less, the market rewards those who make their games accessible.
> >
> > 2. Reasonable accommodation
> > The U.S. government's summary of Title 3 of the ADA is pretty simple:
> >
> > "Public accommodations must comply with basic nondiscrimination
> > requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.
> > They also must comply with specific requirements related to architectural
> > standards for new and altered buildings; reasonable modifications to
> > policies, practices, and procedures; effective communication with people
> > with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities; and other access
> > requirements. Additionally, public accommodations must remove barriers in
> > existing buildings where it is easy to do so without much difficulty or
> > expense, given the public accommodation's resources." (
> > http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor62335)
> >
> > There's also a pretty long list of what constitutes a public accommodation:
> >
> > "Public accommodations are private entities who own, lease, lease to, or
> > operate facilities such as restaurants, retail stores, hotels, movie
> > theaters, private schools, convention centers, doctors' offices, homeless
> > shelters, transportation depots, zoos, funeral homes, day care centers, and
> > recreation facilities including sports stadiums and fitness clubs."
> >
> > You'll notice that none of these things are video games.
> >
> > The Telecommunications Act (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm#anchor63109)
> > requires manufacturers of telco equipment (i.e. infrastructure) and
> > services (i.e. phone companies, etc.) "to ensure that such equipment and
> > services are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, if
> > readily achievable."
> >
> > This is likely where most ADA claims for video games would be made,
> > although it really only seems to apply to an MMO, if then, and possibly
> > multiplayer, although that might be a stretch.
> >
> > You mentioned "reasonably practicable access," so it seems UK law follows
> > a similar bent - focusing on what is both practical and reasonable, not what
> > is possible. It's possible to do lots of things - I seem to recall
> > sending a few folks to the moon a while back, but we haven't done it for a
> > lot people. More to the point, I recall reading an article about Left 4
> > Dead which indicated that the surround sound was so detailed that it
> > allowed someone who met the legal definition of blindness to play it, and
> > reasonably well. I'm reasonably sure that developers at Valve did not set
> > out to engineer the game's sound in such a way that blind folks could play
> > it, but it happened so it's possible. However, I'm not sure that it is
> > reasonable to attempt to legislate such an outcome.
> >
> > 3. Chilling effect
> > And that, not surprisingly, is where we come to the crux of the problem.
> > Legislating accessibility in video games will have a chilling effect. Suing
> > developers over accessibility seems like both a poorly-considered cash
> > grab, as well as something that has a chilling effect. Steve mentioned that
> > developers reduced the amount of communication or stopped it entirely for a
> > time after the SOE accessibility lawsuit. That's because litigation has a
> > chilling effect, and that's part of the point. Suing a slumlord and getting
> > a judgement which forces them to bring buildings up to code and assesses
> > punitive damages is intended to have a chilling effect, and make other
> > landlords fix things before they get sued. However, lawsuits are also a
> > form of intimidation intended to silence people, as the current mess with
> > The Oatmeal shows.
> >
> > The SOE suit used a very novel interpretation of a public accommodation
> > (for more on public accommodations, read this:
> > http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=dlj),
> > one which doesn't really seem to fit the ADA, even the telecommunications
> > part of it (and if you want to read more, here's the dismissal:
> > http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/Stern-v-Sony_MTD_order.pdf). Looking at
> > the actual case, and I looked at it pretty carefully, it didn't pass the
> > smell test. Simply put, reading the ADA in that way is not reasonable, nor
> > is it practical. It is, in fact, the very opposite of both reasonable and
> > practical and would have opened the floodgates for meritless litigation
> > that would likely have ended development of all but the most highly
> > capitalized (meaning really freaking expensive to make) titles, and
> > perhaps even those.
> >
> > It would, in short, have had a long-term chilling effect on development,
> > and actually did have a short-term chilling effect on communication between
> > advocacy groups and developers. This is because developers didn't know how
> > that case was going to shake out, and didn't want to say or write or
> > communicate anything in any way that might later be used against them. For
> > the record, from an organizational change perspective, this is exactly how not
> > to create positive and lasting change. From a legal standpoint, this is
> > not, in fact, something that's up for debate - this is exactly what
> > lawsuits do. It's what they're intended to do. It is, in fact, their
> > entire point and reason for existence. (And, just in case you'd like to
> > debate that point, I have direct experience with this matter from my
> > journalism days, when I was sued for libel while other news outlets
> > reporting on the same events were not, likely due to the individual's
> > perception that I likely didn't have a law firm standing at the ready. What
> > he found was worse - a journalist with an actual background in
> > constitutional law. I represented myself. It was fun. And he dropped the
> > case pretty quickly.)
> >
> > 4. The Harrison Bergeron effect
> > This is the sad part. I believe you mean well. I believe you have good
> > intentions, even though I've never met nor talked with you. The problem is
> > that I also believe that your view is remarkably short-sighted. Since you
> > aren't in or from the US, I can forgive your remarkably oversimplified
> > analysis of anti-discrimination laws, because you weren't here, and may not
> > have even been alive for them. However, one of my degrees is in American
> > Studies, and I've spent a lot of time in the South so, again, I have both
> > practical and academic experience in this matter. The simple fact is that
> > the laws changed nothing. The National Guard had to take kids to school.
> > Civil rights marchers had firehoses and attack dogs loosed on them by law
> > enforcement. And this is AFTER the laws were passed at a federal level. And
> > that history extends back to the end of the Civil War. The Jim Crow-era
> > legislation you're mentioning was just the latest in a long string of
> > indignities, and it required the federal government to implement federal
> > law at gunpoint, and the federal government still, to this very day, has
> > to step in from time to time. In short, it's not as nice or easy as you
> > seem to think it is. A lot of people died, and diminishing their sacrifice
> > by comparing people who sought the right to vote without being clubbed to
> > death or torn apart by dogs to people who are frustrated because a video
> > game doesn't have a particular feature set is offensive and insulting on
> > its face.
> >
> > But, again, you aren't from here and you weren't there, so I'll forgive
> > your ignorance of American history. It's not like I could engage you in a
> > discussion about the Profumo affair, or the Wars of the Roses, or the
> > Battle Of Hastings.
> >
> > With that said, the Harrison Bergeron effect is the most critical reason
> > we don't want legislation dragged in. If a government passes legislation,
> > that legislation will cause litigation as people try to figure out what it
> > means, or push to have it mean something that it may not. Some of this
> > litigation will have merit; most will not and will, instead, be an attempt
> > for an attorney to pay off student loans or cash in with a big win (see the
> > comments about chilling effects above). Developers will hire accessibility
> > experts (which would not be a terrible thing), and have attorneys involved
> > in game design to reduce the risk of litigation at launch (which would be a
> > terrible thing). Only larger developers will be able to afford this -
> > smaller developers will likely just stop because it's expensive to defend
> > against lawsuits, and recovering legal fees in the wake of a failed suit is
> > a nightmare. There's nothing that would distinguish between meritless and
> > valid suits, nor prevent the meritless suits, and smaller developers would
> > likely quit before they started incurring fees they couldn't afford. By the
> > time all of that settled down to a normal level (which means the boundaries
> > would have been defined, people would know what they had to do to avoid a
> > meritorious suit, etc.), the only developers left would be Activision, EA,
> > Bethesda, etc. We'd lose games like Minecraft and Fez and Limbo. We'd lose
> > games which are at the forefront of any discussion about whether games are
> > art.
> >
> > And even then, the meritless litigation wouldn't stop - you'd still see
> > people trying to think of novel interpretations, i.e. Stern. Vs. Sony
> > Online. Developers would still have to follow those same policies.
> >
> > And the outcome would be terribly boring games. If every single game had
> > to adhere to a specific list of accommodations, they would all look a lot
> > alike. They'd have the same features and puzzles, and regardless of how
> > much I hate quick-time events, I don't think that someone who loves them
> > should be denied those events, and the outcome of legislating accessibility
> > in gaming would likely include losing that feature, among others.
> >
> > Let's be really blunt here.
> >
> > Being disabled isn't fun. I can't run. I can't pick up my little girl and
> > give her a piggyback ride. Walking is tough a lot of the time. I deal with
> > it, because that's what I do, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone I know.
> > But I don't get jealous of Usain Bolt. I don't get mad because another
> > father can roughhouse with their kid. I don't wish that people who can walk
> > just fine had to slow down or use a cane or walker. I don't, in short,
> > expect that other people have to have limitations because I do, nor do I
> > think that it's somehow inherently desirable to make every game playable by
> > everyone. My disabilities prevent me from playing any game on the Wii, or
> > any game that uses motion (i.e. Kinect, Move, SIXAXIS controls, etc.).
> > Legislating accessibility for me would mean banning the Wii, the Move and
> > Kinect control systems, and SIXAXIS. I think we can all agree that such an
> > idea is patently absurd.
> >
> > The simple fact of the matter is that accommodating a disability must be a
> > reasonable accommodation. While some developers are actively trying to make
> > games for blind folk and I think that's great, trying to make Battlefield 3
> > accessible for the blind would be a development nightmare. Likewise, I
> > think any developer who fails to include subtitles at this point is an
> > absolute idiot. The solution lies somewhere between those polar examples,
> > but we can only find those reasonable and practical accommodations through
> > innovation and collaboration, partly because what video games are now is
> > something new and we're learning more about what they work and how to make
> > them accessible every day. The innovation and flexibility in a controller
> > scheme like the one in "Resistance: Fall Of Man" is fantastic and I wish
> > more developers would use it, but legislating that means that developers
> > would ONLY do that and wouldn't take a risk on perhaps figuring out
> > something that worked better.
> >
> > My time in tech taught me a lot, but one of the biggest lessons I learned
> > is that innovation results from having a problem and needing to fix it.
> > That's where Evil Controllers shines, and three of the folks I game with
> > have a one-handed controller. It doesn't matter to them whether a game is
> > natively accessible to players with use of only one hand, because they
> > already solved the problem. Likewise, there's another guy who can't really
> > use thumbsticks on a standard controller, so he molded his own joysticks so
> > he didn't have that problem anymore.
> >
> > When people try to legislate technology, what they often overlook is that
> > technology will, given a sufficient timeline, innovate its own solutions to
> > its own problems. Individuals will create new things to mitigate problems.
> > Legislating things like accessibility ensures that we lose that innovation
> > because people simply don't have to think about it anymore, and so they
> > don't. They implement exactly what the law says they have to, and then they
> > don't think about it again.
> >
> > So.
> >
> > Litigation for gaming accessibility is bad. It's perhaps the single worst
> > way to handle it.
> >
> > But legislating gaming accessibility runs a very close second.
> >
> > I want developers to do this stuff and get it right. It's why, any time
> > I'm face to face with someone doing this stuff, I talk to them about it
> > with specific, concrete examples of how they can implement things to
> > improve accessibility without taking away from gameplay.
> >
> > But we also need to remember how inherently individual disability actually
> > is, and how a single solution may not work for two people, even if they
> > have the same disability condition. Legislation is one size fits all. Me?
> > I'd rather see the developers innovate flexible new solutions, and it's
> > important to note that this is happening. It's happening right now. It was
> > in L.A. Noire, and it's in Max Payne 3. It's in MLB The Show 2011, which is
> > the first baseball game I know of that subtitled the announcers'
> > play-by-play. It's happening right now, and without regulation or
> > legislation.
> >
> > So no, I don't think we need it. I think it would make things remarkably
> > worse, and more boring, and that we'd hate the result. But hey, what do I
> > know? I just did this stuff as part of my professional career for the best
> > part of two decades and in several separate sectors subject to significant
> > federal oversight (real estate, finance, insurance, etc.). I just watched
> > people go to work every day and solve intractable problems and generate
> > mind-melting tech as a result. I'm just looking at what developers are
> > actively doing right now and seeing that this change is happening without
> > legislation or regulation, and that regulation, legislation and litigation
> > aren't necessary.
> >
> > It isn't as fast as I'd like, but sustainable change doesn't happen
> > quickly. It takes time, and people have to adjust to it, and learn a new
> > way of thinking and doing. But once they've done that, they don't forget
> > it, and it becomes part of what they do.
> >
> > And that's where we are right now.
> >
> > Like I said at the beginning, take a bio-break before reading.
> >
> > It's not my fault if you didn't listen ;)
> >
> > Regards and other such things.
> >






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/b21a6a60/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 17:56:03 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:56:03 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr><832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com><2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>

I'm not aware of ignoring any of your e-mails, Steve. Things did become painfully sluggish with development of the system. Real-life got well in the way of the ideas getting resolved quickly. I don't remember any e-mail saying that AG walked away, but can understand that they'd only wait so long before becoming fed-up.

With my SE hat on, which is where I helped to develop this system, I'm no where near as free to do what I like. I thought it was a good idea at the time to bring together organisations with such similar goals, but SE preferred the idea of testing it first. It's in BETA, and earlier days than you may realise. I can respect their decision on this, especially in light of fielding opinion on the system, and especially in testing it ourselves to see if it works for us.

Responding to other points:

Again, bear in mind that the Joypad rider symbol use is a pilot project from SE's side. It's a trial. So there still is scope for tying together with people who do like the concept, where we can all just get-a-long! It is good to get people's views on it, as nothing is set in stone at this stage. I've not seen Eleanor's symbol, and would like to.

Re. the CUTO bear - that's part of the review system to denote "Content Unlikely To Offend". It's explained here: http://www.gamebase.info/magazine/read/specialeffect-game-accessibility-rating-system-beta_530.html. It doesn't mean that the game is accessible. Also wanted to give Atari a nod of respect for having the first ever labelling system linked to accessibility back in 1981.

The other symbols were designed to be as clear as we could make them. I don't think they are childish, and I like colour. I think they're eye-catching. Something we thought was very important was to take into account as broad a range of abilities as we could.

Another agree to disagree I guess.

Barrie








From: Steve Spohn 
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 9:46 PM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?


I can tell you with my AbleGamers hat on that we were in communication with Barrie to open up a third-party website where people could go to that saw the mutually agreed-upon symbol that would mean that the game had been given the seal of approval by AG or SE or Anyone (gamefwd 7-128 etc.). After a number of e-mails and no responses from Barrie, AbleGamers walked away from the project. (Can share with the emails with the group if you'd like) 


The important part of the discussion was a third-party non specific website that could house reviews from all websites and allow people to thoroughly explore the accessibility of games from many angles. So, I think specifying that you are going to lobby for a symbol to be placed on boxes that goes to GameBase is a bit much. 


There are a couple fundamental flaws with the symbol system. First, if you read the fine print on the website it says that the game only needs to be reviewed by SpecialEffect. It doesn't need to be accessible, good, friendly or easy to play, it simply means that is reviewed to some extent. That is not helpful at a glance. Second, the symbols you used Barrie are downright offensive. Eleanor's is a nice neutral symbol, although it still has a wheelchair in it, but the teddy bear symbol absolutely offends me, and every single disabled gamer I have asked so far said they would be offended seeing a teddy bear on the box meaning that  it is accessible.


A good question for everyone to think about is why are all of the symbols we see coming out that could mean accessibility filled with ultra-colorful, cartoonlike and childish symbols. Not all gamers with disabilities are children, in fact, the majority are not. 


On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

  @BlazeEagle - Glad you like the symbol, I do too. It's on trial with SpecialEffect at the moment. Maybe it will take hold and spread if they'll release it, maybe not. I'm hoping at the least it will sow more seeds for getting a labelling system going.

  Ultimately, this could be a free and loose system where anyone can use it to denote Game Accessibility Information, or tied up tighter in ELSPA/PEGI style-ee. I do know there was a lot of difference of opinion at the time of the symbol surfacing, but to us (with my SpecialEffect hat on now) - we liked this one best out of the ones we were allowed to use.

  I do recognise the feelings from Sandra and Dimitris of looking for something slightly less disability related. However, we did open this up for some time, looking for the best symbol we could, and speaking for myself, I saw nothing better at the time. I do like a white on black version we have, and the 3D version quite a bit too.

  What I did like about the symbol is that it can be interpreted in a number of ways (wheelchair user combined with joypad, laid-back gamer sitting on a giant joypad, person riding some steam-punk like machine).

  What I liked about the way it could be used, is the potential flexibility. It could be placed on its own with tiny link and/or QR code to send you to accessibility info where space is very limited. It could be placed next to future access symbols. It could send you off to GameBase. Maybe one day, it could send you off to a database pointing you to a variety of opinions (a bit like Amazon maybe).

  What would be really great, if there was a system people could get familiar with, broadly adopted, and agreed, Lynsey - it could be a positive system of encouraging developers/publishers to think a bit more about accessibility. I've always been supportive of a multi-pronged effort to improve accessibility.

  Barrie.


  --------------------------------------------------
  From: "Lynsey Graham" <lgraham at blitzgamesstudios.com>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 10:39 AM
  To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" <games_access at igda.org> 

  Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?


    I think it'd be useful (certainly for 'mainstream' games) if accessibility criteria and symbols could be incorporated into the existing rating systems, such as PEGI and the ESRB, that are supposed to inform consumers of a game's suitability.

    http://rashedgamedev.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/pegi_ratings_system.png

    As well as being more informative for the consumer, it might raise publisher/developer awareness if there was an extra set of boxes to tick on the rating submission form.  Given that you have to check 'Yes' or 'No', it might actually embarrass some developers/publishers to realise how even the most basic accessibility measures such as subtitles and colour blind friendly mechanics have been overlooked...


    -----Original Message-----
    From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Grammenos
    Sent: 26 June 2012 10:26
    To: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
    Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

    First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid conversation taking place again in our list!

    Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.

    1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility  is a good thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit misleading, as well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra capabilities - use a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food products that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised similarly.
    For example, you have "Football game" and  "Football game++". The notion is that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess you get the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific disabilities.

    2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point of view.
    I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game can be played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable difficulty, subtitles, etc.

    3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
    Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. So, one thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to look for it, or collaboratively build it up.

    4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so that gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most importantly becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".

    5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering down", "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be true for the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital world it is the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way (what is the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, unless this is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are fully supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to which it can and should be pursued.  If you have some time you can have a look at
    these:
    - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
    http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
    - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
    http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
    - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 slides) PDF
    format(15MB)
    http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
    Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf


    I'll be back for more :-)

    Dimitris



    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

    _______________________________________________
    games_access mailing list
    games_access at igda.org
    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
    The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org


  _______________________________________________
  games_access mailing list
  games_access at igda.org
  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
  The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org






-- 
Steve Spohn 
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/9b58dfc6/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 18:04:36 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 18:04:36 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>

Wow. So much for all of us cooperating for the cause, eh?

SE would rather do it on their own.

Ok. Good Luck

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> With my SE hat on, which is where I helped to develop this system, I'm no
> where near as free to do what I like. I thought it was a good idea at the
> time to bring together organisations with such similar goals,
> but SE preferred the idea of testing it first. It's in BETA, and earlier
> days than you may realise. I can respect their decision on this, especially
> in light of fielding opinion on the system, and especially in testing it
> ourselves to see if it works for us.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/b9d1190e/attachment.htm>

From thomasw at dsv.su.se  Tue Jun 26 18:32:30 2012
From: thomasw at dsv.su.se (Thomas Westin)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:32:30 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8431669E-B7ED-455B-9630-E6E0C6479E57@dsv.su.se>

I repeat what I've said a couple of months ago in a similar line of communication: collaboration is generally good but sometimes it may not be possible outside of local organizations; sometimes even better to do just locally. The main thing is that we all move forward, be it locally or globally. 

I like to think of the GA community on this list and elsewhere, as a bilateral collaboration; this means all organizations, researchers, gamers, developers etc. here share similar goals and values regarding GA. 

However, we should NOT have to synchronize our actions in detail or have overarching rules for collaborations. This would take a lot of administration and control and just kill creativity. So please stop complaining or accusing people/organizations for what they do (or don't do) - it is just not a fruitful way forward. At least not in my e-mail box, thank you.
 
Mvh / Best regards
Thomas Westin
Stockholm University :: dsv.su.se :: +46 8 161992

On 27Jun 2012, at 12:04 AM, Steve Spohn wrote:

> Wow. So much for all of us cooperating for the cause, eh? 
> 
> SE would rather do it on their own.
> 
> Ok. Good Luck
> 
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
> With my SE hat on, which is where I helped to develop this system, I'm no where near as free to do what I like. I thought it was a good idea at the time to bring together organisations with such similar goals, but SE preferred the idea of testing it first. It's in BETA, and earlier days than you may realise. I can respect their decision on this, especially in light of fielding opinion on the system, and especially in testing it ourselves to see if it works for us.
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/95502732/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 26 18:35:26 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:35:26 +0000
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4417.1340743606.94576.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.4417.1340743606.94576.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W823E265CBC66F61B4424D491E00@phx.gbl>



Although I totally get the points of view about use of wheelchairs Vs positive messaging I'm from the opposite school of thought, if it was down to me I'd be more in favour of just the standard international wheelchair symbol as that's already universally recognised, although I do understand the worry of it inferring a higher level of accessibility than might be possible. 

I can't speak for wheelchair users obviously as I'm not one, but a wheelchair is a positive, empowering piece of assistive tech after all, and (for me at least) one of the strongest symbols of the power that technology has to remove barriers.

On a different note the reason for it linking to special effect reviews at the moment is just because it's currently an internal special effect trial right? 

As far as I can tell the idea would be SE to trial it to see how/if it works, then if successful for it to be opened up for other people to use how they wish, just as a general signifier of accessibility information. So regardless of whether it's associated with an AG review, a SE review, PEGI symbols, bullet points or so on, the grand ambition would be for gamers to be able to tell at a glance whether or not any accessibility information is present. Is that right? If so I think it's fair to say that's something that everyone would be in favour of.

Ian

> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:46:44 -0400
> From: Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com>
> Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
> To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List <games_access at igda.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> I can tell you with my AbleGamers hat on that we were in communication with
> Barrie to open up a third-party website where people could go to that saw
> the mutually agreed-upon symbol that would mean that the game had been
> given the seal of approval by AG or SE or Anyone (gamefwd 7-128 etc.).
> After a number of e-mails and no responses from Barrie, AbleGamers walked
> away from the project. (Can share with the emails with the group if you'd
> like)
> 
> The important part of the discussion was a third-party non specific website
> that could house reviews from all websites and allow people to thoroughly
> explore the accessibility of games from many angles. So, I think specifying
> that you are going to lobby for a symbol to be placed on boxes that goes to
> GameBase is a bit much.
> 
> There are a couple fundamental flaws with the symbol system. First, if you
> read the fine print on the website it says that the game only needs to be
> reviewed by SpecialEffect. It doesn't need to be accessible, good, friendly
> or easy to play, it simply means that is reviewed to some extent. That is
> not helpful at a glance. Second, the symbols you used Barrie are downright
> offensive. Eleanor's is a nice neutral symbol, although it still has a
> wheelchair in it, but the teddy bear symbol absolutely offends me, and
> every single disabled gamer I have asked so far said they would be offended
> seeing a teddy bear on the box meaning that  it is accessible.
> 
> A good question for everyone to think about is why are all of the symbols
> we see coming out that could mean accessibility filled with ultra-colorful,
> cartoonlike and childish symbols. Not all gamers with disabilities are
> children, in fact, the majority are not.
> 
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/7970e2bd/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Tue Jun 26 18:45:07 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:45:07 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>

Hi,

 

one question: why can't we work together?

 

Best regards,

Sandra

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/3bbd6ce7/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 19:06:30 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:06:30 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>

Well Sandra,

According to Thomas Westin, we shouldn't all have to work together. But,
keep in mind, this is also the guy that answered my talking about the
difficulties of dealing with living with two terminal illnesses with "we
are all dying of life, Steve."

So, in the meantime, I'm going to keep working with organizations that want
to work together. And I'm also going to continue "complaining" when I feel
more can be done to accelerate the cause.

Steve

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

> Hi,****
>
> ** **
>
> one question: why can?t we work together?****
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards,****
>
> Sandra****
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/90490eef/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 19:10:45 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:10:45 -0400
Subject: [games_access] IndieGala Partners with the AbleGamers Foundation
Message-ID: <CABrM+MXccePm2k=ZHDHXg_fWpo5HwMh+V+_8Oy81dhutwVq-Qw@mail.gmail.com>

-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>

IndieGala Partners with the AbleGamers Foundation

*Bundle Service IndieGala has Chosen to Permanently Support Disabled Gamers*



Harpers Ferry, WV ?June 25, 2012? The AbleGamers
Foundation<http://www.ablegamers.com/>and
IndieGala <http://www.indiegala.com/> are thrilled to announce the bundle
service will now offer AbleGamers as the charity deal hunters can support
while getting great games. Having raised $5000 for the charity in the first
month alone, IndieGala is on track to be one of the foundation?s largest
supporters.



?This is a very exciting time for the game accessibility movement,? said
Mark Barlet, President of The Ablegamers Foundation. ?The gaming community
has always been very supportive of our mission and the partnership with
IndieGala will allow the community to pick up some great games while making
a donation to support gamers with disabilities.?



?I could not be more pleased,? said Steve Spohn, Editor-In-Chief of
AbleGamers. ?We are a charity, but we do our best to give back to those who
support our mission and partnering with such a wonderful bundle service
will allow our donors to receive something other than the wonderful feeling
of supporting disabled gamers for their donations.?



?IndieGala is proud to support such a wonderful cause as AbleGamers,? said
Riccardo Rosapepe, Lead Manager of IndieGala. ?We have so much love and
respect for gamers with disabilities. It feels really good to give back to
the community that supports us.?



IndieGala bundles more than a dozen games and music together in a pay what
you want format. Users can choose to give the money to any of the options
(developers, charity or the gala themselves) by adjusting the sliders how
they see fit.



*About The AbleGamers Foundation***



The AbleGamers Foundation is a 501(c)(3) public charity that runs
AbleGamers.com, which provides news and reviews on the accessibility of
mainstream video game titles, as well as consultation on assistive
technology.  As an alternative to Serious Gaming, mainstream video games
supply many disabled individuals and veterans with rehabilitation as well
as social stimulation in situations where they may be otherwise shut out of
society's idea of normal everyday life.



###







For more information about this topic, the AbleGamers Foundation,
AbleGamers.com, or to schedule an interview with Mark Barlet, President of
AbleGamers, call Steve Spohn at (703) 891-9017 ext:102 or email
press at AbleGamers.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/ebc65ef5/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 19:12:25 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:12:25 -0400
Subject: [games_access] G4TV.COM Features AbleGamers,
	Helps Raise Awareness for Cause
Message-ID: <CABrM+MVBL3NqVMcPhxTyz=Bk5rAMGac6Q87m4v-Ae9sq3mUerg@mail.gmail.com>

**

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



Contact: Steve Spohn

press at ablegamers.org

(703) 891-9017 ext:102



G4TV.COM <http://g4tv.com/> Features AbleGamers, Helps Raise Awareness for
Cause


Harpers Ferry, WV ?June 26, 2012? The AbleGamers Foundation is proud to
announce its partnership with
G4TV.COM<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=85613693&msgid=1051573&act=HWN4&c=369830&destination=http%3A%2F%2FG4TV.COM>
to
bring awareness to the accessible gaming movement and shine the spotlight
on disabled gamers. Starting Monday at
www.g4tv.com/ablegamers<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=85613693&msgid=1051573&act=HWN4&c=369830&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.g4tv.com%2Fablegamers>,
G4TV is running an entire week?s worth of articles that highlight the
disabled community, the mission of making games more accessible, and how
AbleGamers works with a wide range of organizations to enable aspirational
gamers despite their disabilities.

For many people in the disabled community, video games can be a window into
a world that is otherwise largely inaccessible. Every day, the number of
people with a disability climbs higher across the globe and a large number
of them could benefit from playing video games.

?I can?t express how happy we are to see G4 supporting disabled gamers,?
said Mark Barlet, President of the AbleGamers Foundation . ?It was a
pleasure to share our stories of how video games change the lives of those
with disabilities. I?ve seen mothers on the verge of tears when we were
able to help their baby play, children smile when playing for the first
time, adults learning to play again or finding new ways to game, and it
really makes you feel good to help bring a little more joy to the world one
person at a time.?

?It's all about options,? said Steve Spohn, Editor-In-Chief of AbleGamers.
?We hope by sharing some of our most heartfelt moments with G4 that we can
express how gamers in the disabled community simply want options that allow
us to play today's hottest games with our friends and family just like
everyone else.?

?AbleGamers demonstrate a kind of passion and devotion to gaming that would
make anyone who has ever played proud,? said Rob Manuel, Senior Features
Editor at G4TV.COM <http://g4tv.com/>. ?The aid we?ve received from them in
telling their stories has been nothing less than inspirational, and
hopefully, we've conveyed to our readers that everyone deserves the
opportunity to be a gamer.?

G4TV.COM <http://g4tv.com/>?s extensive coverage of the AbleGamers
Foundation starts today, Monday, June 25, 2012  at
www.g4tv.com/ablegamers<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=85613693&msgid=1051573&act=HWN4&c=369830&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.g4tv.com%2Fablegamers>,
and includes some of the deepest moments for the organization, as well as
the struggles and triumphs of the disabled community. The AbleGamers
Foundation truly believes there should be no barriers to fun.



*About The AbleGamers Foundation*


The AbleGamers Foundation is a 501(c)(3) public charity that runs
AbleGamers.com, which provides news and reviews on the accessibility of
mainstream video game titles, as well as consultation on assistive
technology.  As an alternative to Serious Gaming, mainstream video games
supply many disabled individuals and veterans with rehabilitation as well
as social stimulation in situations where they may be otherwise shut out of
society's idea of normal everyday life.


###



For more information about this topic, the AbleGamers Foundation,
AbleGamers.com, or to schedule an interview call (703) 891-9017 ext:102  or
email press at AbleGamers.com.

-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/d7cfc1cd/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 26 19:17:48 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 23:17:48 +0000
Subject: [games_access] G4TV.COM Features AbleGamers,
 Helps Raise Awareness for Cause (Steve Spohn)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4476.1340752348.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.4476.1340752348.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W32F94A419658D9C9EEE18C91E00@phx.gbl>


Congrats on both counts, both the indiegala deal and the G4TV featuring will be fantastically helpful for raising awareness, nice work :)
Ian 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/84f016b9/attachment.htm>

From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 19:19:23 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:19:23 -0400
Subject: [games_access] G4TV.COM Features AbleGamers,
 Helps Raise Awareness for Cause (Steve Spohn)
In-Reply-To: <DUB116-W32F94A419658D9C9EEE18C91E00@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.4476.1340752348.94575.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W32F94A419658D9C9EEE18C91E00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MUvb_xQWaG-e8Ym_O8gu2tana2dEPiv3PmbVHBKVsQqPQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you, sir.

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Ian Hamilton <i_h at hotmail.com> wrote:

>  Congrats on both counts, both the indiegala deal and the G4TV featuring
> will be fantastically helpful for raising awareness, nice work :)
>
> Ian
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/8504bae1/attachment.htm>

From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 22:22:17 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 03:22:17 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
	<CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEdM-4J7fMJXM2oT=MavrV53=wdhzxKen2K=h2UNSWQrqmHj6w@mail.gmail.com>

I completely deny your quote, Steve and am very sad that you think I
would be that cold and uncaring towards you. If you've been left with
that feeling though I'm truly sorry. I'm withdrawing from this as I am
starting to feel a line of being baited and bullied.

On 27/06/2012, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:
> Well Sandra,
>
> According to Thomas Westin, we shouldn't all have to work together. But,
> keep in mind, this is also the guy that answered my talking about the
> difficulties of dealing with living with two terminal illnesses with "we
> are all dying of life, Steve."
>
> So, in the meantime, I'm going to keep working with organizations that want
> to work together. And I'm also going to continue "complaining" when I feel
> more can be done to accelerate the cause.
>
> Steve
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> one question: why can?t we work together?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Best regards,****
>>
>> Sandra****
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> games_access mailing list
>> games_access at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device


From oneswitch at gmail.com  Tue Jun 26 22:52:52 2012
From: oneswitch at gmail.com (Barrie Ellis)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 03:52:52 +0100
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CAEdM-4J7fMJXM2oT=MavrV53=wdhzxKen2K=h2UNSWQrqmHj6w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
	<CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEdM-4J7fMJXM2oT=MavrV53=wdhzxKen2K=h2UNSWQrqmHj6w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEdM-4LPxW8rms37bmv=WR7COP0G3o0n2Fet3kmtHjw4CTcSAg@mail.gmail.com>

Last thing for a while, I promise. I can't speak for Thomas but if I
misread your message and you were upset by his comment not mine, I
would like to say I have never read an unkind word from him before.

I'd guess Thomas may have been running down some  existential train of
thought with that one. I would imagine he would be mortified to have
left you feeling like that.

 I know passions run high with this topic at times but I just wish we
could show one another more kindness when there are misunderstandings
and/or disagreements and/or moments of jealousy/irritation. We should
all be able to go our own way and also find common threads to pull
together on. Wouldn't we be stronger like that? I'd still like that.

Bye for a while.

Barrie

On 27/06/2012, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
> I completely deny your quote, Steve and am very sad that you think I
> would be that cold and uncaring towards you. If you've been left with
> that feeling though I'm truly sorry. I'm withdrawing from this as I am
> starting to feel a line of being baited and bullied.
>
> On 27/06/2012, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:
>> Well Sandra,
>>
>> According to Thomas Westin, we shouldn't all have to work together. But,
>> keep in mind, this is also the guy that answered my talking about the
>> difficulties of dealing with living with two terminal illnesses with "we
>> are all dying of life, Steve."
>>
>> So, in the meantime, I'm going to keep working with organizations that
>> want
>> to work together. And I'm also going to continue "complaining" when I
>> feel
>> more can be done to accelerate the cause.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> one question: why can?t we work together?****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Best regards,****
>>>
>>> Sandra****
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> games_access mailing list
>>> games_access at igda.org
>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Spohn
>> Editor-In-Chief
>> The AbleGamers Foundation
>> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
>> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
>>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
>> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device


From steve at ablegamers.com  Tue Jun 26 22:58:17 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:58:17 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CAEdM-4LPxW8rms37bmv=WR7COP0G3o0n2Fet3kmtHjw4CTcSAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
	<CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEdM-4J7fMJXM2oT=MavrV53=wdhzxKen2K=h2UNSWQrqmHj6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEdM-4LPxW8rms37bmv=WR7COP0G3o0n2Fet3kmtHjw4CTcSAg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABrM+MXNL5_WC5O=KtepwmyJYcnbvb8+u4eHsSAunCnxBhq5vA@mail.gmail.com>

He said those actual words and I'll never forget them.

Anyway, I'm also going dark for awhile.

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:

> Last thing for a while, I promise. I can't speak for Thomas but if I
> misread your message and you were upset by his comment not mine, I
> would like to say I have never read an unkind word from him before.
>
> I'd guess Thomas may have been running down some  existential train of
> thought with that one. I would imagine he would be mortified to have
> left you feeling like that.
>
>  I know passions run high with this topic at times but I just wish we
> could show one another more kindness when there are misunderstandings
> and/or disagreements and/or moments of jealousy/irritation. We should
> all be able to go our own way and also find common threads to pull
> together on. Wouldn't we be stronger like that? I'd still like that.
>
> Bye for a while.
>
> Barrie
>
> On 27/06/2012, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I completely deny your quote, Steve and am very sad that you think I
> > would be that cold and uncaring towards you. If you've been left with
> > that feeling though I'm truly sorry. I'm withdrawing from this as I am
> > starting to feel a line of being baited and bullied.
> >
> > On 27/06/2012, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:
> >> Well Sandra,
> >>
> >> According to Thomas Westin, we shouldn't all have to work together. But,
> >> keep in mind, this is also the guy that answered my talking about the
> >> difficulties of dealing with living with two terminal illnesses with "we
> >> are all dying of life, Steve."
> >>
> >> So, in the meantime, I'm going to keep working with organizations that
> >> want
> >> to work together. And I'm also going to continue "complaining" when I
> >> feel
> >> more can be done to accelerate the cause.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,****
> >>>
> >>> ** **
> >>>
> >>> one question: why can?t we work together?****
> >>>
> >>> ** **
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,****
> >>>
> >>> Sandra****
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> games_access mailing list
> >>> games_access at igda.org
> >>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Steve Spohn
> >> Editor-In-Chief
> >> The AbleGamers Foundation
> >> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
> >> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
> >>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
> >> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my mobile device
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>



-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120626/8196fb77/attachment.htm>

From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Wed Jun 27 09:09:07 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 16:09:07 +0300
Subject: [games_access] Barrier vs. Challenge++
Message-ID: <000601cd5466$094fe240$1befa6c0$@ics.forth.gr>

Hello all,

1. After our discussions about what constitutes a barrier and what a
challenge, I created an illustration (attached) about which in my opinion is
the difference between the two.

2. AbleGamers, congrats about both the G4TV & IndieGala. I believe that such
cases contribute positively both to your organization, as well as to the
overall goals of game accessibility.

3. I am so sorry, that only a few hours after the expression of my delight
about the vivid conversation that we have here, people have already started
going silent. As (game) accessibility is in essence about including as many
people and alternative views as possible, I don't think that this aids in
any way to our common goal. 

There are always going to be misunderstandings, especially since  we are not
communicating face to face and also some of us are not native English
speakers, but I would like to ask everyone to try to take things in good
faith (I hope I am using the right phrase here) and try to work out any
problems that might come up (maybe by bilateral communications off-list?)
instead of escalating tension and conflict. 

I know that there are a lot of people out there silently following the list
because they have a genuine interest in the field - and I do not think that
we would like to drive them away.


Keep talking,

Dimitris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BarrierVsChallenge.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 43955 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/b8528a44/attachment.jpg>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 27 09:25:04 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:25:04 +0000
Subject: [games_access] games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 40
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4839.1340802555.94575.games_access@igda.org>
References: <mailman.4839.1340802555.94575.games_access@igda.org>
Message-ID: <DUB116-W68516165B5EECAA93EEBB791E70@phx.gbl>


 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/1c6f15e2/attachment.htm>

From eleanor at 7128.com  Wed Jun 27 10:12:55 2012
From: eleanor at 7128.com (Eleanor Robinson)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:12:55 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Accessible Menus
In-Reply-To: <131F0371EFC246BAB4B687F90651E708@OneSwitchPC>
References: <mailman.4125.1340703831.94575.games_access@igda.org>
	<DUB116-W18F659F5218E819596264D91E00@phx.gbl>
	<131F0371EFC246BAB4B687F90651E708@OneSwitchPC>
Message-ID: <4FEB14E7.4090605@7128.com>

In addition, If the game is computer based, make sure the menus are 
accessible to screen readers .  If a menu is in a Dbox structure, it is 
not accessible to screen readers.  They can just see the title of the Dbox.

Eleanor Robinson
7-128 Software

On 6/26/2012 4:45 PM, Barrie Ellis wrote:
> Really good points on watering down, and also issues on overly complex 
> menus. I'd love to see some deeper guidance written up to help people 
> with menus. I get the feeling that a lot of people hate creating menus 
> for games, so some good guidance would help a lot. A few wishes...
> 1. The menu can be navigated using the gameplay controls. Nothing 
> extra needed.
> 2. Option to have a simplified menu system. (Not seen much evidence of 
> this, but SAAB did with a "Night Panel" button, and I remember 
> removing the ability to quit).
> 3. Icons/symbols to represent key options (avoid pure text).
> 4. Spoken menus option.
> 5. Digital controls a possibility.
> 6. Alternative controller access to menus.
> Something a number of players have issues with is in starting games, 
> getting lost in menus and quitting accidentally. Always good to give 
> people protection from this when possible. Especially with one-switch 
> games from experience.
> Barrie
>
> *From:* Ian Hamilton <mailto:i_h at hotmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:05 PM
> *To:* games_access at igda.org <mailto:games_access at igda.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get 
> there?(Dimitris Grammenos)
>
> Elusive business case - it's immensely simple to achieve. Record the 
> cost of feature development, attach analytics to features, compare 
> cost of development to usage and player value. Obviously it only 
> applies to features that are controlled by options and only apples to 
> features that have a significant impact on being able to play, but if 
> all of us push for them in any games work we're associated with then 
> we'll get some useful aggregate data pretty quickly.
>
>
> Every one of those things (tracking costs, analytics, player value) is 
> already standard practice.
>
>
> Homogenizing and watering down - Dimitris, I've dropped you an email 
> separately about having a proper chat as I've been putting your 
> universally accessible game design principled into practice 
> (referenced here: 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2011/10/something_special_makaton_out_about_universal.html ). 
> I'm not permitted to share stats unfortunately but the end result 
> produced some really quite astonishing statistics proving conclusively 
> that the addition of the options produced something that was massively 
> more popular for the entire audience, rather than diluting it.
>
>
> There is a balance to be had between number of options and complexity 
> of interface (presets / advanced helps greatly with this), but in 
> general it just means providing a means to remove barriers that cause 
> difficultly for a great many people, disabled or otherwise, and not 
> removing fun or gameplay.
>
>
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:25:39 +0300
> > From: "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr>
> > Subject: Re: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
> > To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
> > <games_access at igda.org>
> > Message-ID: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > First of all let me express my great pleasure of seeing such a vivid
> > conversation taking place again in our list!
> >
> > Now, I'll try to be brief - honestly.
> >
> > 1) Standardising information and symbols related to accessibility is 
> a good
> > thing - But I think using the wheelchair icon is a little bit 
> misleading, as
> > well as not very "sexy" from a marketing point of you. Why not using a
> > symbol that focuses on the fact that this game has extra 
> capabilities - use
> > a highly positive sign? E.g. have you seen all those labels on food 
> products
> > that have extra vitamins, minerals, etc? They are full of colorful plus
> > signs. I think accessibility capabilities should be advertised 
> similarly.
> > For example, you have "Football game" and "Football game++". The 
> notion is
> > that you get more for what you pay. "Play anyway you like" - I guess 
> you get
> > the idea. Else, game developers might be afraid that buyers will wrongly
> > perceive that their game is targeted to people with specific 
> disabilities.
> >
> > 2) In this respect, I agree with Richard's approach, that if we want to
> > "mainstream" accessibility then we need to see it from a game
> > features/capabilities perspective and not from a disabilities point 
> of view.
> > I believe for example that many people would like to know if a game 
> can be
> > played using an alternative controller, if it supports scalable 
> difficulty,
> > subtitles, etc.
> >
> > 3) I don't believe that legislation is the answer to game accessibility.
> > Obviously, finding that "elusive" business case would be the best. 
> So, one
> > thing we can do, and now it seems that we are many, we can try to 
> look for
> > it, or collaboratively build it up.
> >
> > 4) Ablegames and Gamebase are already doing a great job regarding game
> > reviews. I do not know if it would be possible to access mainstream game
> > magazines and offer to write for them a condensed version of your
> > accessibility reviews using less disability-oriented terminology, so 
> that
> > gradually accessibility gets mainstream in practice, but most 
> importantly
> > becomes integral part of their readers' "game culture".
> >
> > 5) It seems that there is a fundamental misunderstanding among people in
> > this list that game accessibility is about "homogenizing", "watering 
> down",
> > "lowest common denominators", etc. This - to some extent - may be 
> true for
> > the "real world" due to physical constraints, but in the digital 
> world it is
> > the exact opposite. Game accessibility is about freedom, diversity and
> > multiplicity of choices. It is about playing a game the way you like and
> > prefer, not about everyone playing the game exactly the same way 
> (what is
> > the current situation). It is about adapting to the player. So, 
> unless this
> > is completely made clear, then just like in our list, people who are 
> fully
> > supporting game accessibility, maybe skeptical about the extent to 
> which it
> > can and should be pursued. If you have some time you can have a look at
> > these:
> > - Unified Design of Universally Accessible Games (Say What?). URL:
> > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20061207/grammenos_01.shtml
> > - The Theory of Parallel Game Universes: A Paradigm Shift in Multiplayer
> > Gaming and Game Accessibility. URL:
> > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060817/grammenos_01.shtml
> > - Universally Accessible Games & Parallel Game Universes" (206 
> slides) PDF
> > format(15MB)
> > 
> http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/ua-games/docs/DGrammenos_Universally_Accessible_
> > Games_and_Parallel_Game_Universes.pdf
> >
> >
> > I'll be back for more :-)
> >
> > Dimitris
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2437/5096 - Release Date: 06/27/12
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/0e7d8c5f/attachment.htm>

From thomasw at dsv.su.se  Wed Jun 27 17:40:29 2012
From: thomasw at dsv.su.se (Thomas Westin)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:40:29 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
Message-ID: <4CCF475B-1698-4698-B8E2-BF453FDBF7FD@dsv.su.se>

Hi Sandra and Steve,

I didn't say we can't work together, just that it should not be mandatory to collaborate.

If someone does something on their own, they should not be blamed, it's their choice

I think we should encourage efforts, not complaining about them.

I'm on vacation now so this is my last comment about this.

Kind regards,
Thomas

(Sent from my mobile)

On 27 jun 2012, at 00:45, "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> one question: why can?t we work together?
>  
> Best regards,
> Sandra
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/c4b39486/attachment.htm>

From thomasw at dsv.su.se  Wed Jun 27 18:03:01 2012
From: thomasw at dsv.su.se (Thomas Westin)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 00:03:01 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MXNL5_WC5O=KtepwmyJYcnbvb8+u4eHsSAunCnxBhq5vA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001b01cd537d$a7ef55f0$f7ce01d0$@ics.forth.gr>
	<832f1545-35bd-4c99-a296-c6ec4f391b40@blitzgamesstudios.com>
	<2944DF98DABD40CEB1925EC3F6D5281F@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVtm_ANGV+ZXwiPHSbBPyfhWPCH5VhW_KOBhhuBJTbM2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A3639D599C1C44F1AAD5A1FD6BB9E602@OneSwitchPC>
	<CABrM+MVZqiWW+iA_kxYkiyJFzOqd=onXGR3NZuKUnHatxEX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
	<001901cd53ed$5a3bde80$0eb39b80$@de>
	<CABrM+MU4Zj+ufHQSJNH0XjhgC3Po5MYqpqCZTk56tPOVX34ipg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEdM-4J7fMJXM2oT=MavrV53=wdhzxKen2K=h2UNSWQrqmHj6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEdM-4LPxW8rms37bmv=WR7COP0G3o0n2Fet3kmtHjw4CTcSAg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABrM+MXNL5_WC5O=KtepwmyJYcnbvb8+u4eHsSAunCnxBhq5vA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BE484A22-2ECE-4894-8C5C-7DB45CD12C12@dsv.su.se>

Hi Steve

Just had to respond to this too:

I have no idea what you refer to herr Steve? I can assure you that I have not said or meant anything like that with regards to your illness. If you have perceived it anything I have said way it is a misunderstanding. I am really sorry that you feel  this way about me. 

Kind regards,
Thomas

(Sent from my mobile)

On 27 jun 2012, at 04:58, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:

> He said those actual words and I'll never forget them.
> 
> Anyway, I'm also going dark for awhile. 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
> Last thing for a while, I promise. I can't speak for Thomas but if I
> misread your message and you were upset by his comment not mine, I
> would like to say I have never read an unkind word from him before.
> 
> I'd guess Thomas may have been running down some  existential train of
> thought with that one. I would imagine he would be mortified to have
> left you feeling like that.
> 
>  I know passions run high with this topic at times but I just wish we
> could show one another more kindness when there are misunderstandings
> and/or disagreements and/or moments of jealousy/irritation. We should
> all be able to go our own way and also find common threads to pull
> together on. Wouldn't we be stronger like that? I'd still like that.
> 
> Bye for a while.
> 
> Barrie
> 
> On 27/06/2012, Barrie Ellis <oneswitch at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I completely deny your quote, Steve and am very sad that you think I
> > would be that cold and uncaring towards you. If you've been left with
> > that feeling though I'm truly sorry. I'm withdrawing from this as I am
> > starting to feel a line of being baited and bullied.
> >
> > On 27/06/2012, Steve Spohn <steve at ablegamers.com> wrote:
> >> Well Sandra,
> >>
> >> According to Thomas Westin, we shouldn't all have to work together. But,
> >> keep in mind, this is also the guy that answered my talking about the
> >> difficulties of dealing with living with two terminal illnesses with "we
> >> are all dying of life, Steve."
> >>
> >> So, in the meantime, I'm going to keep working with organizations that
> >> want
> >> to work together. And I'm also going to continue "complaining" when I
> >> feel
> >> more can be done to accelerate the cause.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Sandra Uhling <sandra_uhling at web.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,****
> >>>
> >>> ** **
> >>>
> >>> one question: why can?t we work together?****
> >>>
> >>> ** **
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,****
> >>>
> >>> Sandra****
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> games_access mailing list
> >>> games_access at igda.org
> >>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Steve Spohn
> >> Editor-In-Chief
> >> The AbleGamers Foundation
> >> AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
> >> AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
> >>  | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
> >> Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my mobile device
> >
> 
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steve Spohn
> Editor-In-Chief
> The AbleGamers Foundation
> AbleGamers.com | AbleGamers.org | Facebook | Twitter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120628/fa7150c3/attachment.htm>

From thomasw at dsv.su.se  Wed Jun 27 18:41:37 2012
From: thomasw at dsv.su.se (Thomas Westin)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 00:41:37 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Barrier vs. Challenge++
In-Reply-To: <000601cd5466$094fe240$1befa6c0$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <000601cd5466$094fe240$1befa6c0$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <5D15FDE5-A84C-4348-8721-AB3063EED99F@dsv.su.se>

Hi Dimitris, 

I agree!

Kind regards,
Thomas

(Sent from my mobile)

On 27 jun 2012, at 15:09, "Dimitris Grammenos" <gramenos at ics.forth.gr> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> 1. After our discussions about what constitutes a barrier and what a
> challenge, I created an illustration (attached) about which in my opinion is
> the difference between the two.
> 
> 2. AbleGamers, congrats about both the G4TV & IndieGala. I believe that such
> cases contribute positively both to your organization, as well as to the
> overall goals of game accessibility.
> 
> 3. I am so sorry, that only a few hours after the expression of my delight
> about the vivid conversation that we have here, people have already started
> going silent. As (game) accessibility is in essence about including as many
> people and alternative views as possible, I don't think that this aids in
> any way to our common goal. 
> 
> There are always going to be misunderstandings, especially since  we are not
> communicating face to face and also some of us are not native English
> speakers, but I would like to ask everyone to try to take things in good
> faith (I hope I am using the right phrase here) and try to work out any
> problems that might come up (maybe by bilateral communications off-list?)
> instead of escalating tension and conflict. 
> 
> I know that there are a lot of people out there silently following the list
> because they have a genuine interest in the field - and I do not think that
> we would like to drive them away.
> 
> 
> Keep talking,
> 
> Dimitris
> <BarrierVsChallenge.jpg>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org


From steve at ablegamers.com  Wed Jun 27 18:53:26 2012
From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:53:26 -0400
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
	accessibility?
Message-ID: <CABrM+MWtes+HPFHMjcVkiCbzjTSux33oGUJBxB+qoZRhnAxD=g@mail.gmail.com>

This was posted on AbleGamers this afternoon for those of you who might be
interested.
http://www.ablegamers.com/General-Game-News/have-we-found-the-holy-grail-of-accessibility.html
- it is a technology that allows you to use your computer to control either
Xbox or PlayStation. For those with physical disabilities, this is much
closer to what both Barrie and I have dreamt about for the physically
disabled community for years.

It's not perfect, but it's getting closer.

-- 
Steve Spohn
Editor-In-Chief
The AbleGamers Foundation
AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/> |
AbleGamers.org<http://www.ablegamers.org/>
 | Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers> |
Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120627/803cb6cd/attachment.htm>

From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Thu Jun 28 06:26:36 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:26:36 +0300
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail
	of	accessibility?
In-Reply-To: <CABrM+MWtes+HPFHMjcVkiCbzjTSux33oGUJBxB+qoZRhnAxD=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABrM+MWtes+HPFHMjcVkiCbzjTSux33oGUJBxB+qoZRhnAxD=g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006a01cd5518$7f61bbe0$7e2533a0$@ics.forth.gr>

Hello Steve,

 

In my opinion, this is a nice and (potentially) helpful device for some
gamers with physical disabilities (setting aside the extra cost and overhead
of needing a PC in addition to the game console).

 

But my short answer to the article's last line "What do you think? Is XIM
the Holy Grail of accessibility?" is: "No way!"

It is just a handy support tool aiding to *hack* some accessibility features
to consoles, which may render a number of inaccessible console games
(partially) accessible to some players. For example, how can it solve all
those problems that have to do with adjustable game difficulty/speed,
requirements for multiple concurrent input? And what about body-controlled
games?

 

The Holy Grail of game accessibility lies within games themselves. Unless
they are designed with accessibility in mind, there can be no external
"add-on", no matter what kind of technology used, that can magically
transform them to accessible ones. 

 

Please do not misunderstand me. I don't want by any means to lessen your
enthusiasm about this technological development, but on the other hand,
overstating the impact of such tools on accessibility may have a "boomerang
effect" on what we try to achieve, since game developers who read about it
may understand that the problem is solved (since we found the Holy Grail)
and thus there is no need for them to do anything more about it.

 

Best,

 

Dimitris

 

 

 

 

 

From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Spohn
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:53 AM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
accessibility?

 

This was posted on AbleGamers this afternoon for those of you who might be
interested.
http://www.ablegamers.com/General-Game-News/have-we-found-the-holy-grail-of-
accessibility.html  - it is a technology that allows you to use your
computer to control either Xbox or PlayStation. For those with physical
disabilities, this is much closer to what both Barrie and I have dreamt
about for the physically disabled community for years.

 

It's not perfect, but it's getting closer.


 

-- 
Steve Spohn

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120628/4a1fc44b/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Thu Jun 28 08:04:31 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:04:31 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy
	Grail	of	accessibility?
In-Reply-To: <006a01cd5518$7f61bbe0$7e2533a0$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <CABrM+MWtes+HPFHMjcVkiCbzjTSux33oGUJBxB+qoZRhnAxD=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<006a01cd5518$7f61bbe0$7e2533a0$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <001801cd5526$2dfdfa30$89f9ee90$@de>

Hi,

 

from gamer point of view it is the holy grail,

because it a solution that works now.

 

It will take some time until we have accessibility accepted.

So it depends on the point of views.

 

Best regards,

Sandra

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Dimitris Grammenos
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012 12:27
An: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Betreff: Re: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
accessibility?

 

Hello Steve,

 

In my opinion, this is a nice and (potentially) helpful device for some
gamers with physical disabilities (setting aside the extra cost and overhead
of needing a PC in addition to the game console).

 

But my short answer to the article's last line "What do you think? Is XIM
the Holy Grail of accessibility?" is: "No way!"

It is just a handy support tool aiding to *hack* some accessibility features
to consoles, which may render a number of inaccessible console games
(partially) accessible to some players. For example, how can it solve all
those problems that have to do with adjustable game difficulty/speed,
requirements for multiple concurrent input? And what about body-controlled
games?

 

The Holy Grail of game accessibility lies within games themselves. Unless
they are designed with accessibility in mind, there can be no external
"add-on", no matter what kind of technology used, that can magically
transform them to accessible ones. 

 

Please do not misunderstand me. I don't want by any means to lessen your
enthusiasm about this technological development, but on the other hand,
overstating the impact of such tools on accessibility may have a "boomerang
effect" on what we try to achieve, since game developers who read about it
may understand that the problem is solved (since we found the Holy Grail)
and thus there is no need for them to do anything more about it.

 

Best,

 

Dimitris

 

 

 

 

 

From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Spohn
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:53 AM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
accessibility?

 

This was posted on AbleGamers this afternoon for those of you who might be
interested.
http://www.ablegamers.com/General-Game-News/have-we-found-the-holy-grail-of-
accessibility.html  - it is a technology that allows you to use your
computer to control either Xbox or PlayStation. For those with physical
disabilities, this is much closer to what both Barrie and I have dreamt
about for the physically disabled community for years.

 

It's not perfect, but it's getting closer.


 

-- 
Steve Spohn

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>  

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120628/dd54a992/attachment.htm>

From i_h at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 28 10:45:28 2012
From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton)
Date: 28 Jun 2012 07:45:28 -0700
Subject: [games_access]
	=?utf-8?q?games=5Faccess_Digest=2C_Vol_101=2C_Issu?=
	=?utf-8?q?e_44?=
Message-ID: <bay0-p6-eas3307D4FA09F5796D71D25E91E60@phx.gbl>


Haha yes point accepted, its the holy grail for some people - I'll happily agree with that!

----- Reply message -----
From: games_access-request at igda.org
To: <games_access at igda.org>
Subject: games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 44
Date: Thu, Jun 28, 2012 3:00 PM




Send games_access mailing list submissions to
        games_access at igda.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        games_access-request at igda.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        games_access-owner at igda.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of games_access digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Article: have we found the Holy       Grail   of      accessibility?
      (Sandra Uhling)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:04:31 +0200
From: "Sandra Uhling" <sandra_uhling at web.de>
Subject: Re: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy     Grail   of
        accessibility?
To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'"
        <games_access at igda.org>
Message-ID: <001801cd5526$2dfdfa30$89f9ee90$@de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi,



from gamer point of view it is the holy grail,

because it a solution that works now.



It will take some time until we have accessibility accepted.

So it depends on the point of views.



Best regards,

Sandra



Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Dimitris Grammenos
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012 12:27
An: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Betreff: Re: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
accessibility?



Hello Steve,



In my opinion, this is a nice and (potentially) helpful device for some
gamers with physical disabilities (setting aside the extra cost and overhead
of needing a PC in addition to the game console).



But my short answer to the article's last line "What do you think? Is XIM
the Holy Grail of accessibility?" is: "No way!"

It is just a handy support tool aiding to *hack* some accessibility features
to consoles, which may render a number of inaccessible console games
(partially) accessible to some players. For example, how can it solve all
those problems that have to do with adjustable game difficulty/speed,
requirements for multiple concurrent input? And what about body-controlled
games?



The Holy Grail of game accessibility lies within games themselves. Unless
they are designed with accessibility in mind, there can be no external
"add-on", no matter what kind of technology used, that can magically
transform them to accessible ones.



Please do not misunderstand me. I don't want by any means to lessen your
enthusiasm about this technological development, but on the other hand,
overstating the impact of such tools on accessibility may have a "boomerang
effect" on what we try to achieve, since game developers who read about it
may understand that the problem is solved (since we found the Holy Grail)
and thus there is no need for them to do anything more about it.



Best,



Dimitris











From: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Spohn
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:53 AM
To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Subject: [games_access] Article: have we found the Holy Grail of
accessibility?



This was posted on AbleGamers this afternoon for those of you who might be
interested.
http://www.ablegamers.com/General-Game-News/have-we-found-the-holy-grail-of-
accessibility.html  - it is a technology that allows you to use your
computer to control either Xbox or PlayStation. For those with physical
disabilities, this is much closer to what both Barrie and I have dreamt
about for the physically disabled community for years.



It's not perfect, but it's getting closer.




--
Steve Spohn

Editor-In-Chief

The AbleGamers Foundation

AbleGamers.com <http://www.ablegamers.com/>  | AbleGamers.org
<http://www.ablegamers.org/>  | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/ablegamers>  | Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/ablegamers>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120628/dd54a992/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org

End of games_access Digest, Vol 101, Issue 44
*********************************************

From gramenos at ics.forth.gr  Fri Jun 29 07:48:19 2012
From: gramenos at ics.forth.gr (Dimitris Grammenos)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:48:19 +0300
Subject: [games_access] Car cup holders and Game Accessibility (!)
Message-ID: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>

Not so many years ago, most cars - especially in Europe - did not have cup
holders. This was mainly due to the fact that cars were built by engineers,
and engineers "knew" very well what people were looking for when buying a
car: speed, low consumption, passenger safety, low noise levels, large
baggage spaces, alloy wheels, etc. Who would care about a cup holder in a
car?

 

To their great surprise, at some point in time, car companies kept getting
reports by car retailers with a recurring pattern: in practice, car buying
decisions were heavily influenced by cup holders! And not just their
existence. People would be concerned about their number, location, size and
ergonomics. As a result, at present, it is very hard to find a car without
one, while most of cars have much more than you'd expect (even hidden,
folding ones).

 

To some extent, I think that the case of game accessibility shares some
common ground with that of cup holders. Game developers / companies believe
that they know all about what gamers want and what affects their buying
decisions and - currently for most of them game accessibility is not in
their list. On the other hand, there are also several (potential) gamers out
there that are not aware either that there are games which are (more)
accessible to them, or even that accessibility is an option. 

 

Thus, what I believe that we need to (metaphorically) do is three-fold:

(a)    Inform people that it is technically and financially possible to have
cup holders in cars;

(b)   Help towards making cars that do have cup holders to stand out from
the rest, so that people can easily spot them;

(c)    Advise potential buyers to ask about cup holders when looking for a
car.

 

Cheers!

 

Dimitris

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120629/8e90bdab/attachment.htm>

From richard at audiogames.net  Fri Jun 29 07:59:32 2012
From: richard at audiogames.net (Richard (AudioGames.net))
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:59:32 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Car cup holders and Game Accessibility (!)
In-Reply-To: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <4FED98A4.3020103@audiogames.net>

Great post! Thanks D!


On 29-6-2012 13:48, Dimitris Grammenos wrote:
>
> Not so many years ago, most cars -- especially in Europe -- did not 
> have cup holders. This was mainly due to the fact that cars were built 
> by engineers, and engineers "knew" very well what people were looking 
> for when buying a car: speed, low consumption, passenger safety, low 
> noise levels, large baggage spaces, alloy wheels, etc. Who would care 
> about a cup holder in a car?
>
> To their great surprise, at some point in time, car companies kept 
> getting reports by car retailers with a recurring pattern: in 
> practice, car buying decisions were heavily influenced by cup holders! 
> And not just their existence. People would be concerned about their 
> number, location, size and ergonomics. As a result, at present, it is 
> very hard to find a car without one, while most of cars have much more 
> than you'd expect (even hidden, folding ones).
>
> To some extent, I think that the case of game accessibility shares 
> some common ground with that of cup holders. Game developers / 
> companies believe that they know all about what gamers want and what 
> affects their buying decisions and -- currently for most of them game 
> accessibility is not in their list. On the other hand, there are also 
> several (potential) gamers out there that are not aware either that 
> there are games which are (more) accessible to them, or even that 
> accessibility is an option.
>
> Thus, what I believe that we need to (metaphorically) do is three-fold:
>
> (a)Inform people that it is technically and financially possible to 
> have cup holders in cars;
>
> (b)Help towards making cars that do have cup holders to stand out from 
> the rest, so that people can easily spot them;
>
> (c)Advise potential buyers to ask about cup holders when looking for a 
> car.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Dimitris
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> games_access mailing list
> games_access at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120629/c63de8bd/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Fri Jun 29 08:08:23 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:08:23 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Car cup holders and Game Accessibility (!)
In-Reply-To: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>
References: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>
Message-ID: <005701cd55ef$e2beeb40$a83cc1c0$@de>

Hi Dimitris,

 

nice, but I would love to see some kind of quality in it.

We need Standards. Otherwise it will be to complex and difficult.

It could also start with only few standards.

 

And by the way: It is not "reasonable" to request accessibility without
providing standards ...

 

Best regards,

Sandra

 

Von: games_access-bounces at igda.org [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im
Auftrag von Dimitris Grammenos
Gesendet: Freitag, 29. Juni 2012 13:48
An: 'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'
Betreff: [games_access] Car cup holders and Game Accessibility (!)

 

Not so many years ago, most cars - especially in Europe - did not have cup
holders. This was mainly due to the fact that cars were built by engineers,
and engineers "knew" very well what people were looking for when buying a
car: speed, low consumption, passenger safety, low noise levels, large
baggage spaces, alloy wheels, etc. Who would care about a cup holder in a
car?

 

To their great surprise, at some point in time, car companies kept getting
reports by car retailers with a recurring pattern: in practice, car buying
decisions were heavily influenced by cup holders! And not just their
existence. People would be concerned about their number, location, size and
ergonomics. As a result, at present, it is very hard to find a car without
one, while most of cars have much more than you'd expect (even hidden,
folding ones).

 

To some extent, I think that the case of game accessibility shares some
common ground with that of cup holders. Game developers / companies believe
that they know all about what gamers want and what affects their buying
decisions and - currently for most of them game accessibility is not in
their list. On the other hand, there are also several (potential) gamers out
there that are not aware either that there are games which are (more)
accessible to them, or even that accessibility is an option. 

 

Thus, what I believe that we need to (metaphorically) do is three-fold:

(a)    Inform people that it is technically and financially possible to have
cup holders in cars;

(b)    Help towards making cars that do have cup holders to stand out from
the rest, so that people can easily spot them;

(c)    Advise potential buyers to ask about cup holders when looking for a
car.

 

Cheers!

 

Dimitris

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120629/9b9e461c/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Fri Jun 29 10:47:36 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 16:47:36 +0200
Subject: [games_access] Car cup holders and Game Accessibility (!)
In-Reply-To: <005701cd55ef$e2beeb40$a83cc1c0$@de>
References: <001601cd55ed$15bfe4c0$413fae40$@ics.forth.gr>
	<005701cd55ef$e2beeb40$a83cc1c0$@de>
Message-ID: <000001cd5606$21f354c0$65d9fe40$@de>

Hi,

 

what about this?

Bevore we start with a, we should do these things first:

1)      make sure that there will be no misunderstanding and prejudices!

2)      Check all point of views of stakeholers

3)      prepare information, easy to understand, for the "cup holders"

a.      Select one Game Accessibility Feature

b.      explain it easy to understand

c.      consult for realisation

When we have this information we can move over to a)

 

I have a document with information about 1-2.

Maybe we can go through it step by step?

I personally think that is could be very useful.

 

Dimitris Idea:

Thus, what I believe that we need to (metaphorically) do is three-fold:

(a)    Inform people that it is technically and financially possible to have
cup holders in cars;

(b)    Help towards making cars that do have cup holders to stand out from
the rest, so that people can easily spot them;

(c)    Advise potential buyers to ask about cup holders when looking for a
car.

 

 

Best regards,

Sandra

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20120629/e6699cdd/attachment.htm>

From sandra_uhling at web.de  Sat Jun 30 15:51:57 2012
From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling)
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 21:51:57 +0200
Subject: [games_access] One Note about CRPD
Message-ID: <000601cd56f9$cf5b8760$6e129620$@de>

Hi,

there were lots of emails and text.
I do not know if we had this, but
I think it is important.

The CRPD has no wholes, they inlcude verything, also games.

BUT:
It is a law between the government and the UN.
It is not a law for the people, industry, companies.

The government has to make sure no one is discriminated.
The government has to make good meassures.
But every government is free to decide what they use.
But what they do has to be effective.

So they can decide what they want. They also can ignore it.
(Until people suid them :-) )
In Germany they ignore games. Also serious games.

Best regards,
Sandra