[games_access] Looking for feedback
sandra_uhling at web.de
Mon Mar 23 08:48:29 EDT 2015
there are some basic topics to decide:
Diversity of the gamers:
* gamer without a disability can face barriers to
* gamer with disability
* Put GAFs also in the other direction for hardcore gamers
Focus group gamer with a disability
As sideeffect better usability
Von: games_access [mailto:games_access-bounces at igda.org] Im Auftrag von Ian
Gesendet: Montag, 23. März 2015 12:12
An: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [games_access] Looking for feedback
It is reported as being a bit higher again in the UK - 45% of people over
state pension age, which varies between 60 and 65, so for over 65s probably
more like 50%.
That data is actually already included in general population data, it is
just balanced out by how relatively uncommon disability is in children (6%
of UK under 16s).
But I agree definitely worth mentioning separately, firstly in case you're
developing for older audiences, and secondly because I doubt many of the
people reading it would be planning on giving up gaming by age 65
I'd also reference the 2010 Popcap research, which was restricted to casual
gaming only but showed clearly enough that amongst that demographic
disability prevalence was higher amongst gamers than in the general
Something else worth mentioning is the additional impairments that don't
show up in general prevelance data as they don't come under traditional /
self identifying definitions, but still absolutely fall within the social
model of disability.. most notably colourblindness, at 8% of males, and
difficulty reading, at around 14% of adults (depending on country).
Also I'd leave off 'technical' completely, that isn't something that's
included under the umbrella of accessibility in other industries or in
gaming. The other categories all relate to a condition/attribute of a person
interacting with a environmental barrier, but technical doesn't fall under
that at all.
The definition should only be about disability. It's worth mentioning the
other benefits, but specifically as side-effects. I.e. that considering
people with disabilities is also useful for people temporary/situational
impairments, and that it often also happens to be good game design that
results in a better experience for all players. That's an important
difference to saying that accessibility is about all players.
Perhaps frame it in terms of barriers? E.g. that accessibility means
avoiding unnecessary barriers for people with disabilities, but something
that's a barrier for someone with a disability is often still to some degree
a barrier for other people too, so the range people who benefit from
accessibility is often wider than just people with disabilities.
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:20:34 -0400
From: <mailto:eleanor at 7128.com> eleanor at 7128.com
To: <mailto:games_access at igda.org> games_access at igda.org
Subject: Re: [games_access] Looking for feedback
You mention Silver Gamers. According to the US Census, 40% of people over
65 have one or more disabilities. Since a greater proportion of the general
population is now reaching or over 65, AND more people of that age are still
playing games they enjoy, it is a necessity for them to have the
accommodations that allow them to continue to play games. I think the
disabilities that come with aging should be added to the 10 to 20% who have
disabilities as a result of birth, disease, or accident.
On 3/22/2015 6:14 AM, Sandra_Uhling wrote:
here is the first part of the "Game Accessibility Philosophy".
games_access mailing list
games_access at igda.org
The main SIG website page is http://igda-gasig.org
_______________________________________________ games_access mailing list
<mailto:games_access at igda.org> games_access at igda.org
https://pairlist7.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access The main SIG
website page is <http://igda-gasig.org> http://igda-gasig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the games_access