Balancing moral, financial, and legal considerations: How practitioners in the game industry justify spending on accessibility

Abstract

As the global game industry expands, accessibility for players with disabilities has become a growing concern. Implementing accessibility is mostly technologically feasible, yet it remains scarce. This study investigates how practitioners justify accessibility spending in an industry marked by rapid growth, weak regulation, and platform pressures. Drawing on a mixed-method survey of 272 professionals, we identify three decision-making strategies: proactive (morally driven), rational (profit-driven), and reactive (compliance-oriented). The proactive strategy was associated with relatively higher accessibility spending, and non-male participants showed a higher likelihood of supporting accessibility. The findings highlight the ethical, economic, and organizational tensions professionals navigate in digitized or platform-intensive industries. The findings contribute to research on ethical decision-making and creative labor by theorizing on how moral, financial, and legal considerations intersect within digitized or platformized industries.