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

Wed Jan 28 03:28:00 EST 2009

Re: [games_access] Accessible Game Design Initiative, inHi guys,

Just to let you know, I'm reading every thread and am still here! There's a lot to digest this first month of the year so so far I've only been able to listen in.

Gr.

Richard

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: d. michelle hinn 
  To: IGDA Games Accessibility SIG Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:26 AM
  Subject: Re: [games_access] Accessible Game Design Initiative, in planning phase now.

  Those are good points from everyone -- obviously this is a very passionate discussion and I'm just going to come in as mediator here. :)

  I personally am a little conflicted because I see far too often companies starting out with good intentions and then the disability part drops out and then what was originally going to be accessible...no longer is. I guess it's that "feature creep" thing, in part. But we're an old SIG now and perhaps we can help be mentors to the newer SIGs in order to get the accessibility word out. Perhaps, Reid, when we get closer to GDC, you could encourage those in the new SIG to come to the "Accessibility 101" talk so that they can get a crash course in the specific issues we discuss? And then they could come to the roundtable and group gathering to continue the conversation. Not everyone "gets" what it is that we're fighting for and it's our job to educate. I think that the more designers we can get into the room, the more powerful this initiative could be.

  I'm going to encourage Reid to give things a shot to see how it pans out. We CAN have a meeting at GDC about it -- we have some free room space that the IGDA gives for meetings and we might want to do this with other SIGs if enough people are there and enough progress is made (or it could kick off more progress). It will be interesting to see where the workload falls...I think we all know that these things take much more time from the lead of any one project and it can be a little crazy making at times. :) That's my main bit of advise to you, Reid, but you know that I have trouble taking advise about that myself.

  Of course, the problem right now is, we don't have that "accessibility/disability" auto-include thought process yet in the industry and we may be years away from that (think about other electronic media...people are still fighting movie theatres for captioning!!). But perhaps, eventually, we'll get to the point where we reach Thomas' Utopia. I'm all in favor for these things no longer being an issue...but as co-chair of the diversity committee...we still have GLBT, Women, Minorities and other SIGs and the Women in Games SIG has been around for a VERY long time and still has a ways to go. Thomas -- you've known me for so long that you know I have a dimmer view about the world's response to disability accessibility but that doesn't mean we can't dream of a day where the SIG serves as a reminder and a way to get more developers with disabilities involved in gaming (that's another part of our mission that we often forget...but it's important!!).

  Not trying to discourage at all! And perhaps we'll get some cross SIG members. This will be important in the near future, as larger SIGs will get more revenue sharing of IGDA membership costs. So the more members...the more money we'll have to do more with!

  Perhaps, if I may, suggest that we revise the whitepaper to include the Design SIG and it would help both SIGs. Reid -- has the SIG been officially approved by the IGDA? I had not yet heard anything about it on the SIG chair list so when Reid brought it up I wasn't sure the status.

  Also, the Localization SIG chair (also a new SIG!) wants to do something with us too -- because captioning is an important issue for them and if THEY can also double the reason for doing it to ease localization (when games are ported to other regions of the world), then we all win there too. So maybe we can bring them into the discussion and we can have a tri-SIG initiative. (Ok...going a little "Harry Potter" here...tri-wizard initiative?)

  Anyway, we have a LOT going on in such a short span of time and it's exciting. There's a lot of things going on that are exciting here, other parts of the IGDA, and our partners-in-accessibility like AbleGamers that are doing some great things to push the accessibility agenda. If we all give each other a chance, then we will have one amazing year.

  BTW -- the 508 discussion for the AbleGamers piece is heating up. Thomas and others from other parts of the globe. It would be FANTASTIC to get you guys involved in this. Basically I know we all have an opinion as to whether or not games should be required BY LAW to be accessible. This has been a "hot button" issue for us for a while and it's time to get that debate out there and discover what our best advise is going to be for this particular industry! Email me or Mark for more information!!

  Let's keep up the passion and the energy! The way I see it...if we never had any disagreements, then I'd know that we were just not supportive of our own message. We all want the same thing in the end -- more accessible games. Not everyone will have time to be involved in everything and that's ok. But to take the "service" initiative going on here in the US with our new president, let's all remember that whether it's an hour or two a week or much more...get involved! I think that's a good thing for all of us all over the globe. :)

  Michelle

  At 10:24 PM +0100 1/27/09, Thomas Westin wrote:
    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

    _______________________________________________
    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/20090128/f5a6289a/attachment.htm>