[games_access] Accessible Game Design Initiative, in planning phase now.

[Thomas Westin]

Reid and Mark,

While I agree with Mark that the design part is equally important for  
this SIG, I do think it is vital that accessibility is not treated as  
something special.

This SIG is only needed as long as accessibility is treated as  
something as 'for disabled'. When designers in general realize that we  
are all disabled in some sense, then accessibility will be a top  
priority in any game design which would be fantastic. I would be very  
happy to see that this SIG wasn't needed!

So I'm encouraging Reid's attempt to break into the design SIG pushing  
accessibility into the mainstream zone where it should be. It was  
actually the reason I got the idea for starting the SIG in the first  
place, and why I turned the the IGDA where all the mainstream devs are.

So Reid's effort is right on the spot! However utopian it may seem  
today, most or all accessibility features may be mainstream some day.  
I hope.

/Thomas


On 25 jan 2009, at 02.15, Mark Barlet wrote:

> I think "Accessible Game Design" is not the third goal  of this SIG  
> but number ONE. I am thinking back to YOUR poster talk, and looking  
> back at all of the talks this group has given at GDC over the years  
> (and all of the proposals we have had rejected), and I think you  
> would be hard pressed to argue that Game design is NOT a fundamental  
> part of the work of this SIG. You state as the number one "Closed  
> Captioning, slow game speed, high contrast graphics rendering" those  
> are all "game design" aspects. ALL of those things fall under "Game  
> Design"... I dare say that what you say is number 2, while I am a  
> huge supporter of, is in far less a part of this SIG. Also, I am  
> looking at all the active member of this SIG, including you, and the  
> Chair, and they are all game designers.
>
> I think it is a HUGE stretch to say "Accessible Game Design" does  
> not belong in this SIG. So please, if you have time, can you  
> enlighten me on what we have been doing for the last few years that  
> I have been a member, and how I am to catalog the work from the past.
>
> Reid, what is really going on here?
>
> Mark Barlet
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Reid Kimball <rkimball at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> It appears more explanation is necessary.
>
> The Accessible Game Design Initiative takes NOTHING away from the Game
> Accessibility SIG because it does not focus on helping disabled
> players. The work of the Game Accessibility SIG is still extremely
> valuable!
>
> I do think the ideas the initiative covers can be beneficial to the
> disabled, because as I like to say, "games for all". The focus areas I
> listed, such as "player tailoring" and a "hint system" can be helpful
> to both able and disabled players.
>
> To make absolutely clear, here's what I see coming from this SIG:
> * Support community for disabled players
> * Advocate and representative for disabled players
> * Research projects to help disabled players access more games for  
> the:
> -- visually affected
> -- physically affected
> -- mentally affected
> -- aurally affected
> * Share information and assist developers wishing to implement
> features for disabled players
>
> I believe you can approach the goal of game accessibility from three  
> directions:
>
> 1. Special game features
> -- Closed Captioning, slow game speed, high contrast graphics  
> rendering
>
> 2. Alternative controllers
> -- Switch devices, Quad controllers, controller hacks, voice controls,
> brain wave controls
>
> 3. Accessible Game Design
> -- Players customizing gameplay settings
> -- Dynamic Difficulty
> -- Content Navigation system (think VCR allowing rewind, fast forward,
> skip chapters)
> -- Hint system
>
> It is number three that I think this SIG and the Game Design SIG can
> collaborate on, however I feel it is more relevant to game design than
> this SIG.
>
> -Reid
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Mark Barlet <ioo at ablegamers.com>  
> wrote:
> > So Reid what does that make this SIG? I would think that this  
> would have
> > been better served to start in our SIG, and invite others... this  
> is like
> > going to a SIG for Minorities and saying "Let's design a game for  
> disabled
> > minorities" almost a secondary verb when there is already a  
> primary SIG.
> >
> >  I think by not letting this come from the GA SIG, and us reaching  
> out to
> > others, you have undercuts our mission a lot, Not sure that the  
> motive is
> > here, and I hope you get what you are looking for, but I just  
> think you have
> > gone about this in a way that in the end hurts the hard work this  
> SIG has
> > done.
> >
> > Good Luck in your mission, whatever it is...
> >
> > Mark Barlet
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist7.pair.net/pipermail/games_access/attachments/20090127/962b3ce2/attachment.htm>