Accessibility for A Diverse Playerbase

[bigsmiles]

This was an idea I have been wondering about recently.

So I was working on perfecting a difficulty setting, and having fun working out ways to make harder difficulties more tough - other than just stats and numbers etc.
So puzzles are harder, secrets more hidden, quest requirements more tricky, attacks more complex to pull off, whatever.

But then I was thinking. Hold on. How often do we think about "How easy is this game to access for a more diverse number of people?"

I will give an example, I was talking once to a guy who has one hand. He gets sad a lot, because he loves games, but can really only play some types, for obvious reasons with the dexterity.
Then we have maybe people who have different types of cognitive or neurological capabilities, or maybe who cannot do math the same as others, etc.
So for these people, just making enemies easier and more EXP drops, it will not help really in the other areas of the gameplay, only battles.

So my idea, maybe it sounds excessive. I am trying to make a difficulty setting. Called something like "Accessibility Mode". (Not called something like "Very Easy", so then it is less likely to give a sad feeling.)
My idea is having things like for example:
The street brawler character I have, with complicated button combos for special attacks, maybe work a way to use a different system for it, for people who can't press the buttons fast. So take away the timer from the combos.
Or lets say people who have memory problems from injury. Maybe I can make more hints if the switch is on for Accessibility Mode. Things like that.
Another thing I thought was having more clues in the quest tracker, and being less cryptic or difficult.
My idea too is having a series of questions after picking the difficulty, saying like which parts people have trouble with and so it doesn't just apply all of them if not needed.

I am wondering any more aspects of things which I could apply, or whether people think this idea is important anyway. It is extra work, but not really so much I think if you do it in simple but effective ways.

I feel like too many games, there is this idea of "get good". But for many people in life, it isn't possible that way.

 

[TheoAllen]

It boils down to what is your goal.
Generally, accessibility is not to make the game easier, but to make you can play the game without changing its core difficulty.

For example, accessibility such as
- Colorblind Mode
- Keybinding
- Subtitles
- Text-to-speech menu
- Cursor Sensitivity
- Left-hand mode.

Now, if you're making a game with more choices for the difficulty settings, either with a preset label (easy/normal/hard) or with a parameter slider, or with a toggle, it makes the game more sandbox.

The reason you don't add these things is that you want to make a community around your game. Because they are experiencing the same game.

If you add those "accessibility options" such as "skip a puzzle, show puzzle hint, less input for combos, one-hand mode", etc. You're making a sandbox game, or at least it is more sandbox than it used to be. People don't experience the same game.

Both have their own merit. The latter is for people who prefer to have fun on their own terms, at their pace, and with their ability (it is me, btw). They probably don't care about connecting to the community.

 

[gstv87]

I feel like too many games, there is this idea of "get good". But for many people in life, it isn't possible that way.

for many people in life, drawing their first breath out of the womb remains impossible even today.
and there's people who cheer that fact and demand that it be made the norm.

life is unfair all over the place... you can't satisfy everyone, and you can't give everyone the win "just so that they get to experience it" and then prevent other people from winning the way it was intended.

I mean, I'm not saying you should gatekeep gaming, but if a work is interactive in nature and meant to be experienced interactively, making it run itself kinda defeats the purpose.
you can give colorblind people a different palette, while still retaining shapes and forms.
you can give subtitles to deaf people, while still having video and input feedback.
but if the player requires that the game adapts to themselves, they shouldn't be playing games.
if you think that gaming implies "get good", you're missing the point.

 

[ZombieKidzRule]

I like the concept of being inclusive and I can see value in it. I don't usually notice because I tend to gravitate more to turn-based games where you can control everything with just the mouse, so one-handed. I do like mouse & keyboard games, but most of those I could, in theory, play with just the mouse.

I think trying to incorporate other features is nice and I have actually seen posts from people who experience challenges with playing different games for different reasons and they are often extremely appreciative that someone has considered them when developing a game.

I sort of liken some of this to things like Story Mode versus Adventure Mode. I am seeing that a lot more in games.

I also recall someone making a Mod for Morrowind that made all the enemies docile. Why? Because their younger kid wanted to play and didn't like combat. They just wanted to run around and explore. Now, many people would say they you aren't getting the true Morrowind experience if you eliminate the combat, but I can appreciate the desire to allow for such things.

I have long thought that it would be very cool to have initial settings that the player can choose that customize the player experience.

For instance, I think some of these concepts could be achieved through toggles that the player sets. So if the player wants more or less hints, they can experience that. Because the hints are based on the toggle switch.

Hints are just an example. I have seen tons of toggle options in different games. Some from very old games. Like games that have a hunger and thirst system that can be turned off.

Sure, some developers would say that isn't how I want my players to experience my game. Which is fine. But why can't developers also want to allow players to choose options in how they experience the game?

I would love to incorporate many player set options in any game that I create, but that would be limited by my own abilities to build such things.

Just my perspective.

 

[bigsmiles]

--

Colourblind I didn't even think of. I will learn about it. Maybe hard to manage, I wonder if there is a clever way to put a filter like with dyslexia. Or maybe already there is software they can use for their screen in general in life. Either way, cool addition for me to learn.

Interesting, a community is something I have never thought about either. I will need to think about it. I was thinking I prefer if every player has a different experience, with many variables in plot and development of characters. I guess sandbox is the mode it would be, maybe that is the idea. Having the normal difficulties, and then sandbox mode. Maybe that is even cooler, it could have more options too. But now you say it, it is more like I had not realised it is a fact. I think now the big idea for me from this is that difficulty setting not needed for this part, it can just be options.

--

Awwww omg T_T that thing about docile Morrowind is so sweet.
Now I think I am getting a better idea from both of these replies. The better solution is having toggles and a menu for game options with the selections. So the difficulties staying the same, and just having all this other stuff available in all of them. Then also, it means someone can still play hard mode with no timer based reflexes attacks etc.

gstv87

--

Well, I can see your viewpoint. I would say it is more like "People who only want to play hard games, shouldn't be playing on any setting except Nightmare". I'm not planning or suggesting removing any challenging mode. Any of this features, it has zero effect on the game for anyone who doesn't use it. That is the principal objective in the system concept, it could be I didn't explain properly though. I can't make it for everyone, but then I think, eh, if some options I can make simply, why is the reason not?

 

[Milennin]

Because if 1 guy out of the 5000 or more people who play my game only has one hand to play with but implementing the option to play with only one hand and making sure it works correctly and in every place in the game takes me at least multiple hours, then nope, I'm not doing it. There's plenty of games to play with just one hand, but my game won't be it if it was originally designed to be played with both hands. Time is a very valuable and limited resource to take into consideration. That time could be spent implementing more content, working on balancing the game better or other things in my life.

 

[TheAM-Dol]

Hey, glad you brought this topic up, please forgive me if other folks have already mentioned some of these things I haven't read the other posts yet.

On my streams I often talk about accessibility a lot. It's something I care a lot about and unfortunately RPG Maker and RPG Maker devs seem to often neglect the options menu.
Things to consider with accessibility is some of the more obvious things such as disabilities whether it's eye sight, hearing, or physical disabilities, but it can also come down to other things such as player skill level, player (mental) competency, or even player preference.
Options menus are a great way to make your game more appealing to a broader audience by allowing them to play the way they want.
I would say a basic requirement for "modern" accessibility is at the least rebindable keys: Some folks have different preferences for how they play. Some folks are comfortable using old skool arrow keys, some folks may prefer WASD, some folks may be using an alternate keyboard layout so they may NEED to rebind keys in order for them to play comfortably. Fortuantely in MV and MZ there is Keyboard config by Yanfly and Visustela respectively and is as simple as drag and drop (I even wrote a tutorial on this forum for how to change the defaults in Yanfly's Keyboard config to prefer the WASD layout) It's also a little bit disappointing that it's so easy to implement yet so, so, so very often RPG Maker devs outright ignore such an easy fix.
As for adding additional options, again, Yanfly and Visustella come to the rescue with their Options Core plugin which I utilize extensively. This isn't quite as drag-and-drop as Keyboard Config, but it does allow for easily setting up options menus that control a wide variety of things (just make sure to plan for what those options will control when you are designing those things in your game).

(below I get a bit overzealous and preach too much about all the cool types of options you can add, but this post is way too long, so I'm hiding it to not flood the page.)

Spoiler

Basically you can set options to control variables or switches, and using a second plugin that allows for whole-game (meta) switch/variables will allow those variables and switches to be passed onto controlling a variety of different things. I have a noise-filter on my screen to create a visual effect. Option core allowed me to not only allow players to turn the effect off but also control how intense the effect is. Recently I introduced a QTE into my game that requires players to mash the keys on their keyboard quite quickly. Well, I also introduced an option in the options menu to change the behavior from a mash to a press-and-hold, or even the option to outright bypass the QTE if players prefer not to engage with it.
I've also added a "Speed Run" mode which, when enabled, will either short cutscenes & event sequences, or outright skip them.
And of course, the classic tutorial's option, which enables players to either enable or disable tutorials which is great for any player who prefers to figure things out themselves or any players that are playing the game a second time and already know how things function.
I also have a variety of formula's and game mechanics that can be enabled/disabled via the options menu. My game does have a running theme of "freedom of choice by expected consequences", and so it's only thematically consistent that many of my game's difficulty options can only be set for new games and cannot be changed after the game has started.

---

but really my point with all of this is that the sky is the limit and I wish to see more devs introduce options. Coincidentally, just today I had received a rather nasty comment from an individual reacting to my review of a game saying that "It's RPG Maker, you can't add options to your games." (little did that individual know how much I utilize the option menu for my game). I hope to see this misconception dissolve with time by more and more developers taking care to include options. Accessibility isn't just about disabilities, it's about being welcoming to the widest range of players.

As a final anecdote, there was a game I was really excited about playing long ago. It was a 3rd person action game, and in these types of games, I prefer playing with an inverted X-axis on the camera controls. However, since the game didn't have the option, I reached out to the devs about implementing it, but they found that the number of users who prefer inverted X is very small and therefore decided not to implement it. As a result, I had to refund the game. There was nothing fundamentally wrong with the game itself, it was entirely because the dev was unable to provide the options to allow me to enjoy their game that I had to refund it. What a terrible way to make your potential audience have to turn away from your game.

small edit:
after re-reading the OP as well as reading the other posts - I kind of understand a bit better what you are asking. Hmu if you want me to share my options menu and/or show you how it is made. It's really quite extensive.

 

[dennis_the_tennis]

This is the sort of thing that I'm glad the industry is making rapid progress in (colourblind modes, etc. are more common now than ever in AAA games) but for small projects like most of us are working on, it can be hard to find the time. Especially working in this pretty restrictive engine, it can be hard to justify putting in the extra work when your game is most likely going to make a small number of impressions over all. If your game is guaranteed/projected to sell tens of thousands of copies, then you absolutely owe it to the playerbase to be as accessible as possible... but I'll worry about that when I get there haha.

 

[ZombieKidzRule]

I should caveat my previous response with the fact that I am a hobbiest user of MZ. I am having a blast learning how to make games but I harbor no delusions that I will ever complete and publish a game that will make money.

So whatever I do I do because I want to. Because it is something I like. So I don’t mind investing some extra time in learning how to do something, even if it might not be popular.

Now, if I needed to make money off of game making, then my decisions would probably be driven more by economics.

I currently have the luxury of doing this out of sheer enjoyment.

 

[RCXGaming]

So funny thing, it was actually @TheAM-Dol that made me think a lot more about accessibility. I was originally a bit "" until I started looking into keyboard layout modifying scripts, and it wound up being one of the best choices of my life.

I've gotten a lot of comments from non RPG Maker peeps that say having an expanded control scheme was a very good decision on my behalf + some have even said that I'm doing better than Nintendo in this regard lmfao.

On my personal end it wound up being useful for tying things to hotkeys so the player doesn't need to go into the menu for every little thing, and even introduced keybinds for combat. Press 3 to open the equip menu in combat, as well as see if your stats have changed from debuffs, etc.

The ability to rebind also gives people who are left handed/only have one arm the ability to play the game however they want as opposed to being restricted to a control scheme that might be uncomfortable to them.

Other accessibility options like colorblindness filters, the ability to switch certain parts of the game on or off and so on have been fun to tinker with.

The real difficulty coming from... well, how do you modify a section of a game to work for someone who is colorblind or has limited hearing, etc. without completely nullifying it through a "skip this" function?

My answer to color has to not make things solely differentiated by their color - using different shapes is key to this, because even if the player can't see what the color is meant to be then they can still at least tell it apart through what shape it is, etc.

 

[stgiga]

As someone who has atrocious vision, is jittery enough to make PVP in most games impossible, and is neurodiverse, I feel like accessibility is something that game developers should take into consideration.

 

[NamEtag]

You can also check out the youtube videos on accessibility settings. Trying to brainstorm it all in text without significant representation from the actual target audience sounds unwise.

 

[bigsmiles]

That time could be spent implementing more content, working on balancing the game better or other things in my life.

it can be hard to find the time

For me, once the option choices and related variables are in place which is not so much time, it is super fast adding them into eventing etc. Just copy pasting the event into branching and deleting/editing/adding a couple lines for the effect. So other than very complicated sections of game, I am hoping it is not so bad.

I'll give an easy example, my fishing system, it was extremely simple to add these ideas.
I only copy pasted the entire string of components from the main fishing Common Event into a new branch activated by the Accessibility option, and then reduced the speed of the fishing quicktime events for that branch by editing two numbers. It took maybe 25 seconds to achieve. I only am suggesting such simple ideas as this. For me, 25 seconds of development time, it is worth it for me to think "Hehe now someone can maybe enjoy fishing more comfortably."
I believe if your events are efficiently and effectively organised and stuff, it is no big problem, but I agree for your point too. Any instance where it is adding a large amount of development time, it is likely not useful for someone who is trying to get on with a deadline.
However, I do believe my idea, that it is actually very easy and fast to implement this concept for many minigames and puzzles etc. I believe people may overestimate the amount of work prior to deeply considering it.

For example: When I have been mapping for two hours, I will take a break half way through for 10 minutes and quickly add these ideas into a small system which already exists, so it is a low effort activity to refresh the brain.

However, ironically, I was not considering the accessibility of this concept, for many people, it probably does take longer or is more difficult to conceptualise implementations effectively.

Well, I also introduced an option in the options menu to change the behavior from a mash to a press-and-hold, or even the option to outright bypass the QTE if players prefer not to engage with it.

For making the options menu and keybinding, I think easily enough I can do it without plugins (I have too many already hehe, so is getting hard to keep track and remember how they all function, much easier to remember systems I make myself).
Keybinding I did not understand how it is so important. For me now I think it will be one of the high priorities.

Your point is exactly how I feel about it. Once the basic concept is implemented, it is so easy to add it into variables and values of events for mini-games or QTE etc things.

The ability to rebind

Up until reading these replies, I never had even realised the useful ideas for remapping controls. That opens a whole bigger world of ideas for me. I will need to add it lower down on my development map, or else I will lose weeks exploring and experimenting it haha. The ideas could be too huge and distracting because fun.

 

[Prescott]

This may sound harsh, but it is not worth compromising your systems for accessibility of a few people. I even say this as someone who cannot play games with ATB systems because of my epilepsy. If that's the way that you are making your game and really want to balance around it, then changing vast things to be used by people with accessibility issues can harm the integrity of those systems and mess with the game balance. For the most part, you need to create your game with this accessibility in mind and design things from the ground up. Even simple accessibility settings such as colorblind modes can really mess with things if you weren't thinking about it originally (case in point, tactical shooters where enabling colorblind settings can give a competitive edge). This is a problem, though not talked about much, for even the largest studios, so as a solo dev it may be even harder to implement in a way that will make your game fun and cohesive for everyone.

I'd say you should keep the core gameplay as close as possible to what you want it to be in the ideal situation, and then add very simple features that could help people, such as full rebinding and something like the OpenDyslexic font that increases readability for dyslexic people. These are very easy things that will help a lot of people. You don't need to worry about colorblindness too much if you are targeting Windows because there is a really good built-in colorblind feature there (that smashes pretty much every other colorblind filter out there). You can make things better for the vast majority of people with very simple things like that, but add too much that changes systems too much and your accessibility systems will become bloated along with your game having way too many ways to play it that you can't account for in all situations.

Some games just can't be played by some people, and that's okay. Humans are born with different ailments and different talents. There are games I can't play, and plenty I will never be able to play at a highly competitive level. There are other games I can play and do it much better than my friends who aren't as inclined in those skill sets, like rhythm games for example. I'd say it's good to just make your game and include some small adjustments for general accessibility, but don't wildly change it to make everyone happy because you never will be able to.

EDIT: I'd also like to add that it isn't just about the time it takes to make the accessibility system itself, but to make sure it is balanced correctly.

 

[TheMeowingFox]

I strongly believe there's a way to make games accessible without simplifying them or making them "too easy", and you've put to words pretty well what I've been thinking. Unfortunately, as some pointed out, such accommodations are a resource issue, depending on what it is. I'd argue it's something that AAA games should worry more about including, even.

But if you're within the power to do it, I think it's worth considering regardless.

 

[heyguy]

I've tried to think about simplest accessibility options that could be included in my game. Being limited, the simplest accessibility option (for a JRPG) is probably an instant kill button/skill. It's essentially a story-mode button - Ara Fell had one and I thought it was neat.

Another possible option would be some sort of Colorblind windowskin - with appropriately colored text? Is that something that would helpful to people with colorblindness? Anybody out there know? You could have a windowskin selector in your options for people to chose what they need.

The last option, most complicated, would be including filters that affect the game world. That's beyond my knowledge - no idea how that stuff works.

edit: Color Blindness Simulator

Coblis — Color Blindness Simulator – Colblindor

www.color-blindness.com

 

[HumanNinjaToo]

I watched a FF16 dev play the game on a video/showcase the other day. OP made me think of that video because the dev was demonstrating the accessories that can be equipped to make the game easier.

If you have not seen/heard about this, go check it out. I think it is an interesting and outside the box example of altering the games difficulty. Instead of making the game more difficult by pumping enemy stats and/or lowering player stats, the game becomes easier by lowering the difficulty of the in-game features/mechanics. The dev was demonstrating that, after equipping a particular accessory, the player can auto dodge, or use only one button to execute combos, etc. He showed how they made it possible to play an action RPG with only one hand while using a normal PS5 controller.

I'm not sure of all the reasons the FF16 devs did what they did with this game, but it seems to delve into both accessibility and difficulty in a unique way.

 

[nbgamemaker]

it depends on your goal some basic things i know of are trigger warnings, colorblind mode and many others the goal should be not to gut the challenge but to make it so it's not hostile to differently abled gamers asking disabled gamers is also a good start.