How strange. For me, the question of aging isn't about losing one's ability to play twitchy games -- it's about developers ceasing to create the kinds of games that satisfy the interests and lifestyles of highly experienced gamers.

That's not an argument against serving truly disabled gamers. It's more irritation that having played Atari 2600 games would be used to try to inflate the number of "disabled" gamers. AbleGamers does not automatically speak for older gamers.

I also don't care much for the offhand assumption that age and disability are synonymous. "Diminishing skills set?" What about the tactical, operational and strategic knowledge harvested from a lifetime of playing computer games? Why assume that the only kind of computer game possible is one that requires fine motor skills and sub-second reaction times?

Good point Bart. My wife for one has severe motion sickness and therefore reduced her game playing habits significantly when games like Doom came out. This is regardless of her age which I believe was about 20 at the time. Yet at the same time she can play board games of great skill such as Settlers Of Catan or Carcassone.

What I'm saying is, yes I do believe there is more market to be gained by thinking about these kind of strategies but as you say it's definitely not an age based thing.

As a 37 year old gamer who started on the Intellivision and Atari 2600, I can surely testify that my playing tastes and skills have changed throughout the years but, luckily, this has nothing to do with disability yet...

What I see is that time constraints limit my playing sessions but, nonetheless, I am still attracted to games with immersive storylines and gameplay mixing strategic and twitch skills.
What I wish for is games with broad, forgiving difficulty settings (this has little to do with actual "skills", they may still be there, but with patience instead: due to busy life I may not be able to replay a boss battle too many times to get those tricky final shots right in a relative hurry and frustration can kick in earlier than years ago) and check/save points placed at shorter intervals so that a game can be dropped almost at any time if something else pops up.
Obviously, game tastes may also change as we get older: today I'm much more attracted to titles like Heavy Rain than the n-th iteration of Super Mario Bros. but, of course, this can be subjective and I guess there's tons of older gamers that still love to go out and save a princess by jumping over mushrooms instead! :P
Anyway, I think "the hardcore’s diminishing skills set" is not the key point.
The need for more mature themes (not necessarily involving brutal splattering violence) and smaller gameplay chunks are what adult gamers would look for, IMHO.

Of course, Mr. Barlet's points regarding how to help disabled gamers to enjoy games are all well thought and I hope most new games will take them into account to allow a new audience to enjoy games more and more.

"My bias is that as people age, they are less likely to be interested in games, but I agree that will change as today’s 20-something hardcore gamers age"

This is fair enough, and seems a reasonable representation of the same thing I've observed. For instance, my grandmother wouldn't want to touch games with a barge pole, my mother is more interested in them casually, and I hope that I'll be playing them well into my twilight years.

Either way, simple things like a reduction in play length and adaptive (or on the fly) difficulty settings seem to be naturally aimed towards the middle aged gamer. For one the working gamer needs shorter games, and more accessible games due to time restrictions.

As for "diminishing skill sets", well this is going to be an issue for some middle aged to elderly gamers, and for others (the blessedly lucky) it won't be. That said, "twitch" games, can often be played using strategy (and knowledge) rather than incredible reflex, especially shooters. The brain is a remarkable thing, and as one skill sets power is reduced it will adapt and find a more empowering strategy, so I don't truly believe that slightly dulled reflexes will truly bar the aging from playing such games.

As for the techniques used to aid in overcoming a disabled persons barriers to entry, well those I applaud, they'd be useful for disabled persons of all ages.

Oh yeah, what is Bungie thinking making Halo: Reach, all the money they're missing out on!

I think the biggest problem is that making games for older people would involve catering more to their tastes than skill set. This would require the younger skewing industry to research old people's tastes and whatnot. Which won't be a problem once developers grow up and are old people themselves.

Games that aren't accessible to disabled gamers are just as non-accessible to gamers who want a simpler controlling game. Something I'm always going to support. They're really just not comparable to old people.

The biggest problem really would be that any talented company is already making good games, and they'd be missing out on profit by restructuring their company to provide for this different set of gamers. Except for maybe Nintendo, but again, they're getting pretty old, Animal Crossing was made as the type of game that they themselves would want to play.

And any company who's not making a profit with their existing games probably makes bad games, and would make bad games for old people, just like companies make bad games for kids.

The problem is the same problem as ever, to find the balance of accessibility and keeping your game not dumbed down. Complexity vs shallowness. I guess I just find the process of specifically targeting anyone (except maybe games for the blind, deaf, etc) to be redundant. It should be every artist's will to transcend genres and target audiences. Else you're just writing high budget fan fic.

I disagree with Mr. Pachter somewhat uninformed comment about, "accessible with motion controls that require somewhat lower levels of manual dexterity" the disabled community, that I am part of, has a real wait and see with these games. Lack of manual dexterity is an issue across the population, not just the disabled. If we were to subscribe to half of the "features" shown in the Xbox demo last year then many disabled will be left out of these games out-right. Standing, moving your arms, bending these are all issues that many gamers with disabilities cannot over- come. These motion control + camera games MAY in fact be less accessible. We just don't really know yet.

I also urge Mr. Pachter to read the paper "My bias is that as people age, they are less likely to be interested in games, but I agree that will change as today’s 20-something hardcore gamers age" there is mounds of data from the ESA that that transition has happened. Hardcore gaming has been around for some time and while the games have changed the love of video games has not.

Don't get me wrong, the AbleGamers Foundation understands that all games are not going to be accessible by all gamers, but the comment in the story is very shortsighted and misleads the reader that the issues will become moot in a matter of weeks, just not true.

Might I suggest that the HD consoles like almost every console before them are leaving an unquantified and potentially substantial sum of money on the table by not offering left handed controllers?

People form neuron connections more rapidly at certain times of their lives. This rate is very high during childhood and adolescence and slows considerably upon reaching middle aged.

Older gamers have completely different tastes because they are literally wired differently. Thinking spatially, in 3-d, is very difficult for them as they grew up in a 2d world.

So yes, games today tend to ignore them. But then again the older people get the less likely they are to play games on a serious basis.

The DS and Wii are basically systems for the very young and older, casual gamers. I'm not sure that the industry is losing money because Nintendo certainly does a good job to appealing to them.

If you look at a person who is 65 today, they most likely have used computers in work and have one at home. They send emails, they play games - maybe not the same ones the 20 year old plays, but my guess is that the 40 year old has changed tastes in games as well. The premise is that when you consider that over 40% of people 65 and older have one or more disability, if you don't provide some accommodation for their eyesight, hearing, or motor skill loss, you have lost them as a customer. And 40% of people over 65 is a lot of people - and will become more as the Baby Boomers age. That could be a lot of money lost!!

As a lefty, I also agree with Marc that consoles should be adjustable.

And by the way - I'm an over 70 gamer as well as a game developer. And I believe more and more people who play games will continue to want to play even as they age - if they can do so.

An interesting personal experience: My dad, coming up on retirement, is a smart guy, and he irregularly plays various PC games, particularly of the WW2/Modern Warfare FPS variety, as well as your run of the mill internet backgammon, poker, whathaveyou. He's always been into tech and modern games, and somehow he seems to complete all the various splinter cells, call of dutys (or should that be calls of duty? or call of duties?) - he can deal with it.

So it utterly surprised me that he totally couldn't wrap his head around Portal. He loved it for sure (and that's the point really) but he needed persistent help. What I noticed in his play style was:
1. Not being able to deal with the spatial mind bending - he was definitely confused.
2. Not experimenting - My brother and I would attempt something different every second - he'd wait, try to think it out, and get it wrong.

Now I'm no developmental neurologist, but while I seem to disagree with Thomas on a fair bit, there's definitely something to the difference in mental processing amongst the older generations. At some point people become increasingly hardwired though perhaps that can be delayed by continuous new experiences. It seems complex spatial reorientation and complex evolving interactivity will be difficult to deal with if you haven't done it in your youth and/or kept doing it. Obviously a lot of elderly people can drive, and a lot can fly helicopters, which are both tasks with complex spatial manipulations and rules combined with a complex interface, but I bet only a few who can drive and worked an ordinary job their whole lives could now master Steel Battalion. I don't know what this all means, but identifying the way people think as they age would help games hit the baby boomer market better (don't assume they don't want to!), and help create games that capture and keep the younger gens along their lives.

P.S. My dad also plays the bass guitar. He's in a band that actually gets weekly gigs at a bar. He could not get Guitar Hero. Absolutely couldn't get it. And no, his name isn't Randy Marsh.

It might help to understand that at least in America the population is getting sicker. I don't mean as people age. I mean, 1 out of 100 children born today will have some level of Autism. That is a staggering statistic. This generation of children will be the first to live shorter life spans due to obesity related diseases. Unless people wake up to what's killing them (hint: it's fake food, too many vaccines, pollution, big-pharma drugs), disabilities will skyrocket in years to come.

Without reading other comment's, my quick two cents is that I really think fully customizable control schemes should be a MUST in any console game. As a software developer, I know this isn't that difficult to do, and it doesn't take away anything since "most" people will use the defaults anyway.

But for someone who only has a partial left hand, I simply have to pass up some great console only games because I can't play them due to the control configuration.

It's frustrating, and at the same time I want to send many praises to the developers who do include customizable controls in their games. It's a blessing to those who need, and no hindrance at all for those who don't. It' just makes sense... so why not just do it?!

(edit: Not to mention, it's a no-go to use the nunchuck + wiimote... but that's a limitation I can understand because it's hardware based and should not be expected to cater to the "abnormal" physical characteristics of some people.)

@Thomas Lo, I'm sorry but what? Developers are old, well older than their target market. So if old people can't think in 3D terms as much as 2D terms, then how are old people making games?

The point being is, that assumption is wrong. Some developers do have accessibility features. Though not to a huge degree. Valve's Left 4 Dead series captions all audio, event he sound of the special infected so gamers talking on the headset could see a Hunter's scream and prepare to counter them.

If gaming is going to expand to a broader audience than increasing accessibility is going to be needed. Although, I would warn that such features must not be forced, but planned to be as robust as possible.

While I love Splinter Cell: Conviction, the lack of any real strategy for non-lethal playthroughs and the focus of action-oriented paths means that stealth players are just left in the cold. They have to deal with the accessibility features placed to make the genre appeal to a broader audience at the expense of it's core fans' desires.

This is a challenge to the industry and it will not be "completed" in one generation, but has to be a continuous progression, just like the ""Go Green" initiatives moving through companies like Ubisoft, EA, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony.

Back to you Thomas Lo, how old are old gamers to you? If you go to some sites like Colony of Gamers, Joystickrequired, Co-optimus.com, you will see a range of gamers with different backgrounds and ages, that have a similarly varied range of interests. These include but not limited to cooperative play, space sims, stealth games, board games, RTS, FPSs, family games to play WITH their kids (but not dumbed down), etc.

This makes me think about the discussions the industry had a decade or more ago, how do you attract female gamers. Gamasutra had an article about this themselves in the late 1990s to early 2000s.

These are still gamers, they played games as kids and they may have continued to play games or just had the occasional playthrough. Or they could have gotten back into it due to their kids interest.

But gamers enjoy the same stuff through their lives. The only difference is their taste has changed. Like a seasoned chef versus a newcomer, experience speaks volumes and older gamers are still as engaged in the industry as much or more than their younger counterparts.

Older gamers could grow up to become the developers or business leaders of the industry today.

And those sites I mentioned, most of them they revolve around arranging playthroughs without the hassle of random players that may throw insults. And they have monthly to weekly events, so yes they have families and can't play all day long, but they are just as much tenacious in their endeavors as their counterparts. Same goes for disabled gamers.

Has disabilities stopped these people from being athletes or college educated, NO! Why denied them games they would enjoy and find challenging when they are as passionate about the industry as any person involved.

But I do agree, business-wise the figures would have to be solidified in order to get companies to take risks. Because that's 3-5 years they will be spending on a project and they need a good reason to incorporate accessibility features or have games target disabled players in general.

PS: No offense Thomas Lo, just felt that needed a response.

Pachter continued, "My bias is that as people age, they are less likely to be interested in games, but I agree that will change as today’s 20-something hardcore gamers age..."

"Many gamers started playing Atari in the '70s and '80s and are now 50 years and older..." said Stephanie Walker, founder of AbleGamers. "They're essentially being shut out."

Pachter should get his statistics from Wendy. In the meantime I want to point out that before you make games that older people can play, you need to make games they want to play...and many of the 30-50 year old people Wendy mentioned are already complaining that too many games (*cough* Nintendo) are too childish even after being a franchise for 20 years.
Forget getting my grandmother to play, she doesn't even know how to turn on my laptop. My mother is much younger than my grandmother and the games available don;t interest her at all. She bought a Wii so she could try bowling and after one try she has never touched her Wii again..and she bought several other games at the same time (factor that into your sales stats Nintendo)!