[games_access] Game Accessibility - How to we get there?

[Dimitris Grammenos]

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