Welcome back for another edition of the GAconf Awards, once again recognising and celebrating the efforts of people across and around game development to raise the bar for accessibility.
This year we have 21 categories, shortlisted by an expert panel. The winners will decided on by a combination of public and jury vote (public vote coming in November), and announced in January by the inimitable Steve Saylor together with a host of special guests.
AAA excellence
Accessibility in a game made on big budget / by a big team
AA excellence
Accessibility in a game made on a medium budget / by a mid-sized team
Indie excellence
Accessibility in a game made on a small budget / by a small team
Best Deaf & hard of hearing accessibility
Accessibility for players who are Deaf or hard of hearing
Best motor/mobility accessibility
Accessibility for players with motor impairment
Best blind & low vision accessibility
Accessibility for players with low/no vision
Best cognitive accessibility
Accessibility for neurodiversity and cognitive/learning disability
Best mental health accessibility
Accessibility for trauma, phobia, and other mental health conditions
Best representation
Representation of disabled characters and experiences
Best journalism
Article about game accessibility
Best academic research
Published academic paper on game accessibility
Best assistive technology
New or improved accessibility tech
Best accessibility resource
Resource for players or resource for developers
Best comms and marketing
Efforts to share & promote accessibility work with the community, and to share & promote in an accessible way
Most improved
Progress through patches or remakes/remasters
Best mod
Progress through community mods
Greatest accessibility innovation
New steps forward for the industry
Most dedicated publisher
The publisher making the most significant or most consistent accessibility efforts
Most dedicated studio
The studio making the most significant or most consistent accessibility efforts
MVP award for unsung hero
An individual developer without a large public presence making significant and consistent efforts internally within a company (this can include people working in accessibility roles)
The advocacy award
This award can be someone either in a development role or not – anyone who is an advocate using their voice to make a difference across the wider industry
ELIGIBILITY
The eligibility period covers November 16th 2024 to November 15th 2025
NOMINATIONS
Our jury panel for 2026 is:
- Alex Carey – Strength & Dexterity Specialist, PlayAbility
- Anna Waismeyer – Senior Product Manager, Xbox
- Antonio Martinez – Editor In Chief, Game Accessibility Nexus
- Cari Watterton – Senior Accessibility Specialist, Scopely
- Cameron Akitt – Senior Accessibility Researcher, PlayStation Studios
- Capgame
- David Tisserand – Director of Accessibility, Ubisoft
- Elisabeth Sivertsen (Arevya)
- Ian Hamilton
- Jo Kulik – Senior Research & Accessibility Lead, PlaytestCloud
- Jesse Anderson (IllegallySighted)
- Laura Kate Dale
- Many Cats Studios
- Marijn Rongen (ActiveB1t) – Website Operations, Can I Play That?
- Melanie Eilert
- Mila Pavlin – UX Design Director, Wizards of the Coast
- Morgan Baker – Game Accessibility Lead, EA
- SightlessKombat – Accessible Gaming Officer, RNIB
- Stacey Jenkins – Senior Accessibility Design Specialist, Ubisoft
- Steve Saylor
- Tara Voelker, Senior Accessibility Producer, Netflix
- Victor Branco, Low Vision Editor, Game Accessibility Nexus
Each panellist puts forward as many nominations as they they want for consideration. From that large pool, judges vote for their top five for each category. The five which receive the most votes in each category become the finalists.
Jury members can put forward whatever they want for consideration, but are not allowed to vote for anything that they have links to – worked directly on, consulted on, voting for colleagues, etc.
WINNERS
The winners are then decided by a separate vote on which of the 5 finalists in each category should win. It is voted on by both the jury and by A public vote. A Google account is required to vote, as a protection against someone voting multiple times.
The votes are weighted 2/3 jury and 1/3 public. For example if 30% of the jury and 50% of the public vote for a finalist, that’s 30 points from the jury and 25 points from the public for a total of 55 points.
This balance gives some protection against vote-rigging (e.g. a AAA asking everyone in the company to vote, guaranteeing success even if nobody else votes for them), while giving enough weight to the public vote that when the judges vote is reasonably close (which it often is) the public vote decides the result.
Academic papers are generally locked behind journal paywalls, accessible only to people within academia or for a fee. For this reason the best academic paper works slightly differently. It has its own jury, consisting of Elisabeth Whyte, Kathrin Gerling and Ian Hamilton, who research papers over the past year, and vote between them on finalists and winner.
The list of winners is not known outside of the event team, the winners themselves find out via the stream at the same time as the other viewers.
WHO FUNDS THE AWARDS?
There are a number of costs involved, from trophy manufacture to accessibility of the video stream. We do not accept direct sponsorshup of the awards, instead we absorb these costs into the funds raised to put on the GAConf conference.
LAST YEAR'S WINNERS
