Defining Accessibility (Properly)

BIG TIME MASTER wrote:"3. Making a product more accessible does NOT
only consist of “dumbing it down” or “adding an easy mode”. There are many ways
that you can make a product more accessible for those outside of the target
consumer base without messing with originally targeted user’s experience."



From original poster.

Ok, I'm totally down. Now, how??? This is why the argument rages on, you keep stating that it is possible, but not explaining how.

I'm completely open minded, if you give a solid example of how to make DKS accessible to the average gamer but not infringe on its defining principles I will sing praises.

Forum Pirate wrote:By definition, if you use the ramp where there were stairs used to be, your experience has been altered for the sake accessibility. Just saying.

Serious_Much wrote:I generally disagree with your idea that non hardcore gamers need pampering to. The idea that you guys will instinctively pick up on mechanics better than other people cus you play more games is kinda backwards, I know people great at games who've struggled more than I at getting to grips with souls, and some on here who aren't quite the same gamers as most on here like myself, slakemoth give it a pretty damn good go. We did it without help as we learned the game just like you did.

The fact is 'accessibility' isn't the issue for souls, it's whether people are willing to get confused, frustrated and their arse handed to them hundreds of times to be able to fully understand and get through the game. it's not some divine instinct unique in the '7331' or however you spell it gamer population, you're being quite arrogant in making that assumption.

In other games accessibility in my opinion can be done without detracting from the experience due to how they are, they don't rely on difficulty much, but souls relies on being mysterious and not telling you everything. To me souls is a set of hurdles. The first is understanding the basic mechanics of the game, then afterwards you get onto the next step, getting equipment and upgrading it, then finally the last hurdle is the game world difficulty, the skill you need to beat each level, then the process begins again.

Im with Fourm Pirate 100% Business? I do this $hit for pleasure.

I dont care about consumer's I care about the experience!
FROM so far has cared about the Experience and anyone who loves these games can agree that would be a legacy worth keeping.

BIG TIME MASTER wrote:Your guys argument is in a stalemate because you are asking the wrong question. The question isn't whether accessibility a good or bad thing, it is HOW can DKS II be made more accessible without detracting from the defining characteristic of obscurity and difficulty.

I for one, cannot think of any way to make DKS more accessible to a broader range of people without detracting from the games defining characteristics. I'm a pretty good gamer, but I certainly struggled with DKS my first time. If, for the sake of the less abled gamers, the game had compromised its difficulty for me, like given me extra health after so many deaths, or gave me more hints, or better starting gear, or any of the myriad of ways to make the game more accessible, it would have been an entirely different experience. It wouldn't be an experience I cherish.

OP seems to be speaking about an ideal fantasy game, where every person of any skill level can pick up the game and enjoy it, but the hardcore types who play the game for its defining challenge find it as hard as ever. The only way to accomplish this is to have adjustable difficulty settings, and thats a whole different subject. There simply isn't a way to have DKS be accessible and retain it's integrity as well.

If after we spoke to the fallen knight in the Asylum a note was pinned to the corner of the screen reading "Make your way to the boss and then exit the asylum" and was accompanied by a floating marker that guided you to where you need to go, that would help the unskilled bozos, but it ruins the experience for the gamers. If you got a handy dandy map at firelink and you could see all the little nooks and crannies, you wouldnt feel any success in finding the secret area with three chest. If you were hinted at not going into the catacombs before you went in, you would lose the adventure of getting stuck down there and feeling hopelessly screwed. If the crestfallen warriors statement about ringing the two bells was jogged down in a journal, we wouldn't pay attention to what he was saying and keep a mental journal in our own minds that keeps us thinking and wondering about the game long after we are done playing it. I could go on and on.




A little extra, not worth a third post:

ac·ces·si·ble
/akˈsesəbəl/
Adjective
(of a place) Able to be reached or entered.
(of an object, service, or facility) Able to be easily obtained or used.
Synonyms
approachable - available - attainable - come-at-able


Just read that defintion and really try to understand how that word would effect DKS, not in theory, but in practice. Add that word to the Undead Asylum and when you first get to Firelink. Think of ways to make the game more accessible and explain how it can be both accessible and still be difficult, obscure, uncompromising, and generally INACCESSIBLE to anybody not committed or abnormally slow/lazy.

Forum Pirate wrote:That may be the core of the experience, but the experience is still altered ian. If my lambo has doors that open outward instead of up the experience of entering and exit it is different thus the entire experience is different, if only subtly. The experience is changed. If you want to be technical, we can be technical.

ianhamilton_ wrote:...

15-20% of gamers are disabled (NCESAAO),
and many people have temporary impairments such as a broken arm. Many more have
situational impairments such as playing in a noisy room or in bright sunlight,
and all players have different levels of ability – there’s no ‘typical gamer’.

Forum Pirate wrote:That may be the core of the experience, but the experience is still altered ian. If my lambo has doors that open outward instead of up the experience of entering and exit it is different thus the entire experience is different, if only subtly. The experience is changed. If you want to be technical, we can be technical.

Forum Pirate wrote:That however isn't what accessibility generally means in gaming PR and you know it.

To quote mysef from a page ago "Think of it this way, should the NBA teams lower their standards so everyone can play? Or should the people not able to play work for the ability as the current members do or find a game or leauge better suited to their skill and tempermant."

Forum Pirate wrote:
To quote mysef from a page ago "Think of it this way, should the NBA teams lower their standards so everyone can play? Or should the people not able to play work for the ability as the current members do or find a game or leauge better suited to their skill and tempermant."

MasterofShadows wrote:

Forum Pirate wrote:
To quote mysef from a page ago "Think of it this way, should the NBA teams lower their standards so everyone can play? Or should the people not able to play work for the ability as the current members do or find a game or leauge better suited to their skill and tempermant."

Not sure what this analogy has to do with anything. We are talking about accessibility, which is about making products more accessible. Basketball is not a product, its a sport. There are already other sports, or less demanding versions of basketball that can accomodate those who can't play in the big leagues.

Forum Pirate wrote:
I'm not saying the game should make no concessions and be impossible btw, I'm saying that the games previous made few to intentionally aid the nature of the intended experience, which is something I enjoy and would see remain intact, which an accessibility focus legitimately threatens.

Forum Pirate wrote:Again, not my point. I was calling out his phrasing, which he changed, because it was demonstrabily false.

Forum Pirate wrote:@Ian The point of the difficulty in the series though, was to be the metaphorical "big leauges." Similar games of lower difficulty are there for people if they arn't ready for (for whatever reason) the experience. Even a simple difficulty setting is detrimental to the purpose. Then the game isn't hostile and demanding, whatever the difficulty in the normal setting, it sets the precident for being pandering right off the bat, and the knowledge that help is just waiting for you 3 clicks away redues the sense of hopelessness and fear the game works so hard to build.

Forum Pirate wrote:

MasterofShadows wrote:

Forum Pirate wrote:
To quote mysef from a page ago "Think of it this way, should the NBA teams lower their standards so everyone can play? Or should the people not able to play work for the ability as the current members do or find a game or leauge better suited to their skill and tempermant."

Not sure what this analogy has to do with anything. We are talking about accessibility, which is about making products more accessible. Basketball is not a product, its a sport. There are already other sports, or less demanding versions of basketball that can accomodate those who can't play in the big leagues.

That helps my point. There are other games and less demanding versions (known as similar games) for ill equipped players.

Right in the beginning when players first pick up the game is something
that I will definitely focus on. To not immediately throw them into Dark
Souls but provide a good introduction in terms of what the game’s about
and how the game should be played."

MasterofShadows wrote:

ianhamilton_ wrote:...

Thanks for the reference to the
gameaccessibilityguidelines.com website. I've been to the site before, and am
well aware of it. Perhaps if you delve further into it, you will realize that
they actually don't make the sharp distinction between disabled and "less
skilled" players that you do.

Here's a quote from the site:

15-20% of gamers are disabled (NCESAAO),
and many people have temporary impairments such as a broken arm. Many more have
situational impairments such as playing in a noisy room or in bright sunlight,
and all players have different levels of ability – there’s no ‘typical gamer’.

Also consider all of the different examples of accessibility that are mentioned on the site. In fact, some of those examples would be exactly what people complain about regarding games "catering to casuals". No, there is no distinction here. The game industry is using it correctly, but some just aren't executing it well.

Forum Pirate wrote:Ian, you said "That absolutely and catagoricaly doesn't mean the game is dumbed down or changed" and I called you on it because that Is wrong. 2 minuites later, you edited the sentence to remove the word changed.

Forum Pirate wrote:
Now if you want optional closed captions fine, the option won't help anyone with anything that wouldn't be available anyways so the experience is largely unaltered.

It doesn't lower the skill barrier. Those type of changes I'm ok with. See the difference?

ianhamilton_ wrote:

Forum Pirate wrote:Ian, you said "That absolutely and catagoricaly doesn't mean the game is dumbed down or changed" and I called you on it because that Is wrong. 2 minuites later, you edited the sentence to remove the word changed.

Oh ok, I think that was just to add in 'that would defeat the point', I'm not trying to be evasive.

Forum Pirate wrote:
Now if you want optional closed captions fine, the option won't help anyone with anything that wouldn't be available anyways so the experience is largely unaltered.

It doesn't lower the skill barrier. Those type of changes I'm ok with. See the difference?

That's my point, that the disability related accessibility quoted in the original post is actually something a bit different to what is being debated for DS. Subtitle text being difficult to read or atmospherics being conveyed through sound alone aren't necessary parts of the experience, so they're unnecessary barriers that can be avoided. In those kinds of ways it's easily possible to open up the game to more people while in fact making the experience better rather than diluting it to a lowest common denominator.

MasterofShadows wrote:Ian, have you even seen my response post to you? I think that the website you mentioned actually supports my use of the term, not yours.