I think you've got it. Something you often hear is that if "the game was designed that way", then any affordances would run contrary to its artistic vision, and therefore asking for accommodations is tantamount to censorship. It's arguing that the design being like that (and therefore being exclusionary towards disabled folks) is justified, and all its consequences are natural and intended and therefore you just gotta tough it out or not play.
I've said it myself, I have no interest in games that are hard for hard's sake or employ punishing failstates, and so I mostly don't pay attention to the difficulty wank. But it seems every time it comes up, some people start projecting some fucking agenda on the people reporting on it, and getting a few disabled gamers who agree with them to call the act of pointing out the design of a game is exclusionary (not even commenting on whether it's good or bad, even! Just pointing it out!) patronising/condescending/presumptious/ableist/what-have-you
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 15/4/19 08:35 (UTC)I've said it myself, I have no interest in games that are hard for hard's sake or employ punishing failstates, and so I mostly don't pay attention to the difficulty wank. But it seems every time it comes up, some people start projecting some fucking agenda on the people reporting on it, and getting a few disabled gamers who agree with them to call the act of pointing out the design of a game is exclusionary (not even commenting on whether it's good or bad, even! Just pointing it out!) patronising/condescending/presumptious/ableist/what-have-you