Redesign Xbox’s Accessibility Support Page Using SME Insights

DESCRIPTION

The Xbox Accessibility Support Page case study focused on improving the discoverability, usability, and clarity of accessibility help content for players with disabilities. Insights from a focus group with accessibility SMEs led to key design refinements, contributing to an estimated 20–30% drop in related support tickets.

Role/Duration: User Research Specialist, January - February 2023

Main Contributions: Moderator's guide, focus group facilitation, data analysis, final written report

Team: 2 UI Designers, 1 Lead UX Researcher, 2 Project Managers, 1 Content Designer

Employer: Microsoft/Xbox (via Randstad Digital)

OVERVIEW

As a leader in accessible gaming, Xbox aimed to improve its Accessibility Support page by centralizing content and improving usability. I partnered with the Xbox Product Services accessibility team to redesign the page, making it easier for players to find the help they need.

THE CHALLENGE

How do we redesign the Xbox Accessibility Support page to better serve players with a wide range of accessibility needs?

BUSINESS NEED

Streamline accessibility support content to reduce support volume and reinforce Xbox’s commitment to inclusive gaming.

USER NEED

Players with disabilities needed a faster, clearer way to find accessibility-related help tailored to their needs and platform.

THE RESULTS

Improved support content discoverability, contributing to an estimated 20–30% reduction in accessibility-related support tickets.

Improved information architecture and labeling made it easier for players to locate relevant accessibility content, as reflected in stakeholder validation and SME feedback.

screencapture-support-xbox-en-US-help-accessible-gaming-2024-10-14-13_11_07

RESEARCH GOALS

My goal as a researcher was to evaluate the information architecture, discoverability, and understandability and to determine any pain points of these proposed designs.

Copy

Determine if wording and language used is appropriate and understandable for all audiences

Information Architecture

Determine if the article categories on the landing page are understandable for users and that the articles they link to meet user’s expectations.

Accessibility

Determine areas of high risk for accessibility and best practices to keep in mind as mockups are developed

To understand the specific needs of users with disabilities, I conducted a focus group with players representing a range of cognitive, visual, mobility, and auditory disabilities. Participants reviewed three design options in our focus group:

Version 1 (V1): Conversational, expanded layout
Version 2 (V2): Non-conversational, expanded approach
Version 3 (V3): Minimalist, featuring tiles and a hero section

DISCOVER & DEFINE:
FOCUS GROUP

Facilitating a group session with players of varying access needs required careful planning and flexibility. To ensure everyone felt supported and heard, I focused on three things:

Creating a safe, inclusive environment: We began with visual self-descriptions and pronouns, set expectations up front, and encouraged open communication throughout.
Making space for every voice: I read chat comments aloud, paused between questions to allow reflection, and checked in to ensure no one was left out of the discussion.
Providing thoughtful accommodations: I enabled live captions, posted questions in chat for easy reference, described visuals in detail, and allowed extra time for screen reader users to process content.

FOCUS GROUP FINDINGS

Our focus group surfaced key friction points in the proposed designs:

📐 Clear Structure Reduced Friction

Version 1’s layout (a 1–2–3 card structure) made it easy to scan and navigate. The visual hierarchy naturally guided users down the page.

🌀 Overwhelming Text Length

The flat list of links caused decision fatigue, especially for neurodivergent users.

🗣️ Language Shaped Expectations

Participants preferred conversational headers like “Check out…” over more clinical alternatives. However, CTA phrases like “Join” or “Find” were misleading—they expected external actions (e.g., a store or forum link), not a support article.

🧭 Subtext & Grouping Built Trust

Row headers and card descriptions helped participants quickly understand where links would lead.

RESULTS

These findings informed key design updates:

✅ Used V1 layout as the base structure
✅ Rewrote card titles to avoid misleading action words
✅ Grouped link lists under clear category labels
✅ Added visual aids and clearer subtext for support content

REFLECTION

The team found our research highly insightful after the report was presented, and developers implemented several design suggestions based on feedback from our focus group.

The changes included simplifying language, adding row headers with straightforward titles, and reducing the amount of scrolling to prevent information overload. Additionally, it was noted there are future plans implement more improvements to the Level 2 support pages by adding more visual components so information can be approachable and less text heavy.

The project taught me the impact of reaching out to the community and the value of gathering direct feedback to inform design decisions. I also learned how crucial it is to have a robust moderator's guide when facilitating group sessions. Writing down even obvious details—such including reminders to check the chat for messages or offering a 5-minute break in the script—helped me stay organized and ensure I didn’t miss anything critical during the session.

If I could revisit this project, I would consider looking into tree testing to get feedback of the findability of articles, or ask participants to participate in a card sort and compare results to the revision designs. Overall, the experience has greatly refined my approach to accessibility research and focus group preparation/execution.

contact
kddomines@gmail.com