Originally Posted by dargon
You're right, there are lawyers out there that love to do those wonderful lawsuits that take up so much US court time. Now I just checked the website for the ADA, and a quick site search for the word software turned up 4 pages of results, NONE of which involve games. Now, maybe I missed one, always possible. However, from what I can see, the ADA is only involved with making sure the handicapped have access to businesses and services. Guildwars is NEITHER, it's a game. Sure it's nice to be able to play now and then, but your life will not get screwed up if you can't. As far as it being a requirement that ALL software be accessable to the handicapped, please show me a copy of Doom 3 that a blind person can play. Till then, while you may or may not agree with the interface change, it's ANets product, nobody forces you to support them if you disagree with something they did/didn't do.
|
Did they change it maliciously? No. Do they know about it? Yes. Therefore it could be concluded that they designed a product that specifically and unnecessarily excludes persons with certain visual impairments. And they have the ability to correct it, but don't. That could fall under the ADA. Besides that's what legal precedent is for.
Frankly I think that we should give them more time. The new interface is only a week old, let them tweek it.
But, the develiopers need to think about this.
Will the going back to the old interface cost them customers, probably not.
Will the new interface cost thenm customers, definitely yes.
From a pure marketing stand point it is better to go back.
Me personally I don't care either way about the new ui. As much as I hate to see people leave over this issue, this will not cause me to not buy chapter 3; although it is on the list of reason not to.
This is an unpopular change that serves no porpuse, and can and should be removed