>Hence proving my point that this is the stuff of big companies.

No, it doesn't and no it isn't. Your rhetorical question is fundamentally wrong, and I gave you examples to prove it.

And I'm not talking generally, I've destroyed the specific example you gave.

>Soon you will apply the same standard for video games too? After all, why can't people without arms enjoy the same video games as you do?

Yes. Yes they can.

But to address the other stuff you're saying...

Just because even big companies are doing it now, doesn't mean it is necessarily difficult or expensive. Microsoft went big and hard on it not because it needed massive investment, but because it warranted it and is a subject they're passionate about.

Accessibility is and deserves to be expected. There's no excuse for lacking it in the gaming space.

They did it at Microsoft scale and made a product that's effectively a standard now.

And disabled gamers represents more potential revenue. Win win.

(It wasn't immediate clear if you were arguing about the first or second part of the sentence. I'm assuming second, but in case it was the first "Sony and Nintendo" bit:

I didn't know the specifics of non-MS consoles because not owned a Nintendo console newer than a Wii, and have no reason to have a Playstation. Especially as many of the Sony exclusives are coming to PC anyway.

A quick look at PS4/PS5 accessibility features, they include RT transcription for squad comms in addition to standard closed captions, controller remapping, visual accessibility features. First game I picked to look at was TLoU Part 2 has a LOT of accessibility features with sensible presets for physical and cognitive disability.

And you possibly need an adapter, but you can use the Xbox Accessibility Controller with PS4/PS5 as well.)

All the controller-level stuff could literally be done by hobbyists and was done by hobbyists and small companies, and big companies.

A quick Google will show you stuff like the [Thomas] Controller from 2013.[1] AbleGamers have been going since mid-2000.

Big companies have started bringing economies of scale to help drive adoption. You are wrong with your fundamental premise, and I'm proving you wrong with the specific rhetorical question you posed.

And at the software level we're mostly talking about features that aren't expensive to implement. They're as close to free as you can get. Even solo devs can do the majority of it because it's largely stuff you'll have in for ease of debugging, localisation and QA.

With the possible exception of high-end new stuff like comms transcription, slap 'em under the right menu headers, add some sensible presets, GOOD TO GO.

It's basically a modern cheat menu.

[1] https://hackaday.com/2013/06/20/building-custom-game-control...

>"should"'s are meaningless.

No they aren't.

>Resources are limited and you can't expect to serve all the needs out there when you make a product.

Agreed.

>Making choices matter, and that's precisely why you cannot make a product for "everyone".

I'm not disputing that. But you're fundamentally wrong about accessibility. "Should" does matter, and the very example you used demonstrates why.

People without arms DO enjoy the same video games as I do. Just as it should be.

Edit: I forgot physical-level stuff with Nintendo. HORI (who aren't even Nintendo-sized, although not tiny either, have a similar product to the XAC for the Switch, the HORI Flex controller. [2] But you can use the XAC with the Switch anyway with adapters, possibly without adapters via BT.)

But while looking that up, I spotted a new line of Microsoft accessibility products ("Adaptive Accessories") that are hopefully dropping in a few days. Nice.

[2] https://www.flex-controller.com/product