Something I’d love the game accessibility community to know:- As developers, many, many are for sure all striving to reach (and surpass!) the level of *inclusion* TLOU2 reached.

BUT! The solutions that worked for TLOU2 won’t be the same for all games.

It’s nuanced and complex!

So! A thread!

Accessibility isn’t a particular set of features. It’s not even a defined group of settings/options.

Accessibility is an approach, an understanding; a widening of player centred design.

I want us to get it right, unlike the vast history of IRL accessibility...

Making games is incredibly unique. Yes, it’s related to software or tv/film industry, but it’s so complex in its own ways. The way we design, implement, and experiences we create.

This is why so much can’t be “standards” or pass/fail. Every game and genre can be unique to solve.

That’s not to say we can’t learn from TLOU2, or their success.

Whether their approaches & solutions work for another game, or are even technically/practically possible within the architecture/resources/processes is going to dramatically differ even within a studio or publisher.

We can do this, but it sadly takes time. Making games is an iterative process and is unique to every single team or game.

Very few games are built from scratch; from nothing. Most are built on existing systems, assets, technology, and more. This is the first mountain to cross.

(Incidentally this is also the main reason I don’t think baking metaphors work for games accessibility )

It sucks that it takes so long, that we’ll get it wrong. It sucks most that sometimes we can’t *even* do what we want, *how* we want. That’s making games in a nutshell.

There’s several other mountains too, but maybe that’s for another time.

The stakes are higher for accessibility, than any other aspect of making games.

The responsibility is immense. The impact on actual people when we can’t do something, or can’t do it perfectly is real af!

It’s *all* iterative.

It takes knowledge and deep understandings of huge spectrums. Not just of barriers, or player experiences (which we must know first to get it right!) but also game design, the technology, production.

Then it has to work within the goals for the game!!

TLOU2 is a narrative first, single player experience with very particular elements such as contained environments and levels.

This works in TLOU2’s favour - there’s much that can be added in settings because potentially changing mechanics to allow access works within context.

It’s a different equation entirely for some games and genres.

It can depend on things like impacts to multiplayer balancing, or more commonly, whether that’s the experience we want players to have - no matter the player. (Especially for a gameplay/mechanics first experience).

Those options and settings were really tremendously clever and worked really damn well for TLOU2!

They’re not going to always be the right call for other games.

Even when they are right, there are massively different technical and production parameters or constraints on a team.

I’m determined to make games as accessible as possible by bringing similar experiences to everyone who *wants* to try play that game.

A Q I get asked a LOT: Can every game be 100% accessible to every single person?

The Q should actually be:

*What* do we consider “accessible”?

What is “accessible?” Is it no barriers at all? I think in the end, for gaming, it won’t be that. Right now that is how many see it. It’s even how I thought of it at first, perhaps

It’s not just about being able to only get past the gates either. That’s also no good in my mind.

e.g. there’s a LOT of discussion about “difficulty” in relation to accessibility. I prefer “challenge” as a word.

“difficulty” is a concept. It’s a bar, but it’s extremely relative and doesn’t only relate to someone’s skill as many seem to think.

As designers we think bigger

If a designer understands their game will be too challenging (“difficult”) for some and that in itself is part of the considerations made for the design or goals, then it’s ensuring the *reasons* it’s too challenging to complete/compete is similar for as many players as possible.

We can only do that if we understand a wide variety of player experiences. History and systemic bias has shown us that in order to design with an understanding of disability, we must do so deliberately.

We must seek out those with that experience. We do it with other player exp!

Gaming is friction. So, it’s about ensuring the friction is a deliberately designed amount and type that’s predictable, understandable, and acceptable, regardless of interaction experiences or disability.

That’s games accessibility to me. See? Super different to other sorts.

This is why what works for each game is so different (ignoring the tech, production, practical, or bureaucratic things in our way).

Some games are mechanics first experiences, others everything in between - all the problems to solve are different, even within evolving franchises

Even for narrative first experiences, there will always be some level of friction, otherwise it might as well be a book or a movie

(Which incidentally also include friction but mostly less of it, it’s known, predictable, deemed acceptable, or accessibility like AD or audiobooks)

I hope we can find a place where there’s understanding, not just of the barriers that are barring players from deciding for themselves if they *like* an experience, genre, or game, but the reason for dislike isn’t due to not accounting for disability or interaction barriers.

I don’t want to just open doors.

I want to render them non existent by deliberately designing *all* features for as many different players as possible, not just power users, those who have been able to adapt, who know accessibility, or how to use settings menus.

I’m not saying that’s what TLOU2 did because clearly they did so, so much more and we can all hope to be as inclusive as ND!!

What I’m trying to say - even if we could just copy their approach tomorrow (we can’t), it just wouldn’t even work to solve the barriers in most games.

God, how I know it sucks to keep waiting. I feel the pain in my soul. Especially after one studio takes a giant leap for the type of games they make

I write this to try and pierce the veil or shed light on it from dev perspective

Design, and making games, it’s a hell of a thing

Thanks to @sightlessKombat for prompting this

I promise we’re trying, and many get it. I hope we can go several steps better than just copying another game and we think hard about what’s right for the experience we’re trying to create

It takes time too. I’m sorry for that https://twitter.com/sightlesskombat/status/1328470483382267906