I think the problem here is what you really can expect from ANY PC game. And I don't think that keybinding can be expected from any PC game as long as not ALL PC games are using it. To answer the question if keybinding really IS a feature that HAS to be added in any game to be useful for everybody one might as well consider the third parity programs which are free and able to fix the problem that might occur for some people completely. IF by any case it WOULD be a feature without no PC game can be said to be complete/functioning what about missing subtitles for the hearing impared? They are afaik optional even on DVDs (and there is no real workaround for this available) - so I'd still guess that it could not be considered to be mandatory to add such a feature.

I would say that there are still many games which does not have keybinding at all or in the amount some users would want it. But why are those users ranting and not just demanding their money back if it is an impield feature which HAS to be there no matter what?

Except they didn't give you bum wiggling. That's just ridiculous hyperbole. They said "in this model , the gear shift is on the driver side door console instead of the center console. You'll have to learn how to drive again, but in a few days you won't even notice anymore"

People will blow anything out of proportion.

You have been given explanation both in calm and polemic ways on why this is not simply a matter of adapting a bit.
Your personal experience is not shared by every other person on the planet. Different people have different bodies, with different capabilities and disabilities.

I think I see now where yours are.

Except it is a matter of adapting for most people.It's about some gamers who would rather complain about inconvenience claiming it as making a game unplayable rather than try to play the game as it is. Granted there are some who genuinely can not play the game, people with actual disabilities. I think it's pretty stupid that the game didn't come with full key rebinding capability. I also think it's ridiculous to claim it's unplayable, unless of course you truly have a disability (being left-handed is in no way a disability). The guy with one hand, yup. The guy who had a stroke. Of course. These are fringe cases and should not be made as a general rule. How have any left-handed people claiming the game is unplayable managed in life thus far, having to adjust to a predominantly right-handed world? I genuinely pity someone who claims that, as if you can't overcome hand positioning in a game, life will be very hard for you going forward. It is entirely blown out of proportion. Not including fully rebindable keys, while head-scratchingly questionable, is not the crime against humanity that some people on this board are attempting to make it. And yes. That was hyperbole. You think I have a disability for not seeing that you're unequivocally right? I'm not the one hammering home the same explanation over without actually explaining anything. I have made an attempt at an argument without any insults, and failed because you'll be insulted by my statement that some people will blow anything out of proportion. Maybe you feel as though this statement applied to you?

Sadly true, and why i stopped responding in the thread. To many people with the 'it dosent effect me so it dosen't exist' mentality.

That said accessibility in games in the EU is a big thing, especially with the current legislation on it. CDPR could get into a lot of hot water if it was proven they didn't do their due diligence on accessibility. They dont HAVE to have accessibility, but they have to have proof to show it was unfeasable (expense wise) to add it in.

Most dev's get around it since they aren't in the EU and don't directly sell to the EU, but since CDPR is in the EU it could get problematic for them if someone made a formal complaint

Then there are those other people who just simply called you out on pulling random phrases out of nowhere and trying to justify your views as legal standard. Just read this whole bunch of nonsense you posted here, makes my head hurt when I see you admitting not having to have any accessibility (true) but they have to show proof (?) it was unfeasible (??) to add such thing and proceed assuming the company might get in trouble if a formal complaint is lodged against them (???).

And you expect anyone taking you seriously after this.

Eh. I'm really kinda arguing for the sake of it now. simply because as you said, it doesn't affect me. I enjoy seeing my end of the discussion out to fruition despite the fact that I'm in agreement with you about the idea: Rebindable keys should have been included. It's the principle of the matter of whether it should be a legally binding "standard" or not. Which could go either way. It's enjoyable for me to argue the side that pertains to me the most, and my take on the world at large: There are a lot of whiny people out there who will exaggerate and hyperbolize. The fact is simple: Most people are largely unaffected. Most people are at worst inconvenienced. But again, it's treated like a crime against humanity by the posters here, saying that there should be legal repercussions (there shouldn't) and in general blowing out of proportion the scope of what is happening here.

You say a lot of us have the "It doesn't affect me so it doesn't exist" mentality, and that's true. But the opposite is also true, the "this affects me and so is extremely important and is an absolute tragedy that it wasn't fixed" is pervasive on the other side of the argument. We're talking about video games. I do apologize if my discussion in particular struck any wrong chords, but simply stating that "fixed keys make the game unplayable for left-handed people" is a fallacy, and that struck hard to me because I am left-handed and did not ask people to speak for me.

You said this to Ryuubei:

"Then there are those other people who just simply called you out on pulling random phrases out of nowhere and trying to justify your views as legal standard."

After saying this to me:

"No companies, courts or financial institutions will give a damn about your implications that it should have been in the game because the game functions perfectly."

I asked you how you can state that with such certainty, but you didn't respond, instead opening with "free key mapping" in an attempt to rephrase by trivialising the issue. The same things have been raised again and again and you're still just making out that the people who are saying they are having a problem apparently just aren't having a problem.

You say "you can load it up, play with it, complete it.", which is the very thing people are saying they can't do without key rebinding.

Refunds depend of which method. Which country. Applicable Laws. Application of those Laws etc etc, It can be *very* robust and often companies cave under pressure. It rarely, I think, goes to actual court, but according to you:

""No companies, courts or financial institutions will give a damn about your implications that it should have been in the game because the game functions perfectly.""

I wanted to discuss this, but if you're not willing to, then I'm out. It's fine if you think you were discussing it, or if you think it's me that's the issue, but I see no point to this.

Take care.
The Keybinding in Games Act of Countries 20-and-somewhen :o)

Sorry to butt in [not sorry enough to *not* butt in, but still :o) ].

I wonder if the different types of colour blindness is a factor? Aren't there a number of different types? I don't know. I wonder if the possible variations would make it much more difficult to allow a game to be played by a large percentage of people with a form of colour blindness. Having said that, there may well be only one or two types that take up a much higher percentage, so it might not be that complicated after all.

Do many games have options? One type of option? Is there a, kind of, middle ground that can be effective for many people?

Just to note based on how this thread has been :o) I'm not arguing with you, I'm genuinely curious.
That's interesting. The EU has been pushing accessibility. It's been coming up more and more as I recall.

Selective reading again? You got your answer in this post. It is not me who is trying to shift the topic here, read the title again :) You keep coming with presumed laws that don't apply when we are talking about refund eligibility.

Also can we drop this scaremongering with laws please? Show me one example where any court ruled in favour of someone asking for a refund based on the lack of key mapping feature in a video game.

I completely missed your post. And as an aside, for a little while, I confused you and MrBMT, thinking you were both one in the same. It's the vaguely similar names, but mainly I also saw your avatars as the same roguish sea captain :o) I should probably pay more attention to such things.

I would very much disagree with the principle that expectation relies on total appearance of a feature in all products. There will always be products that don't have something for a whole host of reasons (some valid, others not). I think there's a threshold of expectation. An arbitrary, fluctuating, subjective, untested (I think in the case of games) and therefore a very difficult to define threshold :o), but a threshold none-the-less. I think that is a part of the problem with these sorts of things. I would say... the sorts of things I've been saying :o) in that I would expect a game to include key rebinding, due to it being very common for many years, very important (even critical) for many users and not really that difficult to implement.

*But* that would be my view and someone like yourself sees things differently. In many (maybe all) respects I think it comes down to what a product could reasonably be expected to do and that requires a much bigger picture view (legislation and a compilation of many views). Such things as key rebinding seem to be very untested. I guess to some extent it depends on what we're talking about specifically, as there are different levels to dealing with such things. There's a refund from a company, a refund from the financial system (Bank, Credit Card or the like) and then there's the courts. It's something I say a lot, but these things just don't actually get tested to know where we (i.e. Consumers) stand on such things.

I would also add, that there is a lot of vested interest in *not* giving people money back.

As for DVDs :o) Would you agree that a *lot* of DVDs give pretty good (if not complete) information regarding subtitles, so people will know in advance? I've gone on too long, but maybe one solution is for games to have a *full* features list, instead of all the hype?

I think I would be okay with that. They made the game, they know what's in and what's not. List compatible screen resolutions, presence and extent of key rebinding, colour vision deficiency options and a whole list of things that a bunch of *gamers* could compile really quickly, so I would hope the developer would be able to. Not everyone would care about a lot of things, but "Here are all the details for those who are affected or care :o)".

I don't think people are ranting. *Some* take things too far, but 'some' always will :o) I think many have a genuine issue and voice it.

As for demanding money back, that's a big thing for me. Annnnnnd it's a whole big conversation :o) I think the software industry has managed to make a lot of people see hype, bugs, missing features and general issues just a part of software. Demanding one's money back is not that easy and I don't know to what extent companies like Steam can actually do what they do, when they say 'no refunds'. There's a degree of letting a company try and fix an issue (which is very important), but I would really like to know, where games fall in terms of a 'defective product' and when a game can actually be returned. In my view, the amount of money involved, means that many want this to be kept out of the courts and for things to keep going as they are. Just the idea that games are released when the developer/publisher knows there are problems with them.

I should stop. Maybe it's not helpful of me to say a certain amount, but no more, but I've gone on long enough. I should add though, I very much dislike Steam :o)

Don't worry about replying, I know I ramble :o)

Yes, I got that you weren't making a genuine claim/argument for a refund, but a comparison to show the illegitimacy of a refund claim due to no key rebinding :o) I think it's good to point out such things though... especially to me :o)

I said to MarkoH01 [at great length :o) ], that maybe the solution is to step up game descriptions. Full list of *actual* features, present and not present. Not just hype features, like "Living breathing world" and "Choices that matter" etc, but a matter of fact list of things. Things that are supported, partially support (to what extent) and not supported.

I read your comment to foo_, about the red scent trails? I can only imagine how that messes up all the times that come up. I don't know if some of the differences between different issues (terrible word, but I couldn't come up with anything better to convey diverse things than affect people) come down to a combination of the number of people affected, how they are effected and the ease with which a solution could be achieved.

I really don't think it is at all reasonable to expect every product to cater to every possible situation that any person could be in [not that you was saying they should :o)]. It just can't be done, but there is a certain amount that can/should be. Where expectations lie though is, very subjective. I think with key rebinding, it's not just disabled people or even left handed people, that need it. Even then the percentage of people who are left handed isn't an exact number, but it's in the realms beyond 10% of the population. Some are affected by needing keys rebound more than others, just as I would say that colour vision deficiency can affect to a greater or lesser extent. The point is :o) I would say that many more people could be affected by not having key rebinding, than by not having options for colour vision deficiency. Which is easy for me to say, since I don't have colour vision deficiency. There's also the addition of people who are neither disabled, not left handed, who need to use different keys, due to habit, hand size, keyboard and possible a few other things.

I guess it comes back to the threshold I keep going on about. The point where it would be reasonably expected for a company to take something into account and address it. I do think it's important that I very much consider [possible very wrongly :o) ] that the work required to include options for colour vision deficiency, would be a great deal more than key rebinding. The Witcher 3 had key rebinding at launch, but for some reason, not fully.

In the end, I take issue when someone who can't play a game, can't get a refund. But views very much vary, which I have found happens quite a lot :o)

For me? Yes :o)

But thank you for going into such detail. Much appreciated.

Interesting link.

There are two things: I'd like to see more of everything do more for more people :o), but there's the reality of resources and cost. I think the ratios heavily favour having key rebinding as an expectation, but I'd like to see more accessibility. The more it's done, the more such things will be understood, the more tools and knowledge will be gained and the easier/cheaper it will become. Well, in theory :o)

Thanks again for the information.

Wow, a passage full of information about colorblind. Good read, thanks!
I can only imagine how difficult for you to tackle some of the quests in Witcher 3, and it'd certainly be inconvenient to handle various tasks in life.

I think that requesting refund based on "no keybinding" is a stupid one, but when elevators are becoming essentials for many areas to improve accessibility for the disabled, Games - any software - should seriously consider adding more accessibility features.

This game really suck!!!! To slow leveling

SKYRIM RULES!