Blind support (category proposal)
 

Slightly over a year ago, there was some discussion about custom clients and their impact on blind players: (do a find search for "blind").

About six months ago on another discussion forum, I proposed the idea of a separate category for 'blind support'. I think TMS could also benefit from such a category, as it would help get positive attention from AudioGames.net and similar sites.

My initial thought was to have four options:

[ ] UNPLAYABLE: The mud requires a special client without screen reader functionality, or for some other reason cannot be played with a screen reader client.

[ ] LIMITED SUPPORT: There are difficulties for blind players, such as not being able to switch off colour, prompt, or ascii maps.

[ ] STANDARD SUPPORT: Most stock muds fall into this catagory, and it would also be the default.

[ ] ACTIVE SUPPORT: Includes additional features designed to aid blind players, such as alternative table displays and customisable aliases.

The above would also include a text box, for clarifying exactly what sort of support (or lack of support) is available.


If the above is considered too much for such a minority (only 277 of the 10765 characters in my mud use the 'screen reader' mode) then perhaps it could instead be a simple yes/no radio button in the features section (ideally with a text box as well, but even just the radio button on its own would be enough to justify advertising TMS on forums for blind gamers).

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

I think this is a fantastic idea.

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

Great idea.

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

I like this as well. NW has numerous blind players. Go Text Muds!

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

Definitely pencil me in under "support".

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

My head coder uses a text-enlarger to read so we're loathe to introduce anything that will tax the ability of a person with visual impairment from enjoying the experience. I'm not sure where we'll stand in the options suggested. We'll probably qualify as "standard support" even though we'll definitely be taking visual impairment heavily in mind throughout the process of creating the game. We've found that a MUD client coupled with thoughtful design can eliminate most obstacles.

That said, I support this search option completely.

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

Sounds like a good idea to me, can't see any reason why not to add something like this!

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

I too like this idea.

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

It would be 100% buzzword compliant to frame this concern in terms of 'accessibility'. Like over here:

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

Yeah, I remember killing some blind guy on Kavir's mud a while back. GW II. The kid sucked at pkilling but I was genuinely excited that a blind person could actually play a MUD. Needless to say after I realized he was blind I left him alone after that..

-D

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

Accessibility includes far more than just blind and visually impaired users, though. While my mud does provide extra support for blind players, those with learning disabilities or motor/dexterity impairments are probably going to find it less accessible than most other muds (because there's a lot of complexity, and a lot of typing).

If there was just a single "accessibility" radio button with a text box, I suppose you could click the option and then state exactly what sort of accessibility features you support (although I fear we'd see a lot of muds clicking the radio button and then writing in the box "Fully accessible to those with hearing impairments"). But I don't think the four choices would work so well unless you split it up into specific disability types.

Another option would be to have a radio button for "Requires a custom client", although there are very few text-based muds that would need to select it. I think this would be much less useful for visually impaired players, although it could be of interest to others.

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

And not only that, but accessibility (including for the blind) is not so much governed by the MUD/MUSH/etc. but the client. The best the game can do is to not throw up roadblocks for clients. In other words, the game can at most promise to enable accessibility, not provide it (unless it provides a client with those features).

Re: Blind support (category proposal)
 

While it's certainly the client that enables accessibility (at least in the case of blind players), there are still numerous ways in which the mud can facilitate that accessibility. For example: