Games for visually impaired?

[skallagrigg]

I was talking to someone who works for the RNIB the other day who said that a company were making a games console/PC that would run games over 3 TV screens (like Atari's TX-1 Tasmania - if you're old enough to remember).

Why don't games companies make games with a disability option? I remember Atari used to have a kids option on some of their games - like on Pac-Man where you could choose to be up against 1-4 ghosts.

It would be so easy to do.


Destruction Derby on the Playstation was nice with the barriers to help you around, no matter how shabby a driver you were.

Leaderboard Golf was good on the C64 - line up at your leisure -then one button to wallop it.

There's a few more bits on my web-site www.oneswitch.org.uk - but does anyone know of any other games that are easy and clear to play?

Barrie

[mikm]

Wait...how do the visually impaired play good computer games?

[Mattress]

Not all visually impaired people are completely blind m²k. Some of them just have really poor vision but can make out text and images if they're rather large.

skallagrigg, my suggestion would be to get a projector and project your game screen up on a large wall in your home to get a large screen for visually impaired gaming, probably a lot cheaper to buy one projector than two more TVs and no extra cost for developers.

[skallagrigg]

It's a great idea - but still really expensive.

I know there's a thing called a Fresnel lens that allows you to project from your TV onto the wall to make a 20+foot screen. They cost about a fiver - but I just can't beleive they'll be much cop.

http://bigscreentv.20m.com/custom.html - has more info if interested.


But beyond that - I can't see why developers don't consider the disability market. How hard would it be to offer an option to simplify graphics (drop polygons - and remove background graphics) - Make a talking menu and so on.


I'm under the impression that with new laws coming in October 2004 via the Disability Discrimination Act - companies are expected to make reasonable adjustments to their products.

All seems pretty reasonable to me.


Can anyone think of any other obvious/non-obvious ways of making games more accessible to people of various disbilities?


Barrie

[mikm]

I know visually impaired usually see, albiet poorly. Games would be hard for them because of the details in them. When working, they can take advantage of high-contrast mode, magnifiers, or text-to-speech utilities, but it would be hard to get the same quality of play if you have to make it accesible for them.

[Mattress]

Hmm, disability discrimination act is going to force developers and other people to make their games so that visually impaired people can play them? what about deaf people? or paralyzed people? or mentally retarded people?
I don't think the economics of this is feasable, compare development costs vs. demand for visually impaired gaming. Probably not there.

You can get a projector for around two grand (check froogle), I think this is a better solution than to force a developer to lose money building a product for disabled people.

[skallagrigg]

But would they loose money? Surely making games more accessible would bring a bigger audience? Not just people with disabilities - but children and older people too - people having physiotherapy and so on.

Seriously - the changes to many games wouldn't be that difficult to implement. A talking menu is easy to programme - Adding a simplified control method and perhaps reduced complexity options shouldn't be too tough - Simple graphics options like the ones mentioned I've seen developers drop in as 'Easter Egg's.

Wouldn't you rather games and the world in general were made more open to all? I don't know how rich you are Mattress - but £2000 is a LOT of money to me and most people living on disability benefits. A little social conscience from the developers adding small things would surely be worth the cost?


Also - and perhaps niavely - does absolutely everything about a game have to be around economics?

[Mr Jones]

Originally posted by skallagrigg

Also - and perhaps niavely - does absolutely everything about a game have to be around economics?

In a perfect world, no, but we live in a world that is far and away not perfect, and the sad reality of the fact is, most games developers are driven by the need to make money, and the best way of doing that is by getting product out the door, having to hold back product to make further changes, some of which might come at the expense of say features a regular gamer would use, would only eat into their budgets and profits.

Look at it this way, you have two driving games, one that is adapted for disabled people , with a whole new set of graphics/controls etc etc, BUT, to do that we had to drop a number of tracks/vehicles from our game, because these extra disabled only features, that would in fact only be there for a minority group, eat into our available disc space that we pack the game on and delay release by 3 months while we add them in.

Game two, similar game, but has no disabled features, but on the other hand does feautre tons of vehciles/track and is released a good 3 months before game one.

Which one do you think will sell, and which company do you think will make the quick profit?

Sadly it all comes down to simple economics, and what I've described above is of course fictional, but you can see where I'm coming from right?

By the way, interesting web site you have there

[Mattress]

skallagrigg, 2000 GBP is a lot more than 2000 USD, and how is that much more expensive than your suggestion in the first post to have a game run on three TV screens, this requires you to buy three TVs, and I think if you're visually impaierd you're probably not going to benefit from a tiny $100 TV.

Also, what Mr. Jones said.

[skallagrigg]

Mr. Jones: Thanks for the kind comment - much appreciated.

Mattress: Okay $2000=£1250ish - still a big chunk of money - but yep, cheaper than the 3 screen idea. Not cheaper than using a standard TV but having accessibility options for graphics.




Accessible features in games will come, If human rights legislation maintains it current rate of development.

It will become uneconomic to exclude a minimum set of accessibility features in the future - as companies will be sued for discrimination (especially in the US - land of the litigious).

It's only right that this becomes law, because as Mr. Jones points out - companies won't bother if they don't ALL have to do it. Technological progress outstrips social progress - that's clear. It just seems mad to me when an area that is perfect for making people more equal - just doesn't seem to care a jot.



Still - laws and willing are all be very slow in coming (2020?) - so I thought I'd drop in a couple of links to disability switch interfaces for popular games machines that already exist:


http://www.oneswitch.org.uk - PLAYSTATION/PC and Retro consoles (D.I.Y. guides to come).

http://www.pathwaysdg.com - NINTENDO machines.

[skallagrigg]

Try these NAMCO links too - you may be supprised:


http://www.namco.com/company/supporters.html



http://www.namco.co.jp/welfare/

http://www.namco.co.jp/welfare/news/02-070.shtml

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...ch_hustle.html


(Use http://babelfish.altavista.com/ - to translate Japanese into very rough English.)

[Mattress]

Personally, I'm kinda against pro-handicapped laws, I can see how they are good but they can be abused. There is a part of my school that can't be used because it is not handicapped accessable. I don't understand why everyone has to be banned from the place just because handicapped people can't get up there. That's like saying everyone should have to walk around wearing a blindfold just because there are some people who can't see.

[skallagrigg]

Definitely - some people push things too far - and of course - no one likes being told how to think or act. I don't know the precise reasons for your school's stance - but I see your point.

However - you don't get positive social change without laws stopping people from keeping slaves, denying women the vote and so on. You just can't rely on good will.


By the way - most disabled people don't like being referred to as handicapped - as the word is derived from "cap in hand" - which is very close to being called a beggar.


I think Democracy would work very well, if it wasn't for human nature. Majority rule - stuff the minorities.

For the scope of this forum - simply imagine becoming disabled - and being unable to play your favourite games. You can see that a few simple design additions would bring them back to you - but no one really cares.

What games would you miss most? I bet they could be adapted easily.


I'd miss:

Asteroids: You could make the game playable for just one or two switches. Make the craft rotate continually - Make Hyperspace so that you can't immediately blow up on re-entry. You could then play the game using just one or two buttons (FIRE and HYPERSPACE).

Add options to make the Vectors as thick as you like - reduce number of Asteroids - have extra lives.

Shenmue: Add a scanning menu (as with Stephen Hawkins speech synthesiser) for all game options - including WALK - RUN etc.

Add options to dim down unimportant objects, and hightlight objects with a function (like the sparkle effect in Resident Evil - but more pronounced).

Keep the excellent difficulty features - making scenes you fail progressively easy.


Any effort though is better than none at all.

[Mr_007]

Good news!
i like atari!

[skallagrigg]

Atari were great - I remember an article in the Atari 2600/VCS colour fanzine of the early 80's (anyone remember the name for the UK?), where some one had made an Atari joystick more accessible for a man with C.P. using an array of lollypop sticks!

Miss the variety of options they used to have on games.


More like minded people at:

http://www.8bitjoystick.com/archives...videogames.php

[Nic01]

http://sclegacy.com/article.php?sid=1726

Sight is not everything...

[Mattress]

That is cool.

[skallagrigg]

Superb stuff. Any other examples anyone?