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

Tue Jun 26 15:59:47 EDT 2012

@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
> 