Here's an article and a small excerpt:
The Physical Glass Ceiling: When The Git Gud Mentality Turns Ableist
It’s not ableist to like Cuphead, or be good at Cuphead. But it’s ableist to insist that we shouldn’t lower the access barrier for those who have limitations. As for how to better support people with disabilities, there are many things developers can do, some of which are already widely in use. Skippable levels, varying difficulty levels, remappable control schemes, support for disability-friendly controllers and accessories are all good. These suggestions are opt-in and don’t take anything away from the game. And for titles like Cuphead, whose identity doesn’t rely on its challenging action alone, it would give players a chance to enjoy the many other wonderful things, like music and art style, that make the game what it is.
So:
1) Do you think difficult games are inherently ableist or otherwise exclusionary?
2) Do you think games have a moral obligation to offer modes accessible to disabled gamers?
3) Do you think games have a moral obligation to offer modes accessible to people not as skilled in games?
4) Do you think the inclusion of the suggested variants (Skipping levels/bosses/infinite lifes, etc.) takes away from the artistic goals of games?
Edit: 5) Do you think the same applies to difficult movies (Eg. Baraka) or a difficult book (Don Quixote) or, say, Picasso's art? Is all art inherently exclusionary or ableist?
Feel free to share your thoughts. I'm interesting in hearing what you have to say.