[games_access] GDC: in retrospect

Wed Mar 14 14:14:38 EDT 2007

luckily...the contestants for the idol session saw what happened and 
i think that they would be on board for our first advisory panel for 
sure. i know some others who could pull some serious strings too but 
i'll email them to you off list so it's not publicly archived. i'm 
all for calling out names but i don't want to call theirs out at this 
time. time and place for everything and they've been nothing but 
gracious to us so there's no reason to call out names. :D

oh ass has been busted...it's now time to distribute the ass a little 
more. that's sounds weird. forgive me. my temp is 103 right now and 
i'm late for a meeting...

>You should have had better numbers at SGS - we'll fix that next 
>time.  Everyone should try to feel better first though.  You've 
>gotten immensely far but from reading what I've seen thus far I 
>think my best advice upfront is you might need to get some senior 
>advisors on board a few more people who can help you push things to 
>the next level.  I've been lucky in many ways to attract some people 
>that can help with that but I've also had to bust a lot of ass and 
>wait my turn.
>
>I'll try to spend some time looking deeper at all the output from 
>the SIG and post some more thoughts as they occur.  I looked around 
>and just have one dumb (don't worry they'll be more) question which 
>is... is there an outright SDK for accessibility that is available. 
>A one stop shop for accessibility tools/libraries/etc.
>
>- Ben
>
>
>On Mar 14, 2007, at 1:50 PM, d. michelle hinn wrote:
>
>>Just a quick reply -- we don't see it as *just* a legal 
>>obligation...but it's surprising when we don't get the numbers 
>>BECAUSE it is also a legal obligation for the serious games folks. 
>>Most of us view game accessibility as the next coolest thing ever. 
>>:) I mean, we had the friggin' jedi mind trick on display this 
>>year. Take that nintendo. :D
>>
>>Yes...yesterday will ill-timed. I was at hospital on Saturday and I 
>>was at hospital again last night for an IV, Robert was so sick he 
>>had to go home, meanwhile the folks from Holland are too sick to 
>>move now that they are back home...yesterday was the wrong time for 
>>a conversation about how unsuccessful we were.
>>
>>I agree...I see us (or saw us) as having a great success this year. 
>>But it's hard to see it as such when reminded that compared to Halo 
>>4.5 we're in the suck zone. I've been in this for too many years to 
>>think that if we just tweak one thing that miracles will occur. But 
>>we're getting there.
>>
>>I'll send you more offline to talk about what we have in the works 
>>and for your advise because I know you have been there, Ben. Really 
>>-- if anyone knows, you do!
>>
>>Michelle
>>
>>>First, the Serious Accessibility for Serious Games Panel -- I'm 
>>>not sure why we had an auditorium nor do I know why it was 
>>>increased to 60 minutes (from the proposed 45 minutes). I think 
>>>the Serious Games people like to think that they care more about 
>>>accessibility because they are the ones that have the legal 
>>>obligation to do so. But in the end...we know we barely had people 
>>>in the room for that session. So that's a constant baffling bit 
>>>for me.
>>>
>>>
>>>There are no serious games people in this case... it's just me.  
>>>Legal obligation???  Yes that's part of it but I also run games 
>>>for health and I'm amazed at some of the actual applications and 
>>>games that can be made too and further I just think this is a 
>>>really cool thing for games in general.  If you want to know what 
>>>I think my email is plastered everywhere and if people want me 
>>>easily enough my AIM is BENSAWYER.  Pop me a question at any 
>>>moment.
>>>
>>>Why you were in the big room may have been a snafu of late 
>>>rearrangement of the schedule -- you were supposed to be in a 
>>>smaller room.  You were increased to 60 minutes because I figured 
>>>you had a lot to say and its a panel and thus 45 minutes may have 
>>>been too small.  We can certainly work closer to help hone things. 
>>>As far as I'm concerned I will keep booking accessibility sessions 
>>>at all serious games/games for health events regardless of what 
>>>people say or how many show up because eventually it's going to 
>>>settle in.  The attendance at Robert's session at Games for Health 
>>>was pretty strong I believe.
>>>
>>>In looking at the posts in general I really think you're all being 
>>>very hard on yourselves.  Numbers don't matter if you get the 
>>>right people and build the network further.  The numbers will 
>>>eventually follow even if it takes longer then it did for others.  
>>>I struggled for two straight GDCs with 30-40 people.
>>>
>>>I think one of the things you might need to do is figure out how 
>>>to get more attention from some critical people who can help more 
>>>and help you grow the network.  Have any of you spent time talking 
>>>to Jamil Moledina at all?  If not I'm happy to talk to him more 
>>>about things.  GDC has grown now to the point where there may be 
>>>other avenues like a booth on the floor in North Hall that could 
>>>help you much more then a 5th extra session...
>>>
>>>Also as I relayed to Michelle briefly before your panel I'm 
>>>working on a new setup for our Games for Health conference for May 
>>>2008 and I want to create an entire daylong conference within a 
>>>conference focused on accessibility.  I'm working specifically on 
>>>this idea and will be in touch with Michelle shortly on it.  It 
>>>would have its own agenda you control, it's own marketing, price 
>>>for specific entry and facilities.  I'm working also if we can 
>>>define it enough within our next grant proposal for it to have its 
>>>own funding.  Lots of promises but that's the trajectory I'm 
>>>trying to go on because I believe in the work.  I really think 
>>>that through Games for Health we can attract a very big crowd for 
>>>a standalone event.  I see this as a conference that could be 
>>>profitable in its own small right and eventually have 100+ 
>>>attendees.  I'm crossing my fingers I can organize the proper 
>>>investment for it.
>>>
>>>So please I hope you don't see it just as legal obligation -- 
>>>there are initially some huge concerns there as people could use 
>>>legal hurdles to accessibility to fight serious games in gov't 
>>>using it as a technicality when their objections are otherwise but 
>>>beyond that I and others in the community have much deeper 
>>>interests in a broad range of applications.
>>>
>>>One thing the SIG might want to do is create an industry advisory 
>>>board of people who might help further things a bit more and 
>>>provide advice on how to get in the doors of places you want to 
>>>get into.  There are many other things you can do and I'm happy to 
>>>try and help provide ideas and contacts.
>>>
>>>You're not bumping up against failure -- you're bumping up against success.
>>>
>>>- Ben
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>games_access mailing list
>>>games_access at igda.org
>>>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>games_access mailing list
>>games_access at igda.org
>>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access
>
>_______________________________________________
>games_access mailing list
>games_access at igda.org
>http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/games_access