Braille Display Users Deserve Better From Blindfold Games

I have already contacted Marty about this with a proposed solution (see below for a description). Allowing proper braille support would also be ideal for people who prefer to use standard VoiceOver gestures. I suspect that the reason that Marty has not implemented this is that, so far, he believes the number of people who would use this feature is very small and thus would not justify the necessary time involved in redesigning many of the games. This is why people who want this should contact him--he cannot read minds. My proposed solution

• In the top left corner of the screen, there would be a button to exit the game.
• Below that would be the last ten messages spoken by the speech engine displayed as text.
• Below that would be five buttons for performing the actions that would likely be most often used in the game. For example, in a card game, they might be "previous card", "next card", "play card", "draw card" and "announce cards in my hand". This would be similar to the gesture menu that is already in many games.

I’ve never used a braille display, so I can’t talk about this from experience, but you’ve raised an important issue here. I would’ve thought it was just good accessibility practice to use VoiceOver speech rather than having speech built in to the app, and I would encourage Marty to make the games playable with VoiceOver wherever possible. I honestly don’t understand the justification for not doing so. From the posts I’ve read, Marty’s reason is that it would make game play slower because the app can’t stop VO speech when the user performs a gesture, but if the games, especially text-based ones like the card games, could be made to use VO throughout instead of the TTS engine, that wouldn’t be an issue, for the same reason it isn’t an issue in any app that uses VoiceOver in the standard way. So while I sincerely appreciate Marty’s dedication to making accessible games, when there are so few of those in the app store, I’m glad you raised this issue..

There is another important reason that Marty uses custom speech and gestures. Many of the people who play Blindfold Games are people who are beginning to use iDevices and assistive technology. They need a highly polished experience where gestures are consistent and reliable--they do not know about advanced VoiceOver features like the four-finger tap, the rotor, or even how to change the speech rate or voice. Also, listening to the VoiceOver earcons and other extraneous information such as "button" detracts from the immersive game experience that Marty wants to create.

This is why I think the ideal solution is to modify the "use braille display" setting to use a text-based representation of the game, yet to still have the traditional option for those who prefer it.

I think the fact that the games are often played by people without much experience of iOS/VO is another reason for using VoiceOver as standard. It would make the games even more educational, because it would give people a fun way to learn about concepts like the rotor, and for people nervous about breaking something, as people who aren’t very confident with tech often are, it would give them a safe place to practice VO gestures.

Lysette, are you saying that you think that the games should only have the text-based option? If that is the case, the games would need to be completely redesigned because it would be inadequate for the speech to be written on the screen. As an example, in a card game, using what I proposed as an example which I think is a solution that could potentially be implemented relatively quickly, pressing the "flick left" and "flick right" buttons would make the app announce and display the currently active card, and pressing the "play card" button or its equivalent would perform an action on that card. If the games were redesigned, however, each card would be a button that could simply be flicked through and then activated, and there would probably also be buttons on the screen for other functions like drawing and discarding.

Here’s how I’d imagine it working ideally, again, using a card game as an example. If this would take too much work, maybe there’s a compromise, although I don’t know what that is yet. The cards would be displayed in a list so that the user could flick through them. Each one would have rotor actions: draw, play, discard, or whatever. For those who don’t want to use the rotor, a double-tap could perform the most common action, and, if this is possible without direct touch, a triple-tap the next-most common, Game status information would be reported with a two-finger double-tap or shake of the phone, and displayed at the top or bottom of the screen where it’s easy to find. In the textual display, the information would be separated into a couple of controls, so the order might be, for example, an exit game button right at the top, followed by information about your game, flick right from there for info about your opponent’s game, and then the list of cards after that.

I can definitely see what you're saying and think that it shouldn't be too difficult for most people to get the hang of. The problem, however, is that Marty would need to redesign many of the games. See this post on his blog for more information--it's from when he was told to combine them, but the principles are the same: https://blindfoldgames.org/2017/11/13/why-combining-games-is-a-bad-idea/

Basically, what I think we need to come up with is a solution that isn't too hard to implement, or a way for a radical redesign to be cost-effective.

As Marty is one day planning on bringing many of the Blind Fold Games to Android, I too also agree that a rewrite is in order. I'd make the platform act in a similar manner to how Quentin C's Playroom works. For those who want to use their own screen reader's voice/braille display (regardless of which one they use,) they should have the option if they so wish to do that.

I've been thinking about how to solve this problem for several weeks, ever since I got the email.

Firstly, Blindfold RS Games is a different beast, and to solve it requires collaboration between Blindfold Games and RS Games; we are talking about solutions.

Secondly, as I launch new games, such as the upcoming crossword puzzle, I've been working with the testers to see how to involve a braille display to enhance the game play. We are still testing some variants.

Thirdly, I am working with Apple to see if there are ways to get some of the functionality out of voice-over that I get with text-to-speech. The critical one is to be able to stop queued up sentences when you make a gesture. That's what makes the games so responsive. Even if there are 5 more sentences to speak, as soon as you touch the screen, it knows you want to move ahead in the game, and trashes whatever was about to play.

For anyone that thinks the games should work with voice-over instead of text to speech, most of the gestures that make the games work would no longer work - the voice-over engine processes the gestures first, which makes a gesture based game almost impossible. The games would be much slower to play and far less responsive.

However, the suggestion of buttons on a screen for common actions is actually not that unreasonable. I already do something like that in the game so I can debug the games in the iPhone simulator that runs on the mac, before actually testing it on a real phone. However, the bigger problem is that the screen in not voiceover enabled at that time, so even if there are buttons, they won't respond with voiceover labels, and you can't assign a braille display hotkey to them.

If I do make the screen voice over enabled, then lots of things in the game may break, since based on where you place your finger on the screen - for those people using the screen - may have unintended side effects. The internal grid or list cursor that keeps track of where you isn't synchronized with the voice-over positioning cursor, and that would require a major change to each game. All current swipe and tap actions on the screen would be lost; voice-over has priority on those gestures.

So the next best alternative is have an alternative screen with sufficient buttons that the game could be played in an entirely voice-over mode. There would be a button for each and every gesture, but properly labeled. For example, there would be a swipe left button as well as a button for "enter word".

Having the last 5 lines of text is a bit trickier for the following really dumb reason.

Apple requires that the screens look as nicely laid out as a visually oriented app. You can't imagine the number of times, I've had to adjust the font, or center playing boards, just to make Apple happy. In doing that, it removes much of the landscape from the screen for storing recently spoken sentences.

If I use an alternative screen that's fully voiceover, then we would have room for the last 5 lines of text. The screen would consist entirely of buttons and the recent text. I would appreciate feedback on that idea.

In response to one of the most common requests - centralized settings - I've been improving the Blindfold Games app, and some newer apps to test out a way to set your voice settings once and have all the games pick it up. As part of that project, I'll look into making the next game I build have a bunch of buttons and some way to get to whatever was spoken recently - probably a pop-up menu. We get feedback on that approach, we can continue to evolve it, the same way other things have evolved in the games.

By the way, I didn't answered your email yet because I've been pondering the solutions, and didn't want to commit until I have an action plan. Your wasn't the only one sent to me, but I do appreciate your insight.

By the way, while I do subscribe to dozens of Applevis forums for Blindfold Games, I didn't subscribe to this one, and I just happen to stumble upon it. In the future, if people have issues, please also post them in the Blindfold Games forum, so I can be made aware of them.

What I am working on first with Blindfold Wildcard is an alternative game screen that is braille display friendly, and only uses voiceover. It will be a setting for that game. As to moving a game entirely to voiceover for all users - such as word search - that would be a disservice to people who don't use a braille display would be forced to scroll through several buttons to find what the action they are looking for. Moat game players, even some I've spoken to who own multiple braille displays, only use the display on a PC and not on their mobile device.

On a braille display, with ios11, I've been told that you can map commonly used buttons to keys on the keyboard, so the alternate screen idea would work well.

I have no doubt that there are many braille display users who would be all too willing to assist in making all possible games accessible to those whose need for accessibility is often overlooked, and count myself among them.

To ignore the segment of the blind population who use braille displays by necessity or desire is to consciously overlook people whose need for app accessibility is already all too often passed over by many app developers. This is contemptible behavior on Marty's part, as he specifically develops games for the blind, yet blind braille display users cannot benefit from these because they are self-voicing.

To make these games inaccessible to braille display users lessens potential profit because very few will find themselves willing and able to recommend them as they are not equally accessible to all. Though my use of a braille display is a luxury, not a necessity, there are many for whom this is not the case. It is on their behalf that I cannot recommend Blindfold Games to anyone, as I cannot stand behind a company whose business practices I disagree with. The blind community would not countenance an app which was only accessible to braille display users while dismissing the needs of VoiceOver users after repeatedly being made aware of them, so why is the reverse perfectly acceptable to some?

A previous commenter said that it is possible Marty does not feel the time invested to rework these apps is worth it given the small number of users who would be helped by adding braille display support. Since when is a decision about app accessibility made based solely on the number of users who would benefit? Presumably, Marty is developing these games to offer blind gamers accessible, enjoyable games which is commendable. However, excluding a subset of the blind population because of their specific needs, or even personal preferences is not.

Why are these games only being made accessible to those who can take advantage of the self-voicing feature? Are the deaf-blind who must use braille displays out of necessity any less deserving of an enjoyable gaming experience than their hearing counterparts? Such an experience could be had by all if braille support were as high a priority as putting out numerous games seems to be. Perhaps more time should be spent on reworking available games in a way that allows for bbraille support where appropriate than continuing to release games which only VoiceOver users are able to truly enjoy.

The point was raised that many of those playing these games are new iPhone users. Isn't that all the more reason to use VoiceOver instead of having the games be self-voicing? This would allow new users to familiarize themselves with VoiceOver gestures in a fun learning environment, as well as offering braille display support to those who need or wish it.

No one is trying to ask for unreasonable amounts of work from you as an app developer. We are simply asking that you work together with braille display users to make these games accessible to all no matter their needs, or personal preferences.

It is obvious that you wish to provide apps to the blind community which offer something so few others do in the form of enjoyable, accessible gaming. Those efforts are greatly appreciated, and often praised by many VoiceOver users. It is very unfortunate, though, that those who use a braille display out of necessity are unable to enjoy an equally pleasant experience. It is my hope that work will be started to change this for all currently available games, as well as those in future.

The decision about whether to add braille support shouldn’t depend on demand. To quote Shanda’s post, “Since when is a decision about app accessibility made based solely on the number of users who would benefit?” The number of blind users is small, and the number of deaf-blind users even smaller, so accessibility features will never have a really high demand, but adding them is still the right thing to do. If you don’t have the time or money to make the necessary changes, ask for volunteers, start a crowdfunding campaign, and I’m sure many of us on AppleVis would be willing to chip in. I’d also think that making as many of your games usable with VoiceOver, without direct touch or the TTS engine, would reduce your workload in the long run because you wouldn’t have to keep creating a separate braille display mode. As I said earlier, I do sincerely appreciate that you’ve made so many games when so few mainstream games are accessible, but without braille support, they’re not fully accessible to all.

The broader lesson here is that, here on AppleVis, we don’t pay enough attention to users with other disabilities. Of course we’re a site for blind users, and so blindness issues will be the primary focus, but some blind people have other disabilities that mean they have additional accessibility needs, and we also need to make sure we’re not breaking accessibility for other disabled users when apps are made accessible with VoiceOver. That’s something all of us, myself included, need to think about more when we contribute to the site.

Firstly I will say that I fully acknowledge the work you have done Marty in creating your series of games, clearly they have had an impact and mean a lot to many in the community which is fantastic.
That said, I am rather saddened to read your comments stating that the level of perceived demand will effect your decision on this. That's the kind of logic we as a community have fought against for years, in advocating to companies like Amazon (Kindle), Spotify and Facebook to try to ensure that we have full access to those services, in spite of our respectively low numbers. The fact is that as well as universal design being the best way to maximise a user base, it is the right thing to do.
For some in our community, braille is an option, for others including the deaf-blind members of our community, it is quite simply a necessity.
So I genuinely am sad to see that particular line of argument being put forward, and hope you will think again.
I have never questioned your right to charge money for your work, just like any developer has a right to be paid for their work. Nor do I doubt that there would be work involved in this, just as there is work in creating more games and doing regular updates for existing ones, but I would feel strongly that this issue should be given some priority.
My solidarity to those who require braille support.

I am both blind and also a braille user. That being said, and I agree there needs to be better access, @Dave82, you missed one very important difference. Amazon, Facebook and Spotify are all huge companies with the purse strings to make their apps accessible. What's a few thousand dollars to them. There was an app that used to be accessible which went through a re-design phase which took away its accessibility. I called the company and spoke with the higher-ups asking them to bring back accessibility and explaining about Voiceover on an iPhone. A couple of days later, I got a call back and they explained that, while they were sympathetic to me, they were a small company and the cost of having to completely re-design the app would be more than they could financially afford. Just wanted to throw that out there.

If, when you suggest that I or someone else coordinate the fundraising effort, you mean I should start and manage the crowdfunding page, I’d have to research the legal ramifications of managing something like this on behalf of someone else, since I assume I’d be handling money on your behalf, unless there’s a way I could just be an administrator and leave the handling of finances to you. I’ve never done anything like this, so I just don’t know what sort of risk I’d be taking on. Or did you have something else in mind? Were you just hoping I’d promote the cause, for instance?

As an alternative or supplement to the crowdfunding page, you could add a tip jar to each game app, or maybe just the most popular 5 or 10 games, so that people could make donations as in-app purchases. That would make it easy to donate, as people wouldn’t even have to enter their card details. Would it be worth the effort to add that? How much would you need to raise anyway?

As for your limited time, given the extremely low employment rate among VI people, I’m sure there would be quite a few aspiring IT professionals who would volunteer to help with the coding as a way of getting some work experience. Unfortunately I have neither the skills nor the resources to help with that side of things myself, but I’m sure there would be people on here who would love to have that opportunity.

Hi @sockhopsinger while I get where you’re coming from there, my experience is in fact that often it’s the smaller developers who can adapt and make changes more easily and quickly, less red tape internally and often less complex products.
But I know what you’re saying. The fact is though that I’m not for one second suggesting that Marty should or could overhaul his apps overnight, it might take some significant time to reach the point he would like to get to, but that he commits to trying to solve this issue, which is of great importance to some members of our community.
The argument about the size of the demand is inherently problematic for me. It’s not a feature request we’re discussing here, it’s a need for a group of users. Just as we as a blind and low vision community don’t accept it in the mainstream, nor should Braille dependent users accept it within the community. That principle was the nub of my point really, not so much the resources.

I'm not a Braille user, but agree with many of the comments here; would much prefer these games to use VO instead of being self-voicing; in theory, wouldn't that instantly improve the Braille support?

My second thought is probably better kept to myself as I don't know how to articulate it without coming across as overly snarky, but I will say this: given the way that so many contacted Apple and fought to keep these games in the app store, it's sad that the wants/needs of loyal players are being all but disregarded by this developer. For myself, I seriously regret the money I've given to this developer: probably well over $100 over the years. If I had it to do over, I probably wouldn't support this developer at all as it seems that the only thing he truly cares about, at least at this point, seems to be making money. Yes, making money is important; we all need money to live, but... I don't know. Doing some guestimating, it would seem that this developer has made quite a bit of money from the blind community; I know he's made far more than I'd care to admit just from my purchases, and I'm pretty sure most people posting here have bought at least a few of the games, otherwise Braille support wouldn't be the issue it's become.
In closing, all I can say is that I hope the developer does the right thing, and if not, I hope that people will take note and stop supporting him so unconditionally.

I have a few thoughts about recent comments.

Shanda wrote "Since when is a decision about app accessibility made based solely on the number of users who would benefit?" The answer is quite a lot. I shall use an analogy.

The World Wide Web Consortium says that websites should make alternative pages which have the content but using simpler language for people with cognitive disabilities. This is rated as a level AAA guideline which means that it is difficult and possibly time-consuming to achieve, and may only increase the websites' accessibility for a very small percentage of the user base. How many websites do you know that offer their content in easy-to-understand language? Very few. I cannot even think of a website promoting accessibility that offers this feature.

For Marty, I think braille display access is a similar concept. Unless there is a financial incentive to assisthim such as a crowd-funding campaign or a very strong desire from a large number of people, does the necessity of some people to access these games which detracts from Marty's ability to spend his time making more games for the vast majority of people worth it?

Accessibility is the right thing to do, but limits need to be created. I fully believe that universl access is the best possible outcome, but only we as a community will be able to decide that through supporting Marty by using the new mode in Blindfold Wildcard and by supporting the crowd-funding campaign.

Please do not think I am doubtful about whether this will eventuate. I continue to be surprised at what our community has been able to pull off. Think about the crowd-funding campaign for Dictation Bridge where over $20,000 was raised in the space of one month to help people, the majority of whom struggle to type due to physical disabilities in addition to their blindness. The same thing may happen here; only time will tell.

I'd just like to suggest one thing that, if you decide to go through with the crowdfunding, may get more people to donate based on platform alone. Indiegogo in my opinion is a much easier, much more accessible crowdfunding platform. I'd go for Indiegogo at this point.

I don't have your games because I can't afford them right now. I may skim through them and see what I haven't tried or something I don't know. I am not much of a game person honestly.

Marty,

I am not a braille user myself (or even a gamer). However, I really hope that you will take on board the comments and suggestions made in this thread, as ensuring that all blind and low vision users have fair and equal access to your games is simply the right thing to do.

I think that we all are aware and accept that there would be some challenges and issues along the way, but this thread should have made it clear that there are many people keen to help you with overcoming those challenges; and that nobody is expecting it to necessarily be quick or easy. People just want to be able to play your games, and you should take great pride and satisfaction from this being the case.