Evaluating the State of Accessibility Design in Video Games | Hacker News Reader

Evaluating the State of Accessibility Design in Video Games

journals.sagepub.com

29 pointsxingyzt22 comments

I wish more games had better ways to reduce difficulty. There's a particularly obnoxious culture of purism in the gaming community, particularly for platforming games. People having difficulty are told to "get gud" or stop playing. I could complete the game VVVVVV because it has a slow down option. Although I have no serious disability, my reactions are not as good as a teenager's and my joints are stiffer. I've got nowhere with the Hollow Knight because it has no difficulty controls. The game's fans just say get gud, which is impossible for me, and make the community repellent.

As an indie game developper, I would like to argue it's not a developper desire but a player culture thing.

We've made a (probably bad, but that's not the point) first person shooter game last year and difficulty curve conception was a pain.

Initialy the game was aiming for the not-so-niche of hardcore fps player base and thus, clearly hard. As a VR game we attracted a lot of childrens and first time player players, who were overwhelmed.

We then added really easier game modes (and when i mean easier, i really mean 'you could litteraly walk thought the game for one or two minutes ignorings ennemis until you die'.

One of the recurring bad review (not the only one, the game have others problems) we had was the game was too easy, and looking for player stats, we could see video reviews of clearly seasonned fps player, rolling thought the easy mode for obvious reason and quitting after some time finding the game too easy without even trying the second diffulty setting on the 5 availables.

I'm sincerely curious as a developper to how we could improve things for our next try. We could have started the game on an harder difficulty by default, but we did not want to force a non veteran player to check 'mega-beginner-dumbed mode' on startup.

Another point we had and could explain hollow knight difficulty : it's impossible for a gamedevelopper to estimate difficulty on your own game when you work on it for over 2 years. Even if you are normally not very good on the genre You get insanely good at it pretty quickly.

> We could have started the game on an harder difficulty by default, but we did not want to force a non veteran player to check 'mega-beginner-dumbed mode' on startup.

You could make two buttons to start the game, the difficult one first. And call them maybe "Hard" and "Easy", with explanation that Hard is for people who regularly play games of this type, and Easy is for casual players; to make it obvious that a non-casual player is supposed to go with the Hard option even if they play the game for the first time.

And maybe instead of dumbing down some parts of the game, you could remove or replace them. Like, if the end boss is supposed to be a horrible monster, then instead of turning him into a funny punching bag in the Easy mode, you could just replace him with some regular enemy (or a group of them).

I think it should also be obvious when you see someone playing the game, which mode they use. Don't write "Easy mode" on the screen literally, but maybe use an alternative texture for something; or perhaps there is something that makes the mode obvious, for example in Easy mode you get more life. Then everyone who played the game will see which version was used by the reviewer, if there is a video or screenshot.

> it's impossible for a gamedevelopper to estimate difficulty on your own game when you work on it for over 2 years.

Heh, I know that. I knew an open-source game which at one moment had a tutorial so difficult outsiders couldn't make it. It's because when you played the game hundred times, you already know the optimal moves (at least, what is an optimal move in the tutorial), so it is hard to imagine someone who doesn't. And another problem is that if you find a tester, a few months later, the tester has the same problem. So perhaps every new version should be tested by someone who never saw the game before.

that is effectively a possibility, forcing player to choose between 'non obvious' choice, will probably try :)

I guess there's a sense of "achievement" when you beat a game that's hard and has no difficulty settings. The idea of "beating" the game holds more weight in that case.

But when a game has so much more to offer - atmosphere, story, adventure - (like Hollow Knight) it is certainly a bit unfair to restrict those things to only the hardcore players.

Right but you can beat a game on different difficulty settings so if you are difficulty focused and need the validation you can feel better about beating the game on expert rather than easy. Graduated levels of success are fairly common in other endeavors.

You can even self impose rules like the speed running community do.

For me it was very similar first realization at one point - that people like me really don't have place in this community and the community looks down on me.

It was at the time where I still played games, but already had a kid. Having to pass through difficult boss level would mean literally over a week of my free time. That time would be spent by trying again and again the same thing, because it was simply difficult. But the suggestion that it should be easier was literally mocked and treated as illegimate by far too many people. Then I realized that jounalists that wrote something similar were treated in ridiculously aggressive ways, they are not gamers, they are lazy loosers.

I think that is when I first realized how twisted logic of that community is. In order to not be "lazy" etc, you are expected to spend as much possible on gaming. And people who, like, prioritize schoolwork, work, family, create something whatever else are somehow the mocked weak lazy ones.

I had multiple realizations like that about aspects of gaming culture (I moved from sort of pro-gamer to disliking it all), but that was the first one.

For certain games (e.g Dark Souls, Sekiro, etc.) the constant repetition and grinding is the point. If that's not your thing, the game wasn't made for you, it's for masochists. There's a video on YouTube [1] of a guy beating the game with a partially paralyzed hand.

1. https://youtu.be/tso8u4OJLuI

You're not wrong. Difficulty is central to these games, and also IMO often overstated and/or misunderstood. At least in the Fromsoft titles you mentioned, pattern memorization is way more important than straight up twitch reflexes. I would bet good money that many players who have given up would find their groove if they just spent some more time on it.

All that said, I don't see why accessibility has to be a dirty word. Purposefully difficult game design does exclude players. For every inspiring story of someone completing a challenge while suffering from a disability, there are 10 more who completely miss out on what are - difficulty aside - genuinely interesting games. I personally know soulsborne fans who mainly like exploring the world, and for whom boss encounters are just a necessary evil.

That's honestly fair - these are rich worlds with interesting lore and a unique form for storytelling, so I totally get just enjoying the game(s) on those merits alone. It then follows that I think others who are similarly inclined but perhaps not quite as able should be able to enjoy the same experience.

1.) I am not talking about those at all. I dont understand why you think I was trying to play Dark Souls.

2.) I am not talking about some game being "not for me". I am about gaming community hostility toward people "like me" and towards games made for "people like me".

That hostility manifest when we start to talk about what we want in games in general, what we want games to be like. Or when we hit the wall in game that pretends to be for general public, but halfway cease to be. And I am not even complaining about game designer even, I am literally complaining about how gaming community responds to those who have different taste then them.

I've worked in the industry for years and I'm just now starting to see accessibility become mainstream for difficulty. Developers are coming around to the idea that games should be "difficult for you" to the degree you are interested and capable of engaging in difficulty. Celeste, for instance, added some great difficulty adjustments. (Also, it's a fantastic platformer with a great soundtrack and trans main character.)

I hope we continue to see further normalization of sliders for settings for players to tone down (or up) experiences to have the game meet them where they are.

I think everyone should do it like Doom did with the difficulty settings.

Same here. I'm 41 and had to stop playing Hollow Knight because I can't progress anymore. Sad, because I really liked the game.

https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412020971500

I remember in the original God of War on PS1, I kept dying over and over, and the game offered to make the enemies weaker to help me out.

I appreciated the thought, but the problem was a jump I had trouble making.

Ah, jumping puzzles: game obstacles which forever halt some players advancement while never providing any interesting experiences.

I assume you mean God of War for PS2 that came out in 2005?

Oops yes, my mistake. Thanks for the correction.

"Purchase Article for $37.50"

No thanks.

Just for peoples information, Able Gamers is a wonderful charity that advocates for accessible games. It is led by https://twitter.com/stevenspohn and is really doing amazing in this area.

Literally 4 hours ago they hosted the Accessibility Awards to shine light on games that have really put in some effort in Accessibility this year

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/804780340

Why not just throw in a Sci-Hub Link?

Is there a free copy available?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com