# Video game now required, by law, to be accessible for EVERYONE



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

http://archive.vn/TaqVk
https://www.dualshockers.com/cvaa-2019-games-to-be-made-accessible-for-disabilities/


> Starting from January 1, 2019, games launched in the US must ensure they are accessible to people with disabilities. Here is some more information taken from the IGDA website regarding how games are affected based on their development progress.
> 
> Games that enter development after this date must be fully compliant.
> Games already in development after this date but released after it must be as compliant as possible, how far through development the game was at Dec 31st may be taken into account in case of a complaint.
> ...



*Long story short, any video game (Updated or newly released) after January 1st, 2019 in the U.S., that cannot be played by a person who is literally incapable of even playing video games, will be fined by the FCC.*


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

Not to be insensitive but I think they're going too far with this.

Instead of supporting those with disabilities I have to wonder if this isn't really just a way to get more money for the FTC.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> Not to be insensitive but I think they're going too far with this.
> 
> Instead of supporting those with disabilities I have to wonder if this isn't really just a way to get more money for the FTC.



...They are supporting those with disabilities. The FTC may sound greedy but they're not. They're a flipping government agency. They get all the money in the world.


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> ...They are supporting those with disabilities. The FTC may sound greedy but they're not. They're a flipping government agency. They get all the money in the world.



They may have good intentions but I don't agree that a developer has to come up with 25 different ways to play a video game just so everyone can play it. Games take long enough to make now it'll be worse.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> They may have good intentions but I don't agree that a developer has to come up with 25 different ways to play a video game just so everyone can play it. Games take long enough to make now it'll be worse.



Well i do agree. While it may be a bit outrageous its worth it. And i think "25 different ways" is a bit crazy. I wouldn't say 25. It would be like up to 5 ways.


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

Every game that's made a developer will have to decide if it's worth it to make it inclusive or just pay the fine. If they pay the fine then nobody with a disability benefited, just more money went to the FTC. Regardless of how much money they may have that's the fact they would just get more money. Now if they're doing something with that money like funding research for cures great, but that isn't stated.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> Every game that's made a developer will have to decide if it's worth it to make it inclusive or just pay the fine. If they pay the fine then nobody with a disability benefited, just more money went to the FTC. Regardless of how much money they may have that's the fact they would just get more money. Now if they're doing something with that money like funding research for cures great, but that isn't stated.



Well the FTC does give some of the profits (i hope) to the people who passed it. According to the article it wasn't the FTC who passed it. They only were chosen to be the controllers.

The FTC also protects us from fraud and etc.


----------



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> While it may be a bit outrageous its worth it.


How is it worth it to create games where the player doesn't even PLAY the damn thing:
*5. *Operable with limited manual dexterity. Provide at least one mode that does not require user fine motor control or simultaneous actions.
*8.* Operable without time dependent controls. Provide at least one mode that does not require a response time or allows response time to be by passed or adjusted by the user over a wide range.


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

I'm not someone who just says "it's the government, I trust what they do with the money" when they put their hands into things like social security when they're not supposed to.


----------



## AutumnWolf (Jan 3, 2019)

Sorry but this is ridiculous


----------



## Milenko (Jan 3, 2019)

So for example how will the next call of duty comply with this

They say at least one mode, so they could have a mode where you shoot slow moving targets?


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

Milenko said:


> So for example how will the next call of duty comply with this



I would say just continue with what they're doing and continue making their games unplayable for everyone so it's fair, but I know the games sell through the roof somehow but I don't know how.


----------



## ThoD (Jan 3, 2019)

Are they retarded? Seems like the people who passed this have disabled brains...

Let's see...


> Input, control, and mechanical functions shall be locatable, identifiable, and operable in accordance with each of the following, assessed independently:
> Operable without vision. Provide at least one mode that does not require user vision.
> Operable with low vision and limited or no hearing. Provide at least one mode that permits operation by users with visual acuity between 20/70 and 20/200, without relying on audio output.
> Operable with little or no color perception. Provide at least one mode that does not require user color perception.
> ...


1.1) If you can't even see, WHY would you be playing video games in the first place?
1.2) Again, if you are THAT handicapped, you have no reason to be playing games, you got bigger things to worry about and on top of that such implementations require additional hardware just for them to be used!
1.3) If they mean games that simply use hues or have very limited colors, that's not hard to implement. People who can't tell colors apart can still differentiate them, just don't know what they actually are.
1.4) Games can be played without sound just fine as is 99% of the time, so why even mention this?
1.5) Should we include an "autoplay" too? Fucking hell, if you don't even have basic motor skills, just pick games with simpler controls, that's all there is to it, we can't be dumbing down games for the sake of "inclusion"
1.6) Same point as above, only I didn't know it took THAT much strength to press some buttons... Also, special controllers/keyboards are a thing already for such issues...
1.7) What a great idea, time to implement telekinetic controls, it's not like our technology on that is a bit lacking:/
1.8) Again, why dumb down games? QTEs can be annoying but in some cases they are important in making the game feel natural (eg: The Walking Dead S1/S2)
1.9) Hardly any game uses speech to operate functions and pretty much almost all that do are Nintendo games
1.10) Just say it straight, you want a game for retards and not just one, ALL the games to be for retards! It's not like handicapped people or mentally challenged ones already got about 50000 different games that they CAN play that are meant for people with such issues, right?

As for pretty much all points in number 2, well, after they tell devs to do everything that will make games shitty, they then go and say "but also include everything you have already been doing"...

I'm kinda pissed because knowing how shit works, the EU could follow as they always follow with this garbage! NO GAME IS FOR EVERYONE, why can't people realize that? There are MILLIONS of games out there, MANY catering to handicapped people, this is just a new low for the US after taxing "fun"... Really feels like most things they do in the US lately are literally picked from a pool of random retarded ideas


----------



## Milenko (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> I would say just continue with what they're doing and continue making their games unplayable for everyone so it's fair, but I know the games sell through the roof somehow but I don't know how.



Thanks for your unnecessary opinion, I was just using a popular game that required motor skills as an example


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

Milenko said:


> Thanks for your unnecessary opinion, I was just using a popular game that required motor skills as an example



You're welcome.

Do you really want a serious answer? How are we supposed to know?


----------



## Milenko (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> You're welcome.
> 
> Do you really want a serious answer? How are we supposed to know?



Speculate. Of course no one will know for sure


----------



## wormdood (Jan 3, 2019)

Transdude1996 said:


> How is it worth it to create games where the player doesn't even PLAY the damn thing:
> *5. *Operable with limited manual dexterity. Provide at least one mode that does not require user fine motor control or simultaneous actions.


so mario kart is not worth it because there is a auto-accelerate and assisted steering   . . . and i wont even mention amiibos in smash 


Transdude1996 said:


> *8.* Operable without time dependent controls. Provide at least one mode that does not require a response time or allows response time to be by passed or adjusted by the user over a wide range.


 oh no not the use of a c-stick making smash attacks faster and easier . . . is smash not worth it to create


----------



## Coto (Jan 3, 2019)

ehh I think people take for granted you have a fully functional body and two arms so you can play videogames. I mean every game up to date does that.

So I think this initiative is great, and other kind of research such as https://www.conicet.gov.ar/the-firs...ciences-and-behavioral-sciences-was-launched/

of which I know these guys know their stuff, such research will allow everyone to explore other kind of input controls.

I mean the brain is somewhat understood so you move objects if desired, to a certain location. Now map that to VR games.

Same for blind people. Research like: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608844/blind-patients-to-test-bionic-eye-brain-implants/

So it's obviously a step in the right direction.


from a coder perspective for the input controls: just map some matrix-like projection by a margin of whatever the brain accounts for a move at a given range, something like that.
from the legal POV it could just apply for the time being as an experimental feature (since this kind of input control isn't standard), while keeping the usual joystick controls, through an API.


----------



## jumpman17 (Jan 3, 2019)

I work for a company that provides support to people with disabilities, and our goal is to help everyone live as independent a life as they can. But this is just too over the top. Instead of making a reasonable and achievable goal to help create more games people with disabilities can play, they go for the make believe dream land that will result in nothing.

How is this supposed to work? How do you make a game playable for those who are blind? Sure, some games you could, but the vast majority? How? I guess you could have a voice read everything to you:

Voice: You are Spider-Man. Press A to swing on a web. You swing by a building on a web. Uh oh, here comes the bad guy. Press A to punch him. You punch the bad guy. You save the day. Congrats. You've beat the game.

Instead, they need to work towards small, easy to implement changes. When I think of a great example of this, I always think of Meteos (I think it was Meteos, it was a DS puzzle game for sure). In addition to colored squares, each color also had a corresponding symbol. So all yellow blocks had a triangle, all red blocks had a circle, etc, that made it playable for those who are colorblind. They also had an option for those color blind to certain colors to change the color schemes to ones that work work with what you could see. These options were simple to implement, yet allowed more people to play their game.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 3, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> Well i do agree. While it may be a bit outrageous its worth it. And i think "25 different ways" is a bit crazy. I wouldn't say 25. It would be like up to 5 ways.


You're blissfully unaware of how many disabilities there are in the world... While companies like Microsoft released an official product to aid disabled gamers, it requires a fair bit of work to comfortably use.... And incorporating disability-friendly playstyles and control options isn't an easy task. I don't disagree with the notion of the law, I just don't think it should be at such an extreme.


----------



## CeeDee (Jan 3, 2019)

Just make games that are so boring, no one would want to play them, disabled or not.

Hey wait, JRPGs already exist.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (Jan 3, 2019)

Memoir said:


> You're blissfully unaware of how many disabilities there are in the world... While companies like Microsoft released an official product to aid disabled gamers, it requires a fair bit of work to comfortably use.... And incorporating disability-friendly playstyles and control options isn't an easy task. I don't disagree with the notion of the law, I just don't think it should be at such an extreme.



True but hey...atleast now i know the truth. Some disability helpings can go a bit too far. And this one crossed way past that.


----------



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

Looking it up, there are 71 listed disabilities as of 5 years ago.


----------



## AutumnWolf (Jan 3, 2019)

CeeDee said:


> Just make games that are so boring, no one would want to play them, disabled or not.
> 
> Hey wait, JRPGs already exist.


Wow rude


----------



## CeeDee (Jan 3, 2019)

Sinon said:


> Wow rude


it's what i do


----------



## Scarlet (Jan 3, 2019)

Gamasutra Article said:
			
		

> As explained by video game accessibility specialist Ian Hamilton, the area of CVAA that applies to games deals solely with communication. As such, the requirements don’t necessarily mean that games in general must become fully accessible. Rather, the CVAA requires any communication functionality like in-game chat and any UI used to navigate and operate communications functionality must be accessible to people of varying sight, motor, speech, cognitive, and hearing ability. Those stipulations are fully explained under section 14.21 here.


When you look at it like that, it isn't half as drastic as what people seem to think here. 

Interestingly though, this has been something that's been put off for a while. A bit of extra reading from last year if anybody's interested: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news..._for_video_game_CVAA_accessibility_waiver.php


----------



## Scarlet (Jan 3, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> Probably because they didn't get enough votes to pass it i bet.


On the contrary, they've given an exemption to games since 2012. Give the article a read for a bit of extra info.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 3, 2019)

Scarlet said:


> When you look at it like that, it isn't half as drastic as what people seem to think here.
> 
> Interestingly though, this has been something that's been put off for a while. A bit of extra reading from last year if anybody's interested: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news..._for_video_game_CVAA_accessibility_waiver.php


I see. Definitely not as bad as it initially sounded..


----------



## Scarlet (Jan 3, 2019)

Memoir said:


> I see. Definitely not as bad as it initially sounded..


I have to wonder whether Microsoft's accessibility controller would satisfy a lot of what this is asking, assuming the games accommodate its use without any extreme difficulty? If so, it'd be cool to see the same kinda thing from Nintendo and Sony.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 3, 2019)

Scarlet said:


> I have to wonder whether Microsoft's accessibility controller would satisfy a lot of what this is asking, assuming the games accommodate its use without any extreme difficulty? If so, it'd be cool to see the same kinda thing from Nintendo and Sony.


I'm ecstatic to see Microsoft embrace this type of diversity.. Hopeful to see what the other 2 of the big 3 may have planned as well.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jan 3, 2019)

Oh just what we need, more legislation


----------



## Scarlet (Jan 3, 2019)

Memoir said:


> I'm ecstatic to see Microsoft embrace this type of diversity.. Hopeful to see what the other 2 of the big 3 may have planned as well.


Nintendo's an interesting one to watch. For how much I enjoyed Let's Go, it did surprise me to see the controversy that came from the forced motion controls making the game unplayable to people with disabilities. For a company about family friendly fun, it's the kind of thing you almost expect them to have taken into account. It's possible something like this could have positive repercussions for the average player in move available options. That is of course just speculation, it'll be fun to watch play out.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 3, 2019)

Edit: as explained here this thread is quite misleading.

1.1 Operable without vision. Provide at least one mode that does not require user vision.
Umm... did someone fuck you up in the head?

1.2 Operable with low vision and limited or no hearing. Provide at least one mode that permits operation by users with visual acuity between 20/70 and 20/200, without relying on audio output.
While nice, why should developers be forced to comply?

1.3 Operable with little or no color perception. Provide at least one mode that does not require user color perception.
Most games can already be played by colourblind people. Why should developers be forced to comply?

1.4 Operable without hearing. Provide at least one mode that does not require user auditory perception.
Most games can already be played by deaf people. Why should developers be forced to comply?

1.5 Operable with limited manual dexterity. Provide at least one mode that does not require user fine motor control or simultaneous actions.
You are missing the point of Dark Souls.

1.6 Operable with limited reach and strength. Provide at least one mode that is operable with user limited reach and strength.
In most cases this is to do with the controller, not the game itself. Use a Steam controller. You are missing the point of games like Just Dance and Wii Sports.

1.7 Operable with a Prosthetic Device. Controls shall be operable without requiring body contact or close body proximity.
While nice, why should developers be forced to comply?

1.8 Operable without time dependent controls. Provide at least one mode that does not require a response time or allows response time to be by passed or adjusted by the user over a wide range.
You are missing the point of fighting games.

1.9 Operable without speech. Provide at least one mode that does not require user speech.
Most games can already be played by dumb people. Why should developers be forced to comply?

1.10 Operable with limited cognitive skills. Provide at least one mode that minimizes the cognitive, memory, language, and learning skills required of the user.
Not every game is for everyone.

TL;DR Not every game is for everyone.

This is going to fuck over some indie developers with limited funds. While I don't live in America, most games are released in America therefore they will affect games released in other parts of the world. Lengthier and more costly development along with restrictions on how a game is presented leading to potential performance drops and less pleasing visual and auditory effects. There are plenty of games out there to choose from, why should _every _game have to comply to such strict guidelines? I don't play Dark Souls but there shouldn't be a law requiring Dark Souls to have an easy mode.

TL;DR Few people benefit from these regulations but they reduce the quality of games for everyone.


----------



## Robert McCoy (Jan 3, 2019)

They could just put a mini game in the options that even disabled people could play if they're wanting to make a normal game.


----------



## Scarlet (Jan 3, 2019)

Transdude1996 said:


> Look at Britain as a primary example of why that's a bad idea.
> 
> London's murder rate is high than New York's.


London's murder rate is higher than New York's for the first time ever for a period of two months and that's your primary example of why no guns is a bad idea? Look at the bigger picture. Anyway, you should make a separate post or even a blog for this, it's off-topic to the main post at hand.


----------



## Condarkness_XY (Jan 3, 2019)

A dumb stupid idea made by dumb stupid people. I get that it's supposed to be for disabled peoples but that should not be the primary focus of making a video game. I feel like this is going to take away from making the game as good as possible to instead focus on ways to play. Nothing good is going to come of that.


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

leafeon34 said:


> Why should Dark Souls have to by law include a super-easy mode for disabled people?



I'm not disabled, well except mentally. I need an easier mode for Dark Souls


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 3, 2019)

JustinCredible said:


> I'm not disabled, well except mentally. I need an easier mode for Dark Souls


Then play Mario Odyssey. Not every game is for everyone.


----------



## EmulateLife (Jan 3, 2019)

leafeon34 said:


> Then play Mario Odyssey. Not every game is for everyone.



With this law, they soon will be MUAHAHAHAHA.


----------



## Nerdtendo (Jan 3, 2019)

Imagine having to actually play a video game


This post was made by cognitive disability gang



Okay maybe that was in poor taste but come, games can only be so accessible. There are plenty of ways to make games MORE accessible (see Mark Brown's "Designing for Disability" series) but if you don't have physical capabilities to press few buttons then games will remain inaccessible until we can control games with thoughts.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 3, 2019)

ThoD said:


> I get you are trying to be funny while thinking you are proving a point, but the real reason why rape is so prevelant in many parts of EU is because the EU has ridiculously loose borders and the muslims we recently took in didn't help, instead almost doubled rapes in places like the UK! Japan on the other hand, up until 2 years ago, had SO tight borders you were lucky if you were allowed in for 3 months, with permanent residency being next to impossible to attain unless you got married or made major contributions on some field. Even with loosened control, Japan still has some of the tightest legislation for going there as the only thing they changed was pretty much making the 3-month visitor visa easier to get, still hard to even rent an appartment if you have one though...





Scarlet said:


> Anyway, you should make a separate post or even a blog for this, it's off-topic to the main post at hand.


----------



## ThoD (Jan 3, 2019)

SG854 said:


> With detachable arms.
> 
> I’m still waiting on 8k TVs for the blind.


8K Braille TVs? Now THAT would be interesting!

On topic though and in all seriousness, this is really gonna hurt the indie market in the US... As a dev myself, it's a big thing to have to account for all that BS, especially since I'm working on niche things as is...


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 3, 2019)

Wow...three pages of comments, and at best a slight handful of people not treating this like "EVERYONE IS AGAINST GAMERS!!!!" and rather for what it really is. Luckily there are posts like @Scarlet made:


Scarlet said:


> When you look at it like that, it isn't half as drastic as what people seem to think here.
> 
> Interestingly though, this has been something that's been put off for a while. A bit of extra reading from last year if anybody's interested: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news..._for_video_game_CVAA_accessibility_waiver.php



Most interesting part:

_...the area of CVAA that applies to games deals solely with communication. As such, the requirements don’t necessarily mean that games in general must become fully accessible. Rather, the CVAA requires any communication functionality like in-game chat and any UI used to navigate and operate communications functionality must be accessible to people of varying sight, motor, speech, cognitive, and hearing ability.
_
So what it basically comes down to is "things should be easy to navigate and use". And while it's obviously extra work for developers, it isn't "just" the disabled that see profit from it (let alone that others suffer). Extra credits made a video about this at one point. This one:



I suggest you watch it before further going into conspiracy theories.


----------



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

Taleweaver said:


> Wow...three pages of comments, and at best a slight handful of people not treating this like "EVERYONE IS AGAINST GAMERS!!!!" and rather for what it really is. Luckily there are posts like @Scarlet made:
> 
> 
> Most interesting part:
> ...



Meanwhile in the actual legislation (Starting on page 153):


> 14.20 Obligations.
> 
> General Obligations.
> With respect to equipment manufactured after the effective date of this part, a manufacturer of equipment used for advanced communications services, including end user equipment, network equipment, and software, must ensure that the equipment and software that such manufacturer offers for sale or otherwise distributes in interstate commerce shall be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, unless the requirements of this subsection are not achievable.
> ...


So, yes, gaming is screwed.



Taleweaver said:


> Extra credits made a video about this at one point. This one:
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest you watch it before further going into conspiracy theories.



Why should anyone watch a video series that is still headed and run by an abusive stalker, where his only *real* credit in "game development" is writing the story for _Farmville_, and the series' crowing achievement being that We are running out of internet (Among other things)?


----------



## slaphappygamer (Jan 3, 2019)

I’d just turn the accessibility options off. Doesn’t sound too hard.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 3, 2019)

Transdude1996 said:


> Why should anyone watch a video series that is still headed and run by an abusive stalker, where his only *real* credit in "game development" is writing the story for _Farmville_, and the series' crowing achievement being that We are running out of internet (Among other things)?


Okay...so instead of a multi-year running webshow that gives insight, a platform for developers, meaning and context from a known speaker we should follow you. A random dude on the internet with no credit in the game industry whatsoever.

I'll go with the "abusive stalker". But hey...feel free to believe that gaming is screwed if that's what makes you happy.


----------



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

Taleweaver said:


> Okay...so instead of a multi-year running webshow that gives insight, a platform for developers, meaning and context from a known speaker we should follow you.


At what point did I ever say that? You can read the actual legislation for yourself.

But, if you really insist upon it, why should we need a singular web-series run by a bunch of hacks to gain insight, provide a platform for, and/or give "context and meaning" to the jobs and demands of a game developer? What about all of the interviews that existed for the past 50 years? What about all the books published by those down in the dirt? What about the fact that there's developers who host their own channels or teach their own classes? What about the fact that social media allows for people to talk face-to-face with the developers themselves? What about the fact that there's near limitless resources to for you to gain your own insight and see exactly what it is that people have to deal with?


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 3, 2019)

Transdude1996 said:


> At what point did I ever say that? You can read the actual legislation for yourself.


You started this thread, and either ignore or slander sources of opinions that conflict with yours. Or is Ian Hamilton (who's a video game accessibility specialist) also not credible because he stole an apple once?



Transdude1996 said:


> But, if you really insist upon it, why should we need a singular web-series run by a bunch of hacks to gain insight, provide a platform for, and/or give "context and meaning" to the jobs and demands of a game developer? What about all of the interviews that existed for the past 50 years? What about all the books published by those down in the dirt? What about the fact that there's developers who host their own channels or teach their own classes? What about the fact that social media allows for people to talk face-to-face with the developers themselves? What about the fact that there's near limitless resources to for you to gain your own insight and see exactly what it is that people have to deal with?


I have no idea where your train of logic is going, but I don't intend to follow it. I picked one source I happen to know. If you've got some who actually have a solid opinion on the video game accesibility changes, then sure...go ahead and list them.


----------



## Aldoria (Jan 3, 2019)

It is a great initiative but the conditions are totally ridiculous in some cases


----------



## gnmmarechal (Jan 3, 2019)

Uh, this is a bit too much.


----------



## Minox (Jan 3, 2019)

Thanks for supporting non-US game developers


----------



## KingVamp (Jan 3, 2019)

Should this be closed for misinformation and redundancy?


----------



## Transdude1996 (Jan 3, 2019)

Taleweaver said:


> You started this thread, and either ignore or slander sources of opinions that conflict with yours. Or is Ian Hamilton (who's a video game accessibility specialist) also not credible because he stole an apple once?


Let's see, which is more reliable: words coming from someone I don't know who can say whatever the Hell he wants to make a new law sound pleasing and acceptable for parties to adopt, or *the actual legislation itself*?



Taleweaver said:


> I have no idea where your train of logic is going, but I don't intend to follow it. I picked one source I happen to know. If you've got some who actually have a solid opinion on the video game accesibility changes, then sure...go ahead and list them.


Motohiro Okubo, the producer of _Soul Calibur 6_:


> In terms of the volume, of course, there’s always resources and devleopment cycle considerations that we have to abide by – but I don’t actually think more is necessarily better.
> ...
> Our priority when developing the game first and foremost is creating something that’s fun and engaging for the player to experience. We want to make a solid game.


Oh, and esports players like BrolyLegs prove that we don't need any of this "accessibility" BS.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 3, 2019)

Transdude1996 said:


> Let's see, which is more reliable: words coming from someone I don't know who can say whatever the Hell he wants to make a new law sound pleasing and acceptable for parties to adopt, or *the actual legislation itself*?


Same goes for someone who wants to make a law sound displeasing.

As to your Okubo contribution...A producer saying " I don’t actually think more is necessarily better" isn't the same as saying "so yes, gaming is screwed".


----------



## ELY_M (Feb 9, 2019)

I am glad Super Mario Odyssey have texts.


----------



## fiis (Feb 9, 2019)

I remember seeing that commercial by microsoft, pretty neat of them I'd say. Being someone who played sports and video games growing up, I can't imagine not being able to do either one. At least now they can play video games.


----------

