Accessibility in gamified experiences: how to avoid leaving participants behind
A gamified experience can have a strong concept, an engaging narrative and high participation while still excluding part of its audience.
This may happen because instructions are only delivered verbally, the screen contrast is insufficient, every challenge depends on speed or the activity requires a device that not everyone can use comfortably.
Accessibility is not simply about adapting an experience for a particular person once a need becomes visible. It means designing the experience from the beginning so that it can be used in different ways and so that barriers are not an inevitable consequence of the chosen mechanic.
This does not mean removing difficulty. An accessible activity can still be demanding, competitive or complex. The challenge should come from the content, strategy or decisions, rather than from unnecessary obstacles that participants must overcome before they can engage.
Accessibility is not a single issue
Accessibility is often associated only with visual or physical disabilities. In practice, a gamified experience can create many different barriers.
At a minimum, it is worth reviewing:
- Visual barriers. - Auditory barriers. - Physical and motor barriers. - Cognitive or comprehension barriers. - Language barriers. - Technological barriers. - Barriers related to time and pressure. - Social or emotional barriers.
A participant may need more time to read, be unable to hear an instruction clearly, use a phone with one hand, find it difficult to distinguish certain colours or feel uncomfortable contributing publicly.
Many needs are also temporary or dependent on the context. A noisy room can create an auditory barrier for anyone. A poor connection can prevent people with no usual technological difficulties from participating. A screen placed too far away can make correctly designed content unreadable.
1. Provide instructions through more than one channel
One of the most common barriers appears before the activity even begins: participants do not understand what they are expected to do.
When instructions are only explained verbally, someone may miss important information because of noise, distraction, hearing difficulties or arriving a few minutes late.
Whenever possible, instructions should also be available in writing and remain accessible throughout the experience.
A clear introduction should explain:
- Where participants need to go. - Which action they should take first. - Whether they are participating individually or in teams. - How much time is available. - How to ask for help. - Which data is being collected. - What happens when the activity ends.
Instructions should be short, ordered and testable. Asking someone to explain the process in their own words can reveal problems before the activity is launched to the full group.
2. Do not use colour as the only source of information
Colour is useful for organising an interface, showing status or distinguishing teams, but it should not be the only element communicating a difference.
For example, if a correct answer is shown only in green and an incorrect answer only in red, some participants may not be able to distinguish them clearly.
Information can also be reinforced through:
- Text. - Icons. - Shapes. - Patterns. - Different positions. - Confirmation messages.
It is also important to review the contrast between text and background, avoid excessively thin fonts and use a text size that is readable on the actual device used during the activity.
Checking the design on the creator’s monitor is not enough. It should be tested on phones, projectors, in brightly lit rooms and under realistic conditions.
3. Design alternatives for audio and video content
Video, sound effects and narration can strengthen the experience, but they should not contain essential information without an alternative.
A relevant video should include captions or a transcript. A sound that signals the beginning of a challenge can be accompanied by a visual indicator. A recorded explanation can also be provided as text.
Background music should not make speech difficult to understand. At an in-person event, the sound system, room echo and audience noise can make apparently clear content difficult to follow.
The alternative does not have to reproduce every detail in exactly the same form. It should provide the information required to participate and make decisions under equivalent conditions.
4. Avoid making every action depend on motor precision or speed
Some activities require participants to tap quickly, drag small objects, hold down an element or perform precise movements on a touchscreen.
These actions can be difficult for people with reduced mobility, tremors, temporary injuries or less responsive devices.
To reduce these barriers:
- Use sufficiently large buttons. - Leave space between interactive elements. - Allow participants to correct a selection. - Avoid complex gestures when a simple alternative exists. - Do not require extreme speed to confirm an answer. - Support keyboard navigation when the experience is used on a computer.
When an activity is completed in teams, passing the device to another person does not always solve the problem. Participation means being able to influence the decisions, not simply watching someone else operate the interface.
5. Reduce unnecessary cognitive load
An experience can be inaccessible even when it works perfectly from a technical perspective.
Crowded screens, long instructions, constantly changing rules or too many simultaneous tasks can make participation harder for people experiencing attention difficulties, fatigue, stress or different ways of processing information.
Useful measures include:
- Presenting one main action per screen. - Breaking instructions into steps. - Maintaining a consistent visual structure. - Explaining the rules before introducing exceptions. - Using direct sentences. - Avoiding distracting or continuously repeating animations. - Allowing participants to review important information.
Simplifying the interaction does not mean simplifying the subject. A practical case can be intellectually complex while still being presented clearly.
6. Review how time is used
Timers create tension and can increase energy, but they are also a common source of exclusion.
Speed may be justified when it is genuinely part of the objective. In many activities, however, participants are rewarded for answering quickly even when the intended focus is understanding, judgement or collaboration.
Before adding a time limit, ask:
- Is speed genuinely a relevant competency? - Is there enough time to read and understand the information? - Can the time be extended without changing the objective? - Is a constant countdown necessary? - Does the score depend too heavily on a few seconds?
One option is to use time as a narrative device without making it the main scoring criterion. Another is to provide generous time windows or allow participants to continue when they are ready.
7. Do not make public participation compulsory
Some people are comfortable speaking in front of the group, appearing on a leaderboard or improvising a scene. Others are not.
Social pressure should not be confused with engagement.
A more inclusive experience can offer different ways to contribute:
- Responding through a device. - Participating within a small team. - Submitting ideas in writing. - Choosing between several options. - Taking on different roles in the activity.
Public leaderboards should also be used carefully. Showing only the leading positions, allowing team names or setting a collective target can prevent the ranking from unnecessarily exposing people with lower scores.
8. Pay attention to language and translation
An activity may exclude participants when it uses overly complex sentences, unfamiliar cultural references, unexplained abbreviations or literal translations that change the meaning.
The language should match the audience’s actual level of knowledge.
It is advisable to:
- Explain technical terms when they are necessary. - Avoid double negatives in questions. - Divide long ideas into shorter units. - Review translations within their context. - Avoid relying on wordplay that cannot be transferred into other languages. - Allow participants to select their language before starting when the audience is multilingual.
Translation is not simply replacing words. Text length, tone and references can change between languages and affect the screen design or the time required to respond.
9. Prepare a technological alternative
Not everyone will have the same device, battery level, connection or digital experience.
Before the event, check:
- Whether the activity works on different screen sizes. - Whether it requires an application to be downloaded. - Whether it opens in common browsers. - Whether the access process requests unnecessary data. - Whether the venue has sufficient coverage. - What will happen if someone does not have a phone.
Alternatives may include shared devices, team participation, physical cards or assistance from event staff. The important point is that the alternative should not turn someone into a spectator with no influence over the decisions.
10. Design equivalent forms of participation
Offering an alternative does not mean providing a lower-quality version.
If the main challenge involves listening to audio and the alternative is reading a transcript, both options should provide access to the necessary information and allow a comparable score.
If an activity requires movement around a venue, there should be a way to contribute without completing the physical route, such as through another team member, an interactive map or an equivalent digital route.
Equivalence does not require the experience to be identical. It requires participants to be able to contribute to the same objective without receiving an arbitrary disadvantage.
11. Test with different people
The team designing an experience already knows its logic and tends to anticipate where to tap, what each icon means and how long a challenge should take.
This is why internal review is not enough.
Testing should include people with different levels of technological familiarity, abilities, ages and prior knowledge. The experience should also be tested under conditions similar to the real event, including noise, projectors, older phones and variable connections.
During testing, observe:
- Where participants stop. - Which instructions they read again. - Which elements they do not recognise as interactive. - When they ask for help. - Which sections cause fatigue or confusion. - Whether anyone is excluded from the team’s decisions.
A general question such as “did you like it?” will not reveal most of these barriers. It is more useful to ask which part was difficult, which information was missing and whether there was another way to complete the action.
A quick checklist before launching the activity
Before publishing a gamified experience, check that:
- Instructions are available in writing. - Visual content has sufficient contrast and size. - Colour is not the only way information is communicated. - Important videos have captions or a text alternative. - Audio signals have a visual equivalent. - Buttons and interactive areas are easy to activate. - Rules are introduced progressively. - Time limits allow participants to understand the information. - People can participate without being publicly exposed. - The experience works on several devices. - An alternative exists for technical problems. - Translations have been reviewed within the interface. - The activity has been tested by people other than its designers.
Common mistakes
Considering accessibility at the end
Once an activity is complete, some barriers are difficult to remove without changing the mechanic. Including accessibility from the beginning is usually more effective than adding partial solutions later.
Assuming what people need
Not everyone with the same disability uses the same tools or prefers the same solution. Whenever possible, ask what support is needed and provide options.
Confusing accessibility with a lack of challenge
A clear interface does not make the content easy. The challenge can involve solving a problem, selecting a strategy or collaborating without depending on tiny text or being faster than everyone else.
Creating an alternative that separates someone from the main experience
Giving one person a completely different activity may allow them to take part while still isolating them from the group. The priority should be to maintain a shared objective and equivalent ways of contributing.
How to evaluate whether the experience was inclusive
In addition to measuring participation and completion, consider:
- How many people needed help to access the activity. - Where participants dropped out. - Whether particular devices caused more problems. - Whether the time limit affected people differently. - Whether every team member contributed. - Which alternatives were used. - Which barriers participants reported.
A high participation rate does not prove that an experience was accessible. Some people may complete it only by depending constantly on others or without being able to influence the decisions themselves.
Designing so that more people can participate
Accessibility is not a decorative addition or a final check carried out immediately before an event. It is a way of designing experiences that are clearer, more flexible and more resilient across different contexts.
Many accessibility measures benefit the entire audience: visible instructions, strong contrast, captions, clear buttons, reasonable timing and alternatives when technology fails.
At Evenely, we design gamified experiences for events, training, internal communication and recruitment. The objective is not to create a single way of participating, but to build activities in which more people can understand, decide, collaborate and contribute value.