Accessibility continues to be a priority in computer science education, but the goals for accessibility education are non-standardized. In this work, we examine whether evaluation measures differ by disability, and whether accessibility training for some disabilities can translate to a different disability. In our work, 71 students played three accessibility simulation games. We evaluated both student empathy and their generation of accessibility design solutions pertaining to those three disabilities, as well as a fourth disability not portrayed in the games. Our findings indicate that though empathy and accessibility ideas increased for all three taught disabilities, only empathy improved for the fourth disability. We further found that initially, students had a harder time generating accessibility solutions for less relatable disabilities, but that difference disappeared after playing simulation games. Finally, we found that student empathy and ability to generate design solutions were positively correlated only before playing simulation games, suggesting that after obtaining a stronger understanding of accessibility, the effects of empathy on student design solutions are no longer as prominent. Overall, these findings suggest that simulations may inspire empathy even for disabilities not portrayed but should be supplemented with educational content about how to design accessibly for all.