From sandra_uhling at web.de Mon Dec 1 18:41:28 2014 From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 00:41:28 +0100 Subject: [games_access] category hearing impairment Message-ID: <000001d00dc0$548b1f70$fda15e50$@de> Hello I am looking for information about hearing impairment. I have already: * Article: the sound alternative * DGC (I added communication, this was missing) * Guidelines of the gamasutra article Is there something else important? I am wondering what is first: subtitle or voices? Can subtitles support the speaker to record for the voices? Best regards, Sandra -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From i_h at hotmail.com Tue Dec 2 02:43:13 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: 1 Dec 2014 23:43:13 -0800 Subject: [games_access] =?utf-8?q?category_hearing_impairment?= Message-ID: The BBC have some nice well researched guidelines that are along the lines of Gareth's gamasutra article, but with a fair bit more detail on how exactly to go about meeting the words per minute targets: http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/futuremedia/accessibility/subtitling_guides/online_sub_editorial_guidelines_vs1_1.pdf It's a shame that subtitles and captions in games are universally so far behind TV, when they could be so far ahead. The BBC also did a nice bit of work recently on how to handle positioning in dynamic UIs (something that Tomb Raider could have benefited from, the subtitles appearing over the top of the QTE prompts wasn't great): http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/internet/posts/Standard-Media-Player-accessibility There are other things to bear in mind aside from the straightforward visualisation of sounds. Firstly taking other areas of accessibility into account, to avoid situations like this.. http://i.imgur.com/vHMQe.jpg There's a fair bit of Twitter rage about Dragon Age: Inquisition at the moment fir the same reason, but also because they use full caps for their subtitles, which will cause problems for many people who have difficulty reading. Another really important one is communication in multiplayer. It's common for people with hearing loss (or impaired speech) to be kicked out of games for not communicating properly. A few examples of how to address are Halo Reach's chattiness matchmaking preference, Hearthstone's pre-defined text chat, Portal 2's emote based communication, and Dawn of War's non-verbal use of things like map pings. And last two simple things that are helpful for different degrees of hearing loss. Different people lose different frequencies, so being able to adjust volume levels for different types of sounds is important. And for some it's unilateral, I.e. only in one ear, for which a mono toggle helps. Diablo 3 is a nice example of both of those things: http://s14.postimg.org/av2nah1zl/diablo_iii_mono.jpg Subtitles need to start as an accurate representation of the final state of the audio and then be edited down. So they can't be used as a script for the audio - the audio might change in production, and it might be appropriate to say more in audio than is possible to fit in using subtitles. Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "Sandra Uhling" To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" Subject: [games_access] category hearing impairment Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2014 23:46 Hello I am looking for information about hearing impairment. I have already: * Article: the sound alternative * DGC (I added communication, this was missing) * Guidelines of the gamasutra article Is there something else important? I am wondering what is first: subtitle or voices? Can subtitles support the speaker to record for the voices? Best regards, Sandra -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org From barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk Tue Dec 2 03:01:27 2014 From: barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk (Barrie Ellis) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:01:27 +0000 Subject: [games_access] category hearing impairment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Agreed. Tiny subtitles on HD TVs are a nightmare, and often render them useless. Embarrassing for the game industry that TV teletext subtitles c. 1974 were miles better than most subtitles found in modern day games. Colour coded, expandable and made clear with a black or coloured back-ground. On 2 December 2014 at 07:43, Ian Hamilton wrote: > The BBC have some nice well researched guidelines that are along the > lines of Gareth's gamasutra article, but with a fair bit more detail on how > exactly to go about meeting the words per minute targets: > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/futuremedia/accessibility/subtitling_guides/online_sub_editorial_guidelines_vs1_1.pdf > > It's a shame that subtitles and captions in games are universally so far > behind TV, when they could be so far ahead. > > The BBC also did a nice bit of work recently on how to handle > positioning in dynamic UIs (something that Tomb Raider could have benefited > from, the subtitles appearing over the top of the QTE prompts wasn't great): > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/internet/posts/Standard-Media-Player-accessibility > > There are other things to bear in mind aside from the straightforward > visualisation of sounds. > > Firstly taking other areas of accessibility into account, to avoid > situations like this.. > > http://i.imgur.com/vHMQe.jpg > > There's a fair bit of Twitter rage about Dragon Age: Inquisition at the > moment fir the same reason, but also because they use full caps for their > subtitles, which will cause problems for many people who have difficulty > reading. > > Another really important one is communication in multiplayer. It's > common for people with hearing loss (or impaired speech) to be kicked out > of games for not communicating properly. A few examples of how to address > are Halo Reach's chattiness matchmaking preference, Hearthstone's > pre-defined text chat, Portal 2's emote based communication, and Dawn of > War's non-verbal use of things like map pings. > > And last two simple things that are helpful for different degrees of > hearing loss. Different people lose different frequencies, so being able to > adjust volume levels for different types of sounds is important. And for > some it's unilateral, I.e. only in one ear, for which a mono toggle helps. > > Diablo 3 is a nice example of both of those things: > > http://s14.postimg.org/av2nah1zl/diablo_iii_mono.jpg > > Subtitles need to start as an accurate representation of the final state > of the audio and then be edited down. So they can't be used as a script for > the audio - the audio might change in production, and it might be > appropriate to say more in audio than is possible to fit in using subtitles. > > Ian > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Sandra Uhling" > To: "'IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List'" > Subject: [games_access] category hearing impairment > Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2014 23:46 > > Hello I am looking for information about hearing impairment. > > > > I have already: > > * Article: the sound alternative > > * DGC (I added communication, this was missing) > > * Guidelines of the gamasutra article > > > > Is there something else important? > > > > > > I am wondering what is first: subtitle or voices? > > Can subtitles support the speaker to record for the voices? > > > > Best regards, > > Sandra > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From i_h at hotmail.com Wed Dec 3 13:03:14 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 18:03:14 +0000 Subject: [games_access] Ban Ki-moon on accessibility Message-ID: Nice sentiments on accessibility from the UN secretary-general, in conjunction with today being international day of persons with disabilities, and the theme for this year being the promise of technology: http://www.un.org/en/events/disabilitiesday/2014/sgmessage.shtml Ian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk Wed Dec 3 18:20:04 2014 From: barrie.ellis at oneswitch.org.uk (Barrie Ellis) Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 23:20:04 +0000 Subject: [games_access] TV box helps colour-blind viewers Message-ID: TV box helps colour-blind viewers http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30313735 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thomas at westin.nu Thu Dec 4 03:50:11 2014 From: thomas at westin.nu (Thomas Westin) Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 09:50:11 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Ban Ki-moon on accessibility In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5A20A6E7-8A43-4B62-8BB3-9282BAAC4DD9@westin.nu> agreed, just wish he had mentioned games :) Kind regards, Thomas (Sent from my mobile) > On 3 dec 2014, at 19:03, Ian Hamilton wrote: > > Nice sentiments on accessibility from the UN secretary-general, in conjunction with today being international day of persons with disabilities, and the theme for this year being the promise of technology: > > http://www.un.org/en/events/disabilitiesday/2014/sgmessage.shtml > > Ian > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sandra_uhling at web.de Mon Dec 8 10:19:39 2014 From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra Uhling) Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 16:19:39 +0100 Subject: [games_access] exhibition germany - alternative controllers (not accessiblity) Message-ID: <000001d012fa$63030290$290907b0$@de> FYI https://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.g amesciencecenter.de%2FStart%2Fexpo-alternative-controllers%2F -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From garibaldired at btinternet.com Sun Dec 14 08:55:52 2014 From: garibaldired at btinternet.com (David Julian) Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:55:52 -0000 Subject: [games_access] Online Soccer Manager Message-ID: <000001d017a5$ace49a90$06adcfb0$@btinternet.com> Hello all My name is David and I am currently active on a football management game (OSM) owned by Gamebasics based in the Netherlands. Recently, the company removed the mobile version without implementing changes to the other platforms enabling screen reader users like myself to continue independently. I was offered a refund on my remaining tickets and advised that if accepted, the issue of accessibility could no longer be discussed as I have previously proposed changes to the full site. The company also advised that changes to their app would be given consideration to making it compatible with Apple's Voice Over. However, no time frame was indicated. I would like to add that a former moderator was extremely helpful when he wrote a formations guide to help people with a visual impairment to understand how the formations are organised and has since been included in the osm Guide in the Help forum albeit the user is required to access Google docs. However, this now seems irrelevant as it's no longer possible to select team line up, set formations and tactics and other tasks without sighted assistance. OSM is a text based football management game with match simulations occurring daily at different times on various servers. Any help would be much appreciated although I am considering retiring from the game shortly as I don't want to rely on my teenage sons to perform daily tasks albeit taking approx. one minute. Regards. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From i_h at hotmail.com Sun Dec 14 18:11:05 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: 14 Dec 2014 15:11:05 -0800 Subject: [games_access] =?utf-8?q?Online_Soccer_Manager?= Message-ID: If you can give them a succinct list of tweaks that would help, as would having some other voices alongside yours in the request. Applevis would be a very good source of people for that. In short, you'll have better chances if you can demonstrate that the changes are simple to make and aren't just for your benefit alone. They won't have a large team, and will have to choose carefully which features they should or shouldn't work on, as everything is always at the cost of something else. On the plus side you've got a better chance than with most games, as web / Android / iOS are all already pretty much there already, it's just a case of a few last tweaks. If they aren't up for it then there are a couple of alternative screenreader accessible management games available, but obviously it would be better if you didn't have to lose your progress and if they didn't have to lose loyal customers. Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "David Julian" To: Subject: [games_access] Online Soccer Manager Date: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 14:05 Hello all My name is David and I am currently active on a football management game (OSM) owned by Gamebasics based in the Netherlands. Recently, the company removed the mobile version without implementing changes to the other platforms enabling screen reader users like myself to continue independently. I was offered a refund on my remaining tickets and advised that if accepted, the issue of accessibility could no longer be discussed as I have previously proposed changes to the full site. The company also advised that changes to their app would be given consideration to making it compatible with Apple's Voice Over. However, no time frame was indicated. I would like to add that a former moderator was extremely helpful when he wrote a formations guide to help people with a visual impairment to understand how the formations are organised and has since been included in the osm Guide in the Help forum albeit the user is required to access Google docs. However, this now seems irrelevant as it's no longer possible to select team line up, set formations and tactics and other tasks without sighted assistance. OSM is a text based football management game with match simulations occurring daily at different times on various servers. Any help would be much appreciated although I am considering retiring from the game shortly as I don't want to rely on my teenage sons to perform daily tasks albeit taking approx. one minute. Regards. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org From garibaldired at btinternet.com Mon Dec 15 14:54:51 2014 From: garibaldired at btinternet.com (David Julian) Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:54:51 -0000 Subject: [games_access] Online Soccer Manager In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000001d018a0$fd7cc170$f8764450$@btinternet.com> Thanks for the advice. Much appreciated. Regards. David From: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hamilton Sent: 14 December 2014 23:11 To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List Subject: Re: [games_access] Online Soccer Manager If you can give them a succinct list of tweaks that would help, as would having some other voices alongside yours in the request. Applevis would be a very good source of people for that. In short, you'll have better chances if you can demonstrate that the changes are simple to make and aren't just for your benefit alone. They won't have a large team, and will have to choose carefully which features they should or shouldn't work on, as everything is always at the cost of something else. On the plus side you've got a better chance than with most games, as web / Android / iOS are all already pretty much there already, it's just a case of a few last tweaks. If they aren't up for it then there are a couple of alternative screenreader accessible management games available, but obviously it would be better if you didn't have to lose your progress and if they didn't have to lose loyal customers. Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "David Julian" To: Subject: [games_access] Online Soccer Manager Date: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 14:05 Hello all My name is David and I am currently active on a football management game (OSM) owned by Gamebasics based in the Netherlands. Recently, the company removed the mobile version without implementing changes to the other platforms enabling screen reader users like myself to continue independently. I was offered a refund on my remaining tickets and advised that if accepted, the issue of accessibility could no longer be discussed as I have previously proposed changes to the full site. The company also advised that changes to their app would be given consideration to making it compatible with Apple?s Voice Over. However, no time frame was indicated. I would like to add that a former moderator was extremely helpful when he wrote a formations guide to help people with a visual impairment to understand how the formations are organised and has since been included in the osm Guide in the Help forum albeit the user is required to access Google docs. However, this now seems irrelevant as it?s no longer possible to select team line up, set formations and tactics and other tasks without sighted assistance. OSM is a text based football management game with match simulations occurring daily at different times on various servers. Any help would be much appreciated although I am considering retiring from the game shortly as I don?t want to rely on my teenage sons to perform daily tasks albeit taking approx. one minute. Regards. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sandra_uhling at web.de Fri Dec 19 16:51:35 2014 From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra_Uhling) Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Message-ID: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> Hello, one important question: What is our meta aim? What do we want to reach? Kind regards, Sandra -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From i_h at hotmail.com Fri Dec 19 17:27:42 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:27:42 +0000 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> References: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> Message-ID: For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually required as part of a mechanic. *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers won't ever stop having new ideas Ian From: sandra_uhling at web.de To: games_access at igda.org Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Hello, one important question:What is our meta aim?What do we want to reach? Kind regards,Sandra _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sandra_uhling at web.de Sat Dec 20 14:29:45 2014 From: sandra_uhling at web.de (Sandra_Uhling) Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 20:29:45 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> Message-ID: <000901d01c8b$507f8270$f17e8750$@de> other thoughs? Von: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List Betreff: Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually required as part of a mechanic. *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers won't ever stop having new ideas Ian _____ From: sandra_uhling at web.de To: games_access at igda.org Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Hello, one important question: What is our meta aim? What do we want to reach? Kind regards, Sandra _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thomas at westin.nu Sat Dec 20 17:14:20 2014 From: thomas at westin.nu (Thomas Westin) Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 23:14:20 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: <000901d01c8b$507f8270$f17e8750$@de> References: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> <000901d01c8b$507f8270$f17e8750$@de> Message-ID: Hi Sandra, I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified over the years), but your question is very legitimate: - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various members of the SIG - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward to http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > Our Mission Statement: > > ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In order to do this we will promote education of game developers in accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? > What do we do: > > Work together as a community to make great games accessible. > Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the community. > Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres. > Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility perspective. > Learn from accessibility design in other areas. > Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible today and in the future. > Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can do to make a difference. > Develop the above goals further together. Best regards, Thomas 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > other thoughs? > > > Von: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton > Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 > An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List > Betreff: Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually required as part of a mechanic. > > *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers won't ever stop having new ideas > > Ian > > From: sandra_uhling at web.de > To: games_access at igda.org > Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > Hello, > > one important question: > What is our meta aim? > What do we want to reach? > > Kind regards, > Sandra > > > > _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.orghttps://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve at ablegamers.com Sat Dec 20 19:57:33 2014 From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn) Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 19:57:33 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: <000001d01bd5$f6ee70f0$e4cb52d0$@de> <000901d01c8b$507f8270$f17e8750$@de> Message-ID: I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with disabilities. Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. >From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling us to focus on gamers. Have a great holiday season everyone, Steve On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but > adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) > have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified > over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well > achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 > (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, > recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various > members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward > to > > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, > and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is > needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > Our Mission Statement: > > - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of > life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development > community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making > all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In > order to do this we will promote education of game developers in > accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, > corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? > > What do we do: > > - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. > - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the > community.* > - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres.* > - Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility > perspective. > - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* > - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible > today and in the future.* > - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can > do to make a difference. > - Develop the above goals further together. > > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > > other thoughs? > > > *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org > ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 > *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List > *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only > barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually > required as part of a mechanic. > > *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers > won't ever stop having new ideas > > Ian > > ------------------------------ > > From: sandra_uhling at web.de > To: games_access at igda.org > Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Hello, > > one important question: > What is our meta aim? > What do we want to reach? > > Kind regards, > Sandra > > > > _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG > website page is http://igda-gasig.org > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -- Steve Spohn *Chief Operations Officer* AbleGamers Charity AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to *everyone*: Includification.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From i_h at hotmail.com Sat Dec 20 21:25:16 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: 20 Dec 2014 18:25:16 -0800 Subject: [games_access] =?utf-8?q?Important_Question=3A_What_is_our_meta_a?= =?utf-8?b?aW0/?= Message-ID: Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the diversity SIG. Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less people focussing on it. Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "Steve Spohn" To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with disabilities. Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. >From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling us to focus on gamers. Have a great holiday season everyone, Steve On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but > adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) > have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified > over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well > achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 > (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, > recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various > members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward > to > > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, > and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is > needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > Our Mission Statement: > > - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of > life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development > community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making > all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In > order to do this we will promote education of game developers in > accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, > corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? > > What do we do: > > - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. > - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the > community.* > - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres.* > - Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility > perspective. > - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* > - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible > today and in the future.* > - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can > do to make a difference. > - Develop the above goals further together. > > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > > other thoughs? > > > *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org > ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 > *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List > *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only > barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually > required as part of a mechanic. > > *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers > won't ever stop having new ideas > > Ian > > ------------------------------ > > From: sandra_uhling at web.de > To: games_access at igda.org > Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Hello, > > one important question: > What is our meta aim? > What do we want to reach? > > Kind regards, > Sandra > > > > _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG > website page is http://igda-gasig.org > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -- Steve Spohn *Chief Operations Officer* AbleGamers Charity AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to *everyone*: Includification.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org From i_h at hotmail.com Sun Dec 21 05:28:37 2014 From: i_h at hotmail.com (Ian Hamilton) Date: 21 Dec 2014 02:28:37 -0800 Subject: [games_access] =?utf-8?q?Important_Question=3A_What_is_our_meta_a?= =?utf-8?b?aW0/?= Message-ID: Sorry, I meant Bor Verkroost, although Brian Bors also does lots of excellent work! Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "Ian Hamilton" To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 02:31 Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the diversity SIG. Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less people focussing on it. Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. Ian ----- Reply message ----- From: "Steve Spohn" To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with disabilities. Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. >From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling us to focus on gamers. Have a great holiday season everyone, Steve On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but > adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) > have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified > over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well > achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 > (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, > recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various > members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward > to > > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, > and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is > needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > Our Mission Statement: > > - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of > life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development > community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making > all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In > order to do this we will promote education of game developers in > accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, > corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? > > What do we do: > > - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. > - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the > community.* > - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres.* > - Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility > perspective. > - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* > - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible > today and in the future.* > - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can > do to make a difference. > - Develop the above goals further together. > > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > > other thoughs? > > > *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org > ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 > *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List > *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only > barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually > required as part of a mechanic. > > *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers > won't ever stop having new ideas > > Ian > > ------------------------------ > > From: sandra_uhling at web.de > To: games_access at igda.org > Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Hello, > > one important question: > What is our meta aim? > What do we want to reach? > > Kind regards, > Sandra > > > > _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG > website page is http://igda-gasig.org > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -- Steve Spohn *Chief Operations Officer* AbleGamers Charity AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to *everyone*: Includification.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.org https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org From thomas at westin.nu Sun Dec 21 09:17:53 2014 From: thomas at westin.nu (Thomas Westin) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 15:17:53 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <86726C2D-D050-439C-8028-E18556B7D9CC@westin.nu> I agree with Ian. Have a very Merry ! Best regards, Thomas 21Dec 2014 kl. 03:25 skrev Ian Hamilton : > Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the diversity SIG. > > Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. > > It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less people focussing on it. > > Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. > > If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. > > So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. > > Ian > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Steve Spohn" > To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 > > I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe should the SIG concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. > > It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 towards supporting game developers with disabilities. The employment statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with disabilities. > > Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this SIG, which is owned by the International Game Developers Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. > > From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. > > I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling us to focus on gamers. > > Have a great holiday season everyone, > > Steve > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward to > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > >> Our Mission Statement: >> >> ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In order to do this we will promote education of game developers in accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? >> What do we do: >> >> Work together as a community to make great games accessible. >> Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the community. >> Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres. >> Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility perspective. >> Learn from accessibility design in other areas. >> Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible today and in the future. >> Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can do to make a difference. >> Develop the above goals further together. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > >> other thoughs? >> >> >> Von: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton >> Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 >> An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List >> Betreff: Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> >> For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually required as part of a mechanic. >> >> *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers won't ever stop having new ideas >> >> Ian >> >> From: sandra_uhling at web.de >> To: games_access at igda.org >> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 >> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> >> Hello, >> >> one important question: >> What is our meta aim? >> What do we want to reach? >> >> Kind regards, >> Sandra >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.orghttps://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > Chief Operations Officer > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to everyone: Includification.com > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eleanor at 7128.com Sun Dec 21 11:52:13 2014 From: eleanor at 7128.com (Eleanor) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 11:52:13 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? Message-ID: <5496FABD.10802@7128.com> Here are my thoughts on this important topic. As developers ourselves with an interest in accessibility, it is our responsibility to educate other developers as to how to improve accessibility in their games and why that is important to them. The HOW part we are doing on an ongoing basis with our guidelines and Includification and other informational papers and reports. We need to continue to provide specific information to other developers in every venue we can as to how to build accessibility into our games. The WHY part is where we need to improve our efforts. 1. We need to show that adding accessibility accommodations will improve game playability and thus improve sales. 2. We need to make developers and gamers understand that they too, at some time, will most likely need the accessibility accommodations - either on a temporary basis, or permanently as they age and can no longer play the games they love because they can't hear, see or move well enough to play them. 3. Hard-core gamers don't have to use the optional accommodations, but lots of other people can play the games ONLY because of these same accommodations such as the ability to slow things down, or have bigger type with improved contrast, or have more information given through sounds, or the ability to modify the controls to accommodate mobility problems. The gamer culture needs to understand that it is OK to provide the means for people to play their games, even if it isn't at the "hardest" level. Changing the gaming culture is a real challenge and it has to start with the game developers. That is why, as game developers, we have to educate other developers in this area. I believe that our main aim is to improve the playability of games for all people, not just the small sub-set of gamers who currently are the target market for most games that are being released. Built-in accessibility accommodations can help to do that. Eleanor Robinson 7-128 Software From steve at ablegamers.com Sun Dec 21 13:17:22 2014 From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:17:22 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The problem with the thesis statement of "this is the way it's always been," which is what you're saying, is that change is inevitable and necessary. SE & AG will continue to do what they do, as will the a valuable individual advocates, the question was what should GA-SIG be when it grows up. You think it's an awareness problem? No. It's a business problem. A problem advocacy won't fix. On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ian Hamilton wrote: > Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, > however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the > diversity SIG. > > Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the many > other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal > individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to > industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to > researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university > educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. > > It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have > too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and > certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. > There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could > be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, > and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less > people focussing on it. > > Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very > different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about > accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and > vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate > set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. > > If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the diversity > SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. > > So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly don't > think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be about > diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when there's > already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA obviously > doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. > > Ian > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Steve Spohn" > To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 > > I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG > concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities > within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to > lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an > increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam > in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of > the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. > > It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 > towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment > statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the > number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely > low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it > defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather > than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, > GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with > disabilities. > > Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this > SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* Association, > if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come > together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then > game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines > become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the > industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. > The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore > accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. > > From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it > is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and > AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are > ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. > > I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would > share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our > organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the > technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game > developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from > within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling > us to focus on gamers. > > Have a great holiday season everyone, > > Steve > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but > adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) > have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified > over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well > achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 > (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, > recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various > members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward > to > > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, > and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is > needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > Our Mission Statement: > > - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of > life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development > community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making > all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In > order to do this we will promote education of game developers in > accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, > corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? > > What do we do: > > - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. > - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the > community.* > - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres.* > - Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility > perspective. > - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* > - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible > today and in the future.* > - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can > do to make a difference. > - Develop the above goals further together. > > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > > other thoughs? > > > *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org > ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 > *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List > *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > > For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only > barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually > required as part of a mechanic. > > *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers > won't ever stop having new ideas > > Ian > > ------------------------------ > > From: sandra_uhling at web.de > To: games_access at igda.org > Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Hello, > > one important question: > What is our meta aim? > What do we want to reach? > > Kind regards, > Sandra > > > > _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG > website page is http://igda-gasig.org > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > *Chief Operations Officer* > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook > | Twitter > > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility > guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to > *everyone*: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -- Steve Spohn *Chief Operations Officer* AbleGamers Charity AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to *everyone*: Includification.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrporter at uw.edu Sun Dec 21 15:34:14 2014 From: jrporter at uw.edu (John R. Porter) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:34:14 -0800 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: For what it's worth, as a relative GA-SIG outsider and lurker, here are my thoughts on the matter. I apologize in advance if anything I say comes off as abrasive or gets under anyone's skin, but given that I *do* believe we're potentially at a crossroads here, I think there's value in getting cards on the table and not being mired down by overcompensatory tact and hedging. On the community side, AG & SE have done and are continuing to do spectacular work. There's just no two ways about that point. Now that being said, in spite of their successes, it's important that no one falls into the 'solved problem' trap of thinking that AG, SE, the GA-SIG, or any subgrouping is "effectively taking care" of the problem by themselves and doesn't need support. It can be all too easy to get into the hubristic mindset of thinking that a given approach is objectively the best or correct one, and then become dismissive of anyone else doing similar things as being second-tier at best and irrelevant at worst. Frankly, I have seen bits of this sort of territorialism in the past on this mailing list, and it's beyond frustrating. Not to be over-the-top with metaphor, but it's a bit like music. So long as they are harmonious, multiple voices can be much louder than one. For any sort of change movement, you need a choir, not a solo vocalist. Now turning our attention to industry, I wholeheartedly agree that this is a good time to take a careful, critical look at the GA-SIG. Count me among the number who feels that something needs to change. Steve's suggestion of a refocus on diversity within the industry is an interesting one, because he's absolutely correct that having developers with disabilities is a POWERFUL way of getting the accessibility mindset embedded. And that's not just idealistic people in the community like us saying so; it was one of the findings of a study I did (published at ASSETS 2013) that interviewed industry folks. However, the question of whether it's a good strategy is fundamentally different than the question of whether the GA-SIG should be focusing here, and that question is in turn fundamentally different than whether the GA-SIG should abandon its existing foci. Ian mentions that this sort of thing already falls under the purview of the diversity SIG, and that's great. But it obviously isn't enough, since folks with disabilities (as far as I know) are the most underrepresented demographic in the industry but a wide margin*. So something has to change, whether that's the GASIG taking on some of this advocacy, the GA-SIG becoming more directly involved with the diversity SIG to combine efforts/expertise, or something else entirely we haven't thought of yet. But regardless of what the GA-SIG does about this problem, I think it is strange to argue that it should abandon its fundamental tenets. The bulleted list doesn't need to change, let alone go away. In my mind, the problem with the GA-SIG is not what it tries to do. The problem is that it is disturbingly ineffectual at *doing it *in any sort of vocal or coordinated way. I've been subscribed to this list for almost as long as Steve, and I be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed by how silent and passive this SIG seems to be. There is obviously the seminal white paper, that has obviously had good influence, and I know that there are plans to do stuff this year at GDC, but there feels like so much untapped potential. Maybe it's because there aren't enough industry people actively involved with the GA-SIG. Maybe it's because past efforts have encountered industry resistance. Heck, maybe it's even quiet because most of what happens with the SIG is behind even *these *scenes. But to be brutally honest, at the current moment, I don't see the GA-SIG as much more than a chat forum for activists, researchers, and consultants who are doing their work from the outside in. And that's awful, because it's clear how much more it could be from the inside of the industry. Steve is absolutely correct that this is about the GA-SIG growing up, but not about needing to decide what it wants to "be what it grows up." As far as I'm concerned, it already knows what it wants to be. It needs to "grow up" and start being it. -John * Admittedly, a major factor in this is the general uphill battle that folks with disabilities face in employment across all fields, but that's not a good enough excuse. *-- -- -- -- --John R. Porter IIIwww.jrp3.net University of Washington,* *Human Centered Design & Engineering* On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Steve Spohn wrote: > The problem with the thesis statement of "this is the way it's always > been," which is what you're saying, is that change is inevitable and > necessary. > > SE & AG will continue to do what they do, as will the a valuable > individual advocates, the question was what should GA-SIG be when it grows > up. > > You think it's an awareness problem? No. It's a business problem. A > problem advocacy won't fix. > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ian Hamilton wrote: > >> Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, >> however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the >> diversity SIG. >> >> Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the >> many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal >> individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to >> industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to >> researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university >> educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. >> >> It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have >> too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and >> certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. >> There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could >> be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, >> and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less >> people focussing on it. >> >> Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very >> different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about >> accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and >> vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate >> set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. >> >> If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the >> diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. >> >> So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly >> don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be >> about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when >> there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA >> obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. >> >> Ian >> >> ----- Reply message ----- >> From: "Steve Spohn" >> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" >> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 >> >> I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG >> concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities >> within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to >> lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an >> increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam >> in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of >> the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. >> >> It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 >> towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment >> statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the >> number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely >> low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it >> defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather >> than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, >> GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with >> disabilities. >> >> Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this >> SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* Association, >> if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come >> together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then >> game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines >> become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the >> industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. >> The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore >> accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. >> >> From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it >> is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and >> AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are >> ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. >> >> I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would >> share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our >> organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the >> technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game >> developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from >> within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling >> us to focus on gamers. >> >> Have a great holiday season everyone, >> >> Steve >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: >> >> Hi Sandra, >> >> I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but >> adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) >> have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified >> over the years), but your question is very legitimate: >> - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well >> achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 >> (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, >> recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various >> members of the SIG >> - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward >> to >> >> http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility >> >> - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and >> this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what >> is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims >> >> Our Mission Statement: >> >> - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality >> of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development >> community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making >> all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In >> order to do this we will promote education of game developers in >> accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, >> corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? >> >> What do we do: >> >> - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. >> - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the >> community.* >> - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres.* >> - Push the current game technology to its limits from an >> accessibility perspective. >> - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* >> - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible >> today and in the future.* >> - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can >> do to make a difference. >> - Develop the above goals further together. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Thomas >> >> >> 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : >> >> other thoughs? >> >> >> *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org >> ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton >> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 >> *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List >> *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> >> For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only >> barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually >> required as part of a mechanic. >> >> *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers >> won't ever stop having new ideas >> >> Ian >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> From: sandra_uhling at web.de >> To: games_access at igda.org >> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 >> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> Hello, >> >> one important question: >> What is our meta aim? >> What do we want to reach? >> >> Kind regards, >> Sandra >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG >> website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Steve Spohn >> >> *Chief Operations Officer* >> >> AbleGamers Charity >> AbleGamers.com | Facebook >> | Twitter >> >> >> Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility >> guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to >> *everyone*: Includification.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> >> > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > *Chief Operations Officer* > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook > | Twitter > > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility > guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to > *everyone*: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve at ablegamers.com Sun Dec 21 16:13:01 2014 From: steve at ablegamers.com (Steve Spohn) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:13:01 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I love your letter, John. Well said. Allow me to quickly clarify one thing. There is no tiered system. I'm even going to say it twice and bold it. *There is no tiered system, and no one here is better than another. * BUT I do wholeheartedly believe there is a difference in effectiveness of approach. Accessibility is not solved. It will never be solved. My point is simply that there are people out there (not just AbleGamers) already doing pushes into accessibility effectively. And therefore I would love, love, love to see this group come together and help disabled developers. Because right now, no one else is. Allow Cole, Kingett, SpecialEffect, Barrie, AbleGamers, Porter, N0m4d, and all the others who are affecting change to continue fighting that battle, while focus here is put on helping disabled developers. On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 3:34 PM, John R. Porter wrote: > For what it's worth, as a relative GA-SIG outsider and lurker, here are my > thoughts on the matter. I apologize in advance if anything I say comes off > as abrasive or gets under anyone's skin, but given that I *do* believe > we're potentially at a crossroads here, I think there's value in getting > cards on the table and not being mired down by overcompensatory tact and > hedging. > > On the community side, AG & SE have done and are continuing to do > spectacular work. There's just no two ways about that point. Now that being > said, in spite of their successes, it's important that no one falls into > the 'solved problem' trap of thinking that AG, SE, the GA-SIG, or any > subgrouping is "effectively taking care" of the problem by themselves and > doesn't need support. It can be all too easy to get into the hubristic > mindset of thinking that a given approach is objectively the best or > correct one, and then become dismissive of anyone else doing similar things > as being second-tier at best and irrelevant at worst. Frankly, I have seen > bits of this sort of territorialism in the past on this mailing list, and > it's beyond frustrating. Not to be over-the-top with metaphor, but it's a > bit like music. So long as they are harmonious, multiple voices can be much > louder than one. For any sort of change movement, you need a choir, not a > solo vocalist. > > Now turning our attention to industry, I wholeheartedly agree that this is > a good time to take a careful, critical look at the GA-SIG. Count me among > the number who feels that something needs to change. > > Steve's suggestion of a refocus on diversity within the industry is an > interesting one, because he's absolutely correct that having developers > with disabilities is a POWERFUL way of getting the accessibility mindset > embedded. And that's not just idealistic people in the community like us > saying so; it was one of the findings of a study I did (published at ASSETS > 2013) that interviewed industry folks. However, the question of whether > it's a good strategy is fundamentally different than the question of > whether the GA-SIG should be focusing here, and that question is in turn > fundamentally different than whether the GA-SIG should abandon its existing > foci. > > Ian mentions that this sort of thing already falls under the purview of > the diversity SIG, and that's great. But it obviously isn't enough, since > folks with disabilities (as far as I know) are the most underrepresented > demographic in the industry but a wide margin*. So something has to change, > whether that's the GASIG taking on some of this advocacy, the GA-SIG > becoming more directly involved with the diversity SIG to combine > efforts/expertise, or something else entirely we haven't thought of yet. > > But regardless of what the GA-SIG does about this problem, I think it is > strange to argue that it should abandon its fundamental tenets. The > bulleted list doesn't need to change, let alone go away. > > In my mind, the problem with the GA-SIG is not what it tries to do. The > problem is that it is disturbingly ineffectual at *doing it *in any sort > of vocal or coordinated way. I've been subscribed to this list for almost > as long as Steve, and I be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed by how > silent and passive this SIG seems to be. There is obviously the seminal > white paper, that has obviously had good influence, and I know that there > are plans to do stuff this year at GDC, but there feels like so much > untapped potential. Maybe it's because there aren't enough industry people > actively involved with the GA-SIG. Maybe it's because past efforts have > encountered industry resistance. Heck, maybe it's even quiet because most > of what happens with the SIG is behind even *these *scenes. But to be > brutally honest, at the current moment, I don't see the GA-SIG as much more > than a chat forum for activists, researchers, and consultants who are doing > their work from the outside in. And that's awful, because it's clear how > much more it could be from the inside of the industry. > > Steve is absolutely correct that this is about the GA-SIG growing up, but > not about needing to decide what it wants to "be what it grows up." As far > as I'm concerned, it already knows what it wants to be. It needs to "grow > up" and start being it. > > -John > > * Admittedly, a major factor in this is the general uphill battle that > folks with disabilities face in employment across all fields, but that's > not a good enough excuse. > > > > > *-- -- -- -- --John R. Porter IIIwww.jrp3.net > University of Washington,* > *Human Centered Design & Engineering* > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Steve Spohn > wrote: > >> The problem with the thesis statement of "this is the way it's always >> been," which is what you're saying, is that change is inevitable and >> necessary. >> >> SE & AG will continue to do what they do, as will the a valuable >> individual advocates, the question was what should GA-SIG be when it grows >> up. >> >> You think it's an awareness problem? No. It's a business problem. A >> problem advocacy won't fix. >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ian Hamilton wrote: >> >>> Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, >>> however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the >>> diversity SIG. >>> >>> Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the >>> many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal >>> individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to >>> industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to >>> researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university >>> educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. >>> >>> It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have >>> too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and >>> certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. >>> There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could >>> be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, >>> and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less >>> people focussing on it. >>> >>> Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very >>> different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about >>> accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and >>> vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate >>> set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. >>> >>> If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the >>> diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. >>> >>> So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly >>> don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be >>> about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when >>> there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA >>> obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> ----- Reply message ----- >>> From: "Steve Spohn" >>> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" >>> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>> Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 >>> >>> I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG >>> concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities >>> within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to >>> lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an >>> increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam >>> in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of >>> the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. >>> >>> It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 >>> towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment >>> statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the >>> number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely >>> low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it >>> defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather >>> than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, >>> GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with >>> disabilities. >>> >>> Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from >>> this SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* >>> Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were >>> to come together and start really advocating for developers with >>> disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and >>> Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities >>> will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from >>> the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself >>> and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of >>> an initiative. >>> >>> From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, >>> it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and >>> AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are >>> ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. >>> >>> I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they >>> would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for >>> our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the >>> technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game >>> developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from >>> within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling >>> us to focus on gamers. >>> >>> Have a great holiday season everyone, >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sandra, >>> >>> I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but >>> adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) >>> have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified >>> over the years), but your question is very legitimate: >>> - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well >>> achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 >>> (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, >>> recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various >>> members of the SIG >>> - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look >>> forward to >>> >>> http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility >>> >>> - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and >>> this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what >>> is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims >>> >>> Our Mission Statement: >>> >>> - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality >>> of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development >>> community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making >>> all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In >>> order to do this we will promote education of game developers in >>> accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, >>> corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? >>> >>> What do we do: >>> >>> - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. >>> - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the >>> community.* >>> - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game >>> genres.* >>> - Push the current game technology to its limits from an >>> accessibility perspective. >>> - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* >>> - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible >>> today and in the future.* >>> - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can >>> do to make a difference. >>> - Develop the above goals further together. >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Thomas >>> >>> >>> 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : >>> >>> other thoughs? >>> >>> >>> *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org >>> ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton >>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 >>> *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List >>> *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>> >>> For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only >>> barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually >>> required as part of a mechanic. >>> >>> *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers >>> won't ever stop having new ideas >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> From: sandra_uhling at web.de >>> To: games_access at igda.org >>> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 >>> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>> Hello, >>> >>> one important question: >>> What is our meta aim? >>> What do we want to reach? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Sandra >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list >>> games_access at igda.org >>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG >>> website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> games_access mailing list >>> games_access at igda.org >>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> games_access mailing list >>> games_access at igda.org >>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Steve Spohn >>> >>> *Chief Operations Officer* >>> >>> AbleGamers Charity >>> AbleGamers.com | Facebook >>> | Twitter >>> >>> >>> Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility >>> guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to >>> *everyone*: Includification.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> games_access mailing list >>> games_access at igda.org >>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Steve Spohn >> >> *Chief Operations Officer* >> >> AbleGamers Charity >> AbleGamers.com | Facebook >> | Twitter >> >> >> Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility >> guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to >> *everyone*: Includification.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -- Steve Spohn *Chief Operations Officer* AbleGamers Charity AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to *everyone*: Includification.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michellehinn at gmail.com Sun Dec 21 16:41:15 2014 From: michellehinn at gmail.com (Michelle Hinn) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:41:15 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree that being a part of the IGDA means that we have better connections to HR folks in the industry -- it's these folks who are in the diversity SIG. Past efforts by our SIG have never resulted in attracting disabled developers or HR folks but its my hope that we will be able to make a stronger connection with the diversity SIG at GDC in a few months to discuss what all groups can do to help push this forward. I think everyone can agree that the more developers with disabilities we have in the industry, the push toward game accessibility is aided by one more link. But we need the right folks to partner with, as most of us are HCI folk and not employment professionals. I'd say more about this but I just got out of the hospital with major surgery (had to have half my stomach removed due to a cancerous ulcer) and I'm very, very sick at the moment -- my hardest surgery yet. Anyway, just wanted to add that I'd be willing to take a look at the other SIG working on employment issues and see what all of us can do to raise attention toward hiring more developers with disabilities. Not unlike game accessibility, game diversity is something that can use more people aware of resources than just a few folks. Have a great winter holiday season and a happy new year everyone! Michelle On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Steve Spohn wrote: > I love your letter, John. Well said. > > Allow me to quickly clarify one thing. There is no tiered system. I'm even > going to say it twice and bold it. *There is no tiered system, and no one > here is better than another. * > > BUT I do wholeheartedly believe there is a difference in effectiveness of > approach. Accessibility is not solved. It will never be solved. My point is > simply that there are people out there (not just AbleGamers) already doing > pushes into accessibility effectively. > > And therefore I would love, love, love to see this group come together and > help disabled developers. Because right now, no one else is. > > Allow Cole, Kingett, SpecialEffect, Barrie, AbleGamers, Porter, N0m4d, and > all the others who are affecting change to continue fighting that battle, > while focus here is put on helping disabled developers. > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 3:34 PM, John R. Porter wrote: > >> For what it's worth, as a relative GA-SIG outsider and lurker, here are >> my thoughts on the matter. I apologize in advance if anything I say comes >> off as abrasive or gets under anyone's skin, but given that I *do* believe >> we're potentially at a crossroads here, I think there's value in getting >> cards on the table and not being mired down by overcompensatory tact and >> hedging. >> >> On the community side, AG & SE have done and are continuing to do >> spectacular work. There's just no two ways about that point. Now that being >> said, in spite of their successes, it's important that no one falls into >> the 'solved problem' trap of thinking that AG, SE, the GA-SIG, or any >> subgrouping is "effectively taking care" of the problem by themselves and >> doesn't need support. It can be all too easy to get into the hubristic >> mindset of thinking that a given approach is objectively the best or >> correct one, and then become dismissive of anyone else doing similar things >> as being second-tier at best and irrelevant at worst. Frankly, I have seen >> bits of this sort of territorialism in the past on this mailing list, and >> it's beyond frustrating. Not to be over-the-top with metaphor, but it's a >> bit like music. So long as they are harmonious, multiple voices can be much >> louder than one. For any sort of change movement, you need a choir, not a >> solo vocalist. >> >> Now turning our attention to industry, I wholeheartedly agree that this >> is a good time to take a careful, critical look at the GA-SIG. Count me >> among the number who feels that something needs to change. >> >> Steve's suggestion of a refocus on diversity within the industry is an >> interesting one, because he's absolutely correct that having developers >> with disabilities is a POWERFUL way of getting the accessibility mindset >> embedded. And that's not just idealistic people in the community like us >> saying so; it was one of the findings of a study I did (published at ASSETS >> 2013) that interviewed industry folks. However, the question of whether >> it's a good strategy is fundamentally different than the question of >> whether the GA-SIG should be focusing here, and that question is in turn >> fundamentally different than whether the GA-SIG should abandon its existing >> foci. >> >> Ian mentions that this sort of thing already falls under the purview of >> the diversity SIG, and that's great. But it obviously isn't enough, since >> folks with disabilities (as far as I know) are the most underrepresented >> demographic in the industry but a wide margin*. So something has to change, >> whether that's the GASIG taking on some of this advocacy, the GA-SIG >> becoming more directly involved with the diversity SIG to combine >> efforts/expertise, or something else entirely we haven't thought of yet. >> >> But regardless of what the GA-SIG does about this problem, I think it is >> strange to argue that it should abandon its fundamental tenets. The >> bulleted list doesn't need to change, let alone go away. >> >> In my mind, the problem with the GA-SIG is not what it tries to do. The >> problem is that it is disturbingly ineffectual at *doing it *in any sort >> of vocal or coordinated way. I've been subscribed to this list for almost >> as long as Steve, and I be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed by how >> silent and passive this SIG seems to be. There is obviously the seminal >> white paper, that has obviously had good influence, and I know that there >> are plans to do stuff this year at GDC, but there feels like so much >> untapped potential. Maybe it's because there aren't enough industry people >> actively involved with the GA-SIG. Maybe it's because past efforts have >> encountered industry resistance. Heck, maybe it's even quiet because most >> of what happens with the SIG is behind even *these *scenes. But to be >> brutally honest, at the current moment, I don't see the GA-SIG as much more >> than a chat forum for activists, researchers, and consultants who are doing >> their work from the outside in. And that's awful, because it's clear how >> much more it could be from the inside of the industry. >> >> Steve is absolutely correct that this is about the GA-SIG growing up, but >> not about needing to decide what it wants to "be what it grows up." As far >> as I'm concerned, it already knows what it wants to be. It needs to "grow >> up" and start being it. >> >> -John >> >> * Admittedly, a major factor in this is the general uphill battle that >> folks with disabilities face in employment across all fields, but that's >> not a good enough excuse. >> >> >> >> >> *-- -- -- -- --John R. Porter IIIwww.jrp3.net >> University of Washington,* >> *Human Centered Design & Engineering* >> >> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Steve Spohn >> wrote: >> >>> The problem with the thesis statement of "this is the way it's always >>> been," which is what you're saying, is that change is inevitable and >>> necessary. >>> >>> SE & AG will continue to do what they do, as will the a valuable >>> individual advocates, the question was what should GA-SIG be when it grows >>> up. >>> >>> You think it's an awareness problem? No. It's a business problem. A >>> problem advocacy won't fix. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ian Hamilton wrote: >>> >>>> Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, >>>> however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the >>>> diversity SIG. >>>> >>>> Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the >>>> many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal >>>> individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to >>>> industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to >>>> researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university >>>> educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. >>>> >>>> It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have >>>> too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and >>>> certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. >>>> There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could >>>> be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, >>>> and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less >>>> people focussing on it. >>>> >>>> Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very >>>> different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about >>>> accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and >>>> vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate >>>> set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. >>>> >>>> If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the >>>> diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. >>>> >>>> So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly >>>> don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be >>>> about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when >>>> there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA >>>> obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. >>>> >>>> Ian >>>> >>>> ----- Reply message ----- >>>> From: "Steve Spohn" >>>> To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" >>>> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>>> Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 >>>> >>>> I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe *should *the SIG >>>> concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities >>>> within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to >>>> lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an >>>> increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam >>>> in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of >>>> the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. >>>> >>>> It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 >>>> towards supporting game *developers* with disabilities. The employment >>>> statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the >>>> number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely >>>> low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it >>>> defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather >>>> than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, >>>> GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with >>>> disabilities. >>>> >>>> Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from >>>> this SIG, which is owned by the International Game *Developers* >>>> Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were >>>> to come together and start really advocating for developers with >>>> disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and >>>> Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities >>>> will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from >>>> the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself >>>> and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of >>>> an initiative. >>>> >>>> From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, >>>> it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and >>>> AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are >>>> ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. >>>> >>>> I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they >>>> would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for >>>> our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the >>>> technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game >>>> developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from >>>> within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling >>>> us to focus on gamers. >>>> >>>> Have a great holiday season everyone, >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Sandra, >>>> >>>> I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) >>>> but adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our >>>> website) have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly >>>> modified over the years), but your question is very legitimate: >>>> - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well >>>> achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 >>>> (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, >>>> recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various >>>> members of the SIG >>>> - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look >>>> forward to >>>> >>>> http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility >>>> >>>> - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and >>>> this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what >>>> is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims >>>> >>>> Our Mission Statement: >>>> >>>> - ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality >>>> of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development >>>> community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making >>>> all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In >>>> order to do this we will promote education of game developers in >>>> accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, >>>> corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? >>>> >>>> What do we do: >>>> >>>> - Work together as a community to make great games accessible. >>>> - *Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within >>>> the community.* >>>> - *Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game >>>> genres.* >>>> - Push the current game technology to its limits from an >>>> accessibility perspective. >>>> - *Learn from accessibility design in other areas.* >>>> - *Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible >>>> today and in the future.* >>>> - Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they >>>> can do to make a difference. >>>> - Develop the above goals further together. >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Thomas >>>> >>>> >>>> 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : >>>> >>>> other thoughs? >>>> >>>> >>>> *Von:* games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org >>>> ] *Im Auftrag von *Ian Hamilton >>>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 >>>> *An:* IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List >>>> *Betreff:* Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>>> >>>> For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the >>>> only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually >>>> required as part of a mechanic. >>>> >>>> *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers >>>> won't ever stop having new ideas >>>> >>>> Ian >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> From: sandra_uhling at web.de >>>> To: games_access at igda.org >>>> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 >>>> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> one important question: >>>> What is our meta aim? >>>> What do we want to reach? >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Sandra >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ games_access mailing >>>> list games_access at igda.org >>>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG >>>> website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> games_access mailing list >>>> games_access at igda.org >>>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> games_access mailing list >>>> games_access at igda.org >>>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Steve Spohn >>>> >>>> *Chief Operations Officer* >>>> >>>> AbleGamers Charity >>>> AbleGamers.com | Facebook >>>> | Twitter >>>> >>>> >>>> Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility >>>> guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to >>>> *everyone*: Includification.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> games_access mailing list >>>> games_access at igda.org >>>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Steve Spohn >>> >>> *Chief Operations Officer* >>> >>> AbleGamers Charity >>> AbleGamers.com | Facebook >>> | Twitter >>> >>> >>> Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility >>> guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to >>> *everyone*: Includification.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> games_access mailing list >>> games_access at igda.org >>> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >>> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> >> > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > *Chief Operations Officer* > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook > | Twitter > > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility > guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to > *everyone*: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thomas at westin.nu Tue Dec 23 17:04:10 2014 From: thomas at westin.nu (Thomas Westin) Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 23:04:10 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8381A661-E398-4ECC-A3D9-5FED8AD7DB6D@westin.nu> Hi all, This SIG is about game accessibility but we should definitely work with the Diversity SIG for better workplace accessibility and inclusion of disabled in the industry; thanks Michelle for volunteering for that! The work by others has always been embraced by the SIG and many are also part of the SIG. I would love to have more members from the industry in the SIG, which is one reason why we have worked hard to have continious prescence at GDC since 2003. I agree that we have had our ups and downs in activity, but as we are a group of bilateral volunteers, what is being done (and not) is up each and one of us. We (the SIG) don?t have any fundings or other resources, except those we as members are able to bring to the table. This also makes coordinated actions a challenge; noone can force anyone to do anything. Yet, we have had a lot of activities during the years, e.g. various events at the GDC and other conferences. I will volunteer for reworking the list of to-dos during the spring, and will think of a time-effective way to get input from you all on that. Now, back to Christmas stuff... Best wishes, Thomas 21Dec 2014 kl. 22:41 skrev Michelle Hinn : > I agree that being a part of the IGDA means that we have better connections to HR folks in the industry -- it's these folks who are in the diversity SIG. Past efforts by our SIG have never resulted in attracting disabled developers or HR folks but its my hope that we will be able to make a stronger connection with the diversity SIG at GDC in a few months to discuss what all groups can do to help push this forward. I think everyone can agree that the more developers with disabilities we have in the industry, the push toward game accessibility is aided by one more link. But we need the right folks to partner with, as most of us are HCI folk and not employment professionals. > > I'd say more about this but I just got out of the hospital with major surgery (had to have half my stomach removed due to a cancerous ulcer) and I'm very, very sick at the moment -- my hardest surgery yet. > > Anyway, just wanted to add that I'd be willing to take a look at the other SIG working on employment issues and see what all of us can do to raise attention toward hiring more developers with disabilities. Not unlike game accessibility, game diversity is something that can use more people aware of resources than just a few folks. > > Have a great winter holiday season and a happy new year everyone! > Michelle > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Steve Spohn wrote: > I love your letter, John. Well said. > > Allow me to quickly clarify one thing. There is no tiered system. I'm even going to say it twice and bold it. There is no tiered system, and no one here is better than another. > > BUT I do wholeheartedly believe there is a difference in effectiveness of approach. Accessibility is not solved. It will never be solved. My point is simply that there are people out there (not just AbleGamers) already doing pushes into accessibility effectively. > > And therefore I would love, love, love to see this group come together and help disabled developers. Because right now, no one else is. > > Allow Cole, Kingett, SpecialEffect, Barrie, AbleGamers, Porter, N0m4d, and all the others who are affecting change to continue fighting that battle, while focus here is put on helping disabled developers. > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 3:34 PM, John R. Porter wrote: > For what it's worth, as a relative GA-SIG outsider and lurker, here are my thoughts on the matter. I apologize in advance if anything I say comes off as abrasive or gets under anyone's skin, but given that I *do* believe we're potentially at a crossroads here, I think there's value in getting cards on the table and not being mired down by overcompensatory tact and hedging. > > On the community side, AG & SE have done and are continuing to do spectacular work. There's just no two ways about that point. Now that being said, in spite of their successes, it's important that no one falls into the 'solved problem' trap of thinking that AG, SE, the GA-SIG, or any subgrouping is "effectively taking care" of the problem by themselves and doesn't need support. It can be all too easy to get into the hubristic mindset of thinking that a given approach is objectively the best or correct one, and then become dismissive of anyone else doing similar things as being second-tier at best and irrelevant at worst. Frankly, I have seen bits of this sort of territorialism in the past on this mailing list, and it's beyond frustrating. Not to be over-the-top with metaphor, but it's a bit like music. So long as they are harmonious, multiple voices can be much louder than one. For any sort of change movement, you need a choir, not a solo vocalist. > > Now turning our attention to industry, I wholeheartedly agree that this is a good time to take a careful, critical look at the GA-SIG. Count me among the number who feels that something needs to change. > > Steve's suggestion of a refocus on diversity within the industry is an interesting one, because he's absolutely correct that having developers with disabilities is a POWERFUL way of getting the accessibility mindset embedded. And that's not just idealistic people in the community like us saying so; it was one of the findings of a study I did (published at ASSETS 2013) that interviewed industry folks. However, the question of whether it's a good strategy is fundamentally different than the question of whether the GA-SIG should be focusing here, and that question is in turn fundamentally different than whether the GA-SIG should abandon its existing foci. > > Ian mentions that this sort of thing already falls under the purview of the diversity SIG, and that's great. But it obviously isn't enough, since folks with disabilities (as far as I know) are the most underrepresented demographic in the industry but a wide margin*. So something has to change, whether that's the GASIG taking on some of this advocacy, the GA-SIG becoming more directly involved with the diversity SIG to combine efforts/expertise, or something else entirely we haven't thought of yet. > > But regardless of what the GA-SIG does about this problem, I think it is strange to argue that it should abandon its fundamental tenets. The bulleted list doesn't need to change, let alone go away. > > In my mind, the problem with the GA-SIG is not what it tries to do. The problem is that it is disturbingly ineffectual at doing it in any sort of vocal or coordinated way. I've been subscribed to this list for almost as long as Steve, and I be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed by how silent and passive this SIG seems to be. There is obviously the seminal white paper, that has obviously had good influence, and I know that there are plans to do stuff this year at GDC, but there feels like so much untapped potential. Maybe it's because there aren't enough industry people actively involved with the GA-SIG. Maybe it's because past efforts have encountered industry resistance. Heck, maybe it's even quiet because most of what happens with the SIG is behind even these scenes. But to be brutally honest, at the current moment, I don't see the GA-SIG as much more than a chat forum for activists, researchers, and consultants who are doing their work from the outside in. And that's awful, because it's clear how much more it could be from the inside of the industry. > > Steve is absolutely correct that this is about the GA-SIG growing up, but not about needing to decide what it wants to "be what it grows up." As far as I'm concerned, it already knows what it wants to be. It needs to "grow up" and start being it. > > -John > > * Admittedly, a major factor in this is the general uphill battle that folks with disabilities face in employment across all fields, but that's not a good enough excuse. > > > -- -- -- -- -- > John R. Porter III > www.jrp3.net > University of Washington, > Human Centered Design & Engineering > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Steve Spohn wrote: > The problem with the thesis statement of "this is the way it's always been," which is what you're saying, is that change is inevitable and necessary. > > SE & AG will continue to do what they do, as will the a valuable individual advocates, the question was what should GA-SIG be when it grows up. > > You think it's an awareness problem? No. It's a business problem. A problem advocacy won't fix. > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Ian Hamilton wrote: > Personally, I agree completely with the importance of all the below, however there is already an IGDA SIG with precisely that mandate - the diversity SIG. > > Despite all of the great work done by not only AG & SE but also the many other other people involved in game accessibility advocacy (from vocal individual advocates such as Brian Bors and Brandon Cole through to industry/government bodies working behind the scenes, from gamers to researchers, from internal studio/publisher champions through to university educators), accessibility unfortunately is still not taken care of. > > It's easy enough to see from other industries that you can never have too many people working towards the advancement of accessibility, and certainly as lack of awareness is still such an issue, every voice counts. There are many many alternative ideas and routes to take, more than could be addressed by the number of people working in the field at the moment, and I personally wouldn't want to see any move in the direction of less people focussing on it. > > Diversity and accessibility are also two different topics with very different legal and practical knowledge required, people who know about accessibility aren't necessarily the best to be working on diversity, and vice versa - I've seen all of that first hand from internal corporate set-ups, it can go pretty wrong. > > If the accessibility SIG was to establish closer ties with the diversity SIG that would be great, but that's something different again. > > So in short, yes diversity is critically important, but I honestly don't think that changing the focus of an accessibility group to instead be about diversity is a good way to go about furthering it, especially when there's already a direct sister group that has that mandate - the IGDA obviously doesn't need / can't have two diversity SIGs. > > Ian > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Steve Spohn" > To: "IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List" > Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? > Date: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 00:57 > > I, for one, would like to see and strongly believe should the SIG concentrate on getting people with disabilities employment opportunities within the game industry, while AbleGamers and SpecialEffect continue to lead the charge for gamers with disabilities. With much gratitude to an increasingly welcoming community, both organizations continue to gain steam in both funding and technological enhancements, effectively taking care of the making 'games accessible' push we would all care about. > > It is my sincerest hope to see GA-SIG re-direct its efforts in 2015 towards supporting game developers with disabilities. The employment statistics for people with disabilities are nightmarish, at best, and the number of game developers who identify as having a disability are extremely low. The bullet list below should not be the mission of this group, as it defines 75% of what AbleGamers and SpecialEffect already does. but rather than focus this group overlapping what is already being accomplished, GA-SIG could be making huge advancements in the support of developers with disabilities. > > Imagine the incredible inside push that could be accomplished from this SIG, which is owned by the International Game Developers Association, if all of you (including lurkers who read and don't post) were to come together and start really advocating for developers with disabilities. Then game accessibility guidelines like Includification and Ian's guidelines become less critical because people who have disabilities will be in the industry, fighting from within, instead of us pushing from the outside in. The knowledge will already be inside the industry itself and therefore accessibility becomes a part of the gold standard instead of an initiative. > > From someone who has been a part of this group for eight long years, it is always been a group about the long game. While SpecialEffect and AbleGamers are fighting in the trenches of here and now, you all are ensuring tomorrow will be a land of equal opportunity for game developers. > > I cannot speak for SpecialEffect, but I can almost guarantee they would share my sentiment in that we would love for there to be no need for our organizations. We would love for games to be accessible to all and the technology to be covered by government insurance plans,. By supporting game developers with disabilities, you'll change the world of video games from within, and maybe, just maybe, lessen the strain on us nonprofits, enabling us to focus on gamers. > > Have a great holiday season everyone, > > Steve > > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi Sandra, > > I think most people might have gone offline for holidays by now :) but adding to Ians thoughts, the description below (quoted from our website) have been the aim almost since the start in 2003 (perhaps slightly modified over the years), but your question is very legitimate: > - some of the points in ?what we do? section have already been well achieved by members of the SIG and others; e.g. regarding points 2, 3 and 5 (bold text): there are now various sets of guidelines, whitepaper, website, recurring attendance at GDC / other conferences, academic papers by various members of the SIG > - Point 6, to develop a road map, well there is a session to look forward to > http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/building-a-manifesto-for-game-accessibility > - the final (seventh) point relates directly to your question :) and this, and the non-bold points are perhaps not so clear aims, more of what is needed to be done continiously to reach those aims > > >> Our Mission Statement: >> >> ?Computer and console games are an important cultural and quality of life issue. By collaborating with the rest of the game development community the Game Accessibility SIG intends to develop methods of making all game genres universally accessible to all, regardless of disability. In order to do this we will promote education of game developers in accessibility design, tax incentives for accessible game developers, corporate sponsorship and accessibility ratings.? >> What do we do: >> >> Work together as a community to make great games accessible. >> Develop accessibility methods and share this knowledge within the community. >> Define the needs raised by different disabilities and game genres. >> Push the current game technology to its limits from an accessibility perspective. >> Learn from accessibility design in other areas. >> Develop a ?road map? to what accessibility designs are possible today and in the future. >> Collaborate with professionals and students alike on what they can do to make a difference. >> Develop the above goals further together. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > 20Dec 2014 kl. 20:29 skrev Sandra_Uhling : > >> other thoughs? >> >> >> Von: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian Hamilton >> Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 23:28 >> An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List >> Betreff: Re: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> >> For me, it is to get at close as realistically possible* to the only barriers to participation and enjoyment being those that are actually required as part of a mechanic. >> >> *it won't ever be completely possible, as developers and manufacturers won't ever stop having new ideas >> >> Ian >> >> From: sandra_uhling at web.de >> To: games_access at igda.org >> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 22:51:35 +0100 >> Subject: [games_access] Important Question: What is our meta aim? >> >> Hello, >> >> one important question: >> What is our meta aim? >> What do we want to reach? >> >> Kind regards, >> Sandra >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ games_access mailing list games_access at igda.orghttps://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org >> _______________________________________________ >> games_access mailing list >> games_access at igda.org >> https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access >> The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > Chief Operations Officer > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to everyone: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > Chief Operations Officer > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to everyone: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > > > -- > Steve Spohn > > Chief Operations Officer > > AbleGamers Charity > AbleGamers.com | Facebook | Twitter > > Read the award-winning, critically acclaimed set of game accessibility guidelines for developers to create mainstream games that are accessible to everyone: Includification.com > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thomas at westin.nu Tue Dec 23 20:00:17 2014 From: thomas at westin.nu (Thomas Westin) Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 02:00:17 +0100 Subject: [games_access] Fwd: Introducing AFB's Research Navigator--Inaugural Edition: Employment of People with Vision Loss References: Message-ID: <129133F9-3ECD-49F7-AF7D-8F68F0E7411C@westin.nu> Hi again, Dan sent me this (thanks Dan!) which can be used in our contacts with the Diversity SIG Best regards, Thomas > From: AFB Research Navigator > Date: Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:30 PM > Subject: Introducing AFB's Research Navigator--Inaugural Edition: Employment of People with Vision Loss > To: AFB Subscriber > > > > > > Introducing AFB?s Research Navigator > > > A Quarterly Series on Research in Blindness and Visual Impairment from the AFB Public Policy Center > > > > Welcome to this first edition of AFB?s Research Navigator. This is a quarterly series of the AFB Public Policy Center. The purpose of this series is to keep you informed of user-friendly facts and figures and the latest research pertaining to people with vision loss. The series will also include the necessary background information so you may use the information most accurately. Have an idea for a Research Navigator topic? Want to know more about a particular statistic or line of research? Send your thoughts to AFB's Senior Policy Researcher, Rebecca Sheffield > > Follow this link to email Rebecca Sheffield. > > Readers are also encouraged to check out AFB?s Statistical Snapshots on a regular basis. > > Follow this link to Statistical Snapshots > > This webpage is regularly updated with a wide variety of information and tools that address commonly asked questions about people with vision loss. In recognition of October as National Disability Employment Awareness Month, our first topic for AFB's Research Navigator is: > > The Current State of Employment among Individuals who are Blind or Visually Impaired > > > > Introduction to the Topic > > It is no secret that individuals who are blind or visually impaired have far lower employment rates and labor force participation rates than the general population. Certainly, it is a topic of much discussion in this field: for example, the latest volume of the Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness (JVIB November ? December 2013, volume 107, number 6) was a special issue dedicated to transition and employment, not to mention the numerous articles that have been published in other volumes of JVIB. > > Follow this link to JVIB November ? December 2013, volume 107, number 6 > > Joe Strechay of AFB CareerConnect frequently blogs about the topic. > > Follow this link to read more about Joe Strechay > > Follow this link to AFB CareerConnect > > AFB?s annual Leadership Conference often has a number of sessions on the topic, and the list goes on. > > Follow this link to AFB?s annual Leadership Conference > > Yet, among the general population, employment rates among people with vision loss, indeed, employment rates among people with disabilities is not commonly a hot topic of conversation. To be sure, the bleak employment numbers have been acknowledged ? and these numbers have been acknowledged worldwide ? but outside the field, little action has been taken. > > The Numbers > > First, some definitions. When discussing employment, there are three key figures: unemployment rate, labor force participation rate, and percentage not in the labor force. The unemployment rate, as calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), is the percentage of the total labor force that is unemployed but actively seeking employment and willing to work. > > Follow this link to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) > > The unemployment rate does not count individuals who are not looking for work, whether this is because a decision has been made to leave the workforce or those who have dropped out of the workforce as a result of long-term unemployment. The labor force participation, as defined by BLS, is ?the subset of Americans who have jobs or are seeking a job, are at least 16 years old, are not serving in the military and are not institutionalized.? The percentage not in labor force accounts for both, those counted in the unemployment number and those that have either dropped out of the labor force or did not enter it. This number, the percentage not in labor force, is always higher than the unemployment rate and provides a more accurate picture of the proportion of people who are not employed. This number seeks to represent all Americans who are eligible to work in the everyday U.S. economy. All these figures are representative of the civilian labor force. > > Now, the numbers. First, let us look at the numbers for ?working-age? (i.e., 16 to 64 years of age) individuals who are blind or visually impaired. In December 2013, this subset of the population had a 36 percent labor force participation rate, 64 percent not in the labor force, and 15 percent unemployment rate (American Foundation for the Blind [AFB], 2014). That means that an alarming 64 percent of individuals who are blind or visually impaired 16 to 64 years of age were not working! But to fully understand the gravity of this number, let us take a moment to look at the same figures for the general working-age population (i.e. individuals 16 to 64 years of age) during the same month, December 2013. The labor force participation rate was 72 percent, percent not in labor force was 28, and the unemployment rate was 7 percent (BLS, 2013). To reiterate, the labor force participation rate among the general working-age population, 16 and to 64 years of age was exactly two times (72 percent) that of the labor force participation rate among individuals who are blind or visually impaired (36 percent). > > December 2013 was not a unique month. Indeed, individuals with vision loss continually have far lower labor force participation rates than their counterparts in the general population. Between 2009 and 2012, the yearly average labor force participation rate for all working-age individuals ranged from 75 percent in 2009 to 73 percent in 2012. For that same time period and age group, the yearly average for individuals with vision loss ranged from 40 percent in 2009 to 36 percent in 2012 (Kelly, 2013). And, for those individuals with vision loss who are employed, this group has lower median monthly earnings: $2,281 person with vision loss versus $2,724 for an individual with no disability (Brault, 2013). > Note: We use caution about drawing too many conclusions from these data as the margins of error around both the earnings and family income were relatively large. The 90% confidence interval lower bound of the family income estimate for people with disabilities is $2,783 and the upper bound of the family income estimate for people with difficulty seeing is $2,823. This overlap implies that the two may not be statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level. Nevertheless, these numbers are insightful. > > Why This Matters > > Employment is far more than a paycheck, which, in and of itself is vitally important. Employment is the economic and social foundation for stability in one?s life, the lynchpin for one?s independence, an important component of one?s self-definition. Employment has traditionally served as an indicator of one?s entrance into adulthood (Silva, 2012). Additionally, the negative effects of unemployment on psychological well-being have long been established. Indeed, lack of employment has been shown to correlate with depression, anxiety, and low subjective well-being and self-esteem (Cohn 1978, Paul & Moser, 2009). Other research has focused on the role of joblessness and its negative association to one?s social role, meaning that, with a lack of employment comes a questioning of one?s role as a friend, spouse, parent, etc. (Price, Friedland, & Vinokur, 1998). These social relationships are fundamental aspects of well-being. Thus, not only does unemployment negatively impact one?s earnings, it also negatively affects one?s view of self, resulting in low self-esteem, low self-worth, and low self-respect. > > Moreover, individuals with vision impairments want to work. RespectAbilityUSA, a non-profit organization in Washington, D.C., recently presented findings on their survey of individuals with disabilities and family members, close friends, professionals, and volunteers in the disability community. > Note: While we find the results of this survey interesting, we are not privy to their exact methodology and are therefore cautious in reporting these numbers. Moreover, we know that their sample includes ?the activist people with disabilities community and reflects more women, Democrats, Caucasians, and a more highly educated audience than one might expect within the disability community.? > Their survey yielded 3,839 respondents of which 1,969 were individuals with a disability. While this survey was of people with all types of disabilities, individuals with vision loss were part of the sample and the results provide some insight into the issue. Most pertinent among their findings was that 71 percent of people with disabilities said that having a job was more important to them than a government safety net. Additionally, over three-fourths of respondents who had disabilities reported that having a job was ?important to their happiness? (RespectAbilityUSA). > > Yet, despite the desire for and knowledge of the importance of employment, barriers continue to exist. Past studies have shown that education alone is not enough in helping individuals with visual impairments in gaining higher employment numbers (Kirchner & Smith, 2005). Some of the most common barriers cited in employment literature continue to be out-of-date or inaccessible equipment and materials, inadequate assistive technologies, inadequate compensation, weak job status, discrimination, and limited training opportunities. Included in these barriers is a lack of, what Wolffe (2011) refers to as, employability skills on the part of the individual with vision loss. The skills included in this category are: ?organizational and planning skills, working in a team, interacting appropriately with others, and demonstrating a sense of responsibility?(Kaine & Kent, 2013, p. 534)and are vital in both gaining and maintaining employment. Like any other skill set, these must be taught and practiced. And, despite numerous research studies aimed at identifying ways to improve this skill set, there continues to be a need for evidenced-based practices which have successful results (Cavenaugh & Giesen, 2012). > > Conclusion > > Employment is important to one?s social and economic livelihood. The employment numbers for individuals who are blind or visually impaired are bleak. And, important to point out is that certain socio-demographic groups among this population fare worse than others. We know that access to quality vocational rehabilitation (a future topic of AFB?s Research Navigator quarterly series), training programs, career counseling and mentoring, and professional resources all have the potential to make a positive difference in employment outcomes. Yet, despite all this significant research, researchers and practitioners alike continue to be faced with the problem of how to increase employability. No doubt, an investment must be made in the aforementioned programs, and they must be made available to all who need them. But this also means that there is a need for more research, both in the areas mentioned above and in others, such as the importance of social networks and various training and development interventions. > > References > Each reference is hyperlinked to a website where you can read the original source. Note that a subscription or fee applies to read some articles in their entirety. > American Foundation for the Blind. (2014). Interpreting Bureau of Labor Statistics employment data. > Brault, M. (2013). Census Bureau data on vision difficulty. Presented at: Focus on Eye Health National Summit. July 2013. > Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). The employment situation ? December 2013. > Cavenaugh, B., & Giesen, J. M. (2012). A systematic review of transition interventions affecting the employability of youths with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(7), 400-413. > Cohn, R. M. (1978). The effect of employment status change on self-attitudes. Social Psychology, 41(2), 81-93. > Kaine, N., & Kent, R. (2013). Practice perspectives: Activities to encourage employability skills in middle childhood. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 107(6), 524-528. > Kelly, S. M. (2013). Labor force participation rates among working-age individuals with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 107(6), 509-513. > Kirchner, C., & Smith, B. (2005). Transition to what? Education and employment outcomes for visually impaired youths after high school. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 99(8), 499. > Paul, K. I., & Moser, K. (2009). Unemployment impairs mental health: Meta-analyses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 264-282. > Price, R. H., Friedland, D. S., & Vinokur. A. D. (1998). Job loss: Hard times and eroded identity.In J.H. Harvey, ed., Perspectives on loss: A sourcebook (pp. 303-316). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis. > RespectAbilityUSA. (2014). Nationwide poll of people with disabilities, family members, close friends, professionals, and volunteers in the disability community. > Silva, J. M. (2012). Constructing adulthood in an age of uncertainty. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 505-522. > Wolffe, K. (2011). Pre-employment Programme Trainer's Manual. London: Royal National Institute of Blind People. > > > Thanks! > > AFB would like to thank Dr. Stacy Kelly, Policy Research Consultant and Assistant Professor in the Northern Illinois University Visual Disabilities Program, for her work on this article. > > Follow this link to visit Northern Illinois University Visual Disabilities Program > > Questions? > > If you have questions about this edition of the Research Navigator or other research/stats issues related to blindness/visual impairments, please contact AFB's Senior Policy Researcher, Rebecca Sheffield. > > Follow this link to email Rebecca Sheffield. > > You can unsubscribe at any time. To remove your name from this mailing list, or to find out what other newsletters are available from AFB, visithttp://www.afb.org/myafbnewsletter.aspx. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blindwolf8 at gmail.com Tue Dec 23 20:26:15 2014 From: blindwolf8 at gmail.com (Dan Fischbach) Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 20:26:15 -0500 Subject: [games_access] Fwd: Introducing AFB's Research Navigator--Inaugural Edition: Employment of People with Vision Loss In-Reply-To: <129133F9-3ECD-49F7-AF7D-8F68F0E7411C@westin.nu> References: <129133F9-3ECD-49F7-AF7D-8F68F0E7411C@westin.nu> Message-ID: No problem Thomas! :-) I hope you enjoy the information. (as much as it can be) Dan Fischbach, Net+, MCP W: danfischbach.com P: 609-458-7920 Proud NJIT (BS) and UCF/FIEA (MS) graduate Please consider the environment before printing this email On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Thomas Westin wrote: > Hi again, > > Dan sent me this (thanks Dan!) which can be used in our contacts with the > Diversity SIG > > Best regards, > Thomas > > > > From: AFB Research Navigator > Date: Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:30 PM > Subject: Introducing AFB's Research Navigator--Inaugural Edition: > Employment of People with Vision Loss > To: AFB Subscriber > > > [image: AFB DirectConnect Letterhead] > > > *Introducing AFB's Research Navigator* > > *A Quarterly Series on Research in Blindness and Visual Impairment from > the AFB Public Policy Center* > > > Welcome to this first edition of AFB's Research Navigator. This is a > quarterly series of the AFB Public Policy Center. The purpose of this > series is to keep you informed of user-friendly facts and figures and the > latest research pertaining to people with vision loss. The series will also > include the necessary background information so you may use the information > most accurately. Have an idea for a Research Navigator topic? Want to know > more about a particular statistic or line of research? Send your thoughts > to AFB's Senior Policy Researcher, Rebecca Sheffield > > Follow this link to email Rebecca Sheffield . > > Readers are also encouraged to check out AFB's Statistical Snapshots on a > regular basis. > > Follow this link to Statistical Snapshots > > This webpage is regularly updated with a wide variety of information and > tools that address commonly asked questions about people with vision loss. > In recognition of October as National Disability Employment Awareness > Month, our first topic for AFB's Research Navigator is: > > *The Current State of Employment among Individuals who are Blind or > Visually Impaired* > > > *Introduction to the Topic* > > It is no secret that individuals who are blind or visually impaired have > far lower employment rates and labor force participation rates than the > general population. Certainly, it is a topic of much discussion in this > field: for example, the latest volume of the *Journal of Visual > Impairment & Blindness* (JVIB November - December 2013, volume 107, > number 6) was a special issue dedicated to transition and employment, not > to mention the numerous articles that have been published in other volumes > of JVIB. > > Follow this link to JVIB November - December 2013, volume 107, number 6 > > > Joe Strechay of AFB CareerConnect frequently blogs about the topic. > > Follow this link to read more about Joe Strechay > > > Follow this link to AFB CareerConnect > > > AFB's annual Leadership Conference often has a number of sessions on the > topic, and the list goes on. > > Follow this link to AFB's annual Leadership Conference > > > Yet, among the general population, employment rates among people with > vision loss, indeed, employment rates among people with disabilities is not > commonly a hot topic of conversation. To be sure, the bleak employment > numbers have been acknowledged - and these numbers have been acknowledged > worldwide - but outside the field, little action has been taken. > > *The Numbers* > > First, some definitions. When discussing employment, there are three key > figures: unemployment rate, labor force participation rate, and percentage > not in the labor force. The unemployment rate, as calculated by the Bureau > of Labor Statistics (BLS), is the percentage of the total labor force that > is unemployed but actively seeking employment and willing to work. > > Follow this link to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) > > > The unemployment rate does not count individuals who are not looking for > work, whether this is because a decision has been made to leave the > workforce or those who have dropped out of the workforce as a result of > long-term unemployment. The labor force participation, as defined by BLS, > is "the subset of Americans who have jobs or are seeking a job, are at > least 16 years old, are not serving in the military and are not > institutionalized." The percentage not in labor force accounts for both, > those counted in the unemployment number and those that have either dropped > out of the labor force or did not enter it. This number, the percentage not > in labor force, is always higher than the unemployment rate and provides a > more accurate picture of the proportion of people who are not employed. > This number seeks to represent all Americans who are eligible to work in > the everyday U.S. economy. All these figures are representative of the > civilian labor force. > > Now, the numbers. First, let us look at the numbers for "working-age" > (i.e., 16 to 64 years of age) individuals who are blind or visually > impaired. In December 2013, this subset of the population had a 36 percent > labor force participation rate, 64 percent not in the labor force, and 15 > percent unemployment rate (American Foundation for the Blind [AFB], 2014). > That means that an alarming 64 percent of individuals who are blind or > visually impaired 16 to 64 years of age were not working! But to fully > understand the gravity of this number, let us take a moment to look at the > same figures for the general working-age population (i.e. individuals 16 to > 64 years of age) during the same month, December 2013. The labor force > participation rate was 72 percent, percent not in labor force was 28, and > the unemployment rate was 7 percent (BLS, 2013). To reiterate, the labor > force participation rate among the general working-age population, 16 and > to 64 years of age was exactly two times (72 percent) that of the labor > force participation rate among individuals who are blind or visually > impaired (36 percent). > > December 2013 was not a unique month. Indeed, individuals with vision loss > continually have far lower labor force participation rates than their > counterparts in the general population. Between 2009 and 2012, the yearly > average labor force participation rate for all working-age individuals > ranged from 75 percent in 2009 to 73 percent in 2012. For that same time > period and age group, the yearly average for individuals with vision loss > ranged from 40 percent in 2009 to 36 percent in 2012 (Kelly, 2013). And, > for those individuals with vision loss who are employed, this group has > lower median monthly earnings: $2,281 person with vision loss versus $2,724 > for an individual with no disability (Brault, 2013). > *Note*: We use caution about drawing too many conclusions from these data > as the margins of error around both the earnings and family income were > relatively large. The 90% confidence interval lower bound of the family > income estimate for people with disabilities is $2,783 and the upper bound > of the family income estimate for people with difficulty seeing is $2,823. > This overlap implies that the two may not be statistically significant at > the 90 percent confidence level. Nevertheless, these numbers are insightful. > > > *Why This Matters* > > Employment is far more than a paycheck, which, in and of itself is vitally > important. Employment is the economic and social foundation for stability > in one's life, the lynchpin for one's independence, an important component > of one's self-definition. Employment has traditionally served as an > indicator of one's entrance into adulthood (Silva, 2012). Additionally, > the negative effects of unemployment on psychological well-being have long > been established. Indeed, lack of employment has been shown to correlate > with depression, anxiety, and low subjective well-being and self-esteem (Cohn > 1978, Paul & Moser, 2009). Other research has focused on the role of > joblessness and its negative association to one's social role, meaning > that, with a lack of employment comes a questioning of one's role as a > friend, spouse, parent, etc. (Price, Friedland, & Vinokur, 1998). These > social relationships are fundamental aspects of well-being. Thus, not only > does unemployment negatively impact one's earnings, it also negatively > affects one's view of self, resulting in low self-esteem, low self-worth, > and low self-respect. > > Moreover, individuals with vision impairments want to work. > RespectAbilityUSA, a non-profit organization in Washington, D.C., recently > presented findings on their survey of individuals with disabilities and > family members, close friends, professionals, and volunteers in the > disability community. > *Note*: While we find the results of this survey interesting, we are not > privy to their exact methodology and are therefore cautious in reporting > these numbers. Moreover, we know that their sample includes "the activist > people with disabilities community and reflects more women, Democrats, > Caucasians, and a more highly educated audience than one might expect > within the disability community." > Their survey yielded 3,839 respondents of which 1,969 were individuals > with a disability. While this survey was of people with all types of > disabilities, individuals with vision loss were part of the sample and the > results provide some insight into the issue. Most pertinent among their > findings was that 71 percent of people with disabilities said that having a > job was more important to them than a government safety net. Additionally, > over three-fourths of respondents who had disabilities reported that having > a job was "important to their happiness" (RespectAbilityUSA). > > Yet, despite the desire for and knowledge of the importance of employment, > barriers continue to exist. Past studies have shown that education alone is > not enough in helping individuals with visual impairments in gaining higher > employment numbers (Kirchner & Smith, 2005). Some of the most common > barriers cited in employment literature continue to be out-of-date or > inaccessible equipment and materials, inadequate assistive technologies, > inadequate compensation, weak job status, discrimination, and limited > training opportunities. Included in these barriers is a lack of, what Wolffe > (2011) refers to as, employability skills on the part of the individual > with vision loss. The skills included in this category are: "organizational > and planning skills, working in a team, interacting appropriately with > others, and demonstrating a sense of responsibility"(Kaine & Kent, 2013, > p. 534)and are vital in both gaining and maintaining employment. Like any > other skill set, these must be taught and practiced. And, despite numerous > research studies aimed at identifying ways to improve this skill set, there > continues to be a need for evidenced-based practices which have successful > results (Cavenaugh & Giesen, 2012). > > *Conclusion* > > Employment is important to one's social and economic livelihood. The > employment numbers for individuals who are blind or visually impaired are > bleak. And, important to point out is that certain socio-demographic groups > among this population fare worse than others. We know that access to > quality vocational rehabilitation (a future topic of AFB's Research > Navigator quarterly series), training programs, career counseling and > mentoring, and professional resources all have the potential to make a > positive difference in employment outcomes. Yet, despite all this > significant research, researchers and practitioners alike continue to be > faced with the problem of how to increase employability. No doubt, an > investment must be made in the aforementioned programs, and they must be > made available to all who need them. But this also means that there is a > need for more research, both in the areas mentioned above and in others, > such as the importance of social networks and various training and > development interventions. > > *References* > *Each reference is hyperlinked to a website where you can read the > original source. Note that a subscription or fee applies to read some > articles in their entirety.* > > - American Foundation for the Blind. (2014). Interpreting Bureau of > Labor Statistics employment data. > > - Brault, M. (2013). Census Bureau data on vision difficulty. > Presented at: Focus on Eye Health National Summit. July 2013. > > - Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). The employment situation - > December 2013. > - Cavenaugh, B., & Giesen, J. M. (2012). A systematic review of > transition interventions affecting the employability of youths with visual > impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(7), 400-413. > > - Cohn, R. M. (1978). The effect of employment status change on > self-attitudes. Social Psychology, 41(2), 81-93. > > - Kaine, N., & Kent, R. (2013). Practice perspectives: Activities to > encourage employability skills in middle childhood. Journal of Visual > Impairment & Blindness, 107(6), 524-528. > > - Kelly, S. M. (2013). Labor force participation rates among > working-age individuals with visual impairments. Journal of Visual > Impairment & Blindness, 107(6), 509-513. > > - Kirchner, C., & Smith, B. (2005). Transition to what? Education and > employment outcomes for visually impaired youths after high school. Journal > of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 99(8), 499. > > - Paul, K. I., & Moser, K. (2009). Unemployment impairs mental health: > Meta-analyses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 264-282. > > - Price, R. H., Friedland, D. S., & Vinokur. A. D. (1998). Job loss: > Hard times and eroded identity.In J.H. Harvey, ed., Perspectives on loss: A > sourcebook (pp. 303-316). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis. > > - RespectAbilityUSA. (2014). Nationwide poll of people with > disabilities, family members, close friends, professionals, and volunteers > in the disability community. > > - Silva, J. M. (2012). Constructing adulthood in an age of > uncertainty. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 505-522. > > - Wolffe, K. (2011). Pre-employment Programme Trainer's Manual. > London: Royal National Institute of Blind People. > > > > > *Thanks!* > > AFB would like to thank Dr. Stacy Kelly, Policy Research Consultant and > Assistant Professor in the Northern Illinois University Visual Disabilities > Program, for her work on this article. > > Follow this link to visit Northern Illinois University Visual Disabilities > Program > > *Questions?* > > If you have questions about this edition of the Research Navigator or > other research/stats issues related to blindness/visual impairments, please > contact AFB's Senior Policy Researcher, Rebecca Sheffield. > > Follow this link to email Rebecca Sheffield . > > You can unsubscribe at any time. To remove your name from this mailing > list, or to find out what other newsletters are available from AFB, visit > http://www.afb.org/myafbnewsletter.aspx. > > > > _______________________________________________ > games_access mailing list > games_access at igda.org > https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access > The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: