QAuDHD #8 - How The Turntables
The Neurospicy Bit
Yes that's a Michael Scott quote, in case anyone is thinking I've lost my grasp of the English language. Which, in all fairness, happens a lot. Mostly of the “what's the word for…that thing?!” variety. Usually with my brain very insistently offering the same suggested (and incorrect) word on repeat until I give up. And then remember the correct word a week later!
Which has happened in writing these articles, actually - good thing I write them so many weeks in advance!
Anyway, it seems my tangents have become so efficient, they pull me off track before I've even started. So let's hit the reset button and start again.
Prynhawn dda! Yr wythnos diwetha, siaradais am sut beth yw byw mewn ymennydd gydag AuDHD… oh I'm sorry, do you not speak Welsh? Well, see that's sometimes what it's like trying to read the emotions, tone and even meaning behind what's being said to us by neurotypical people. Our brains literally aren't functioning on the same wavelength and things that can seem obvious to you, might as well be in Klingon for us (although I suspect the Venn diagram of people who speak fluent Klingon and people with neurodivergent brains is practically just a circle).
For example, I saw a post recently lamenting the use of the phrase “read between the lines”. This can cause a logical feedback loop in some of us, since there's nothing there to be read, and how does that work when someone is speaking unless you have subtitles on, although if it’s on lined paper then “between the lines” is where the words are, so isn’t that just “reading”? (And down that spiral ad infinitum). Even when we're capable of understanding that expression for its true meaning, we still can't follow its advice. At least not easily or instinctively.
Things that can seem obvious to you, might as well be in Klingon for us
Because what you're asking us to do is, essentially, intuit the true meaning someone wants to get across in spite of the fact that they may well be saying something else entirely. And there are some problems there (as always, I'm generalising and/or speaking from personal 1st hand or 2nd hand experience):
- That might be considered lying, and interestingly (in spite of the fact that most of us live our lives behind a “mask”, which could arguably be considered deceitful but is a necessary self-defence mechanism), we often struggle with the concept of lying. Or feel deeply that it's wrong.
- If someone wants to say something to us, we don't understand why they don't just say it.
- The above is why we're often accused of being blunt or rude or pedantic.
Yet here's something that I've also seen posted recently. As bad as we can be at understanding what neurotypicals are saying to us, through their words, tone, facial expressions and body language, research suggests that neurotypical people can't understand us either! But we understand each other better than we do anyone else.
Which comes back to my Welsh sentence. Which, if you haven't asked Google to translate it for you, was: “Good afternoon! Last week, I talked about what it's like to live in a brain with AuDHD”. And I apologise to any native Welsh speakers; I'm only half Welsh, but I'm on an 836 day Duolingo streak at the time of writing!
The problem with that sentence wasn't what was being said, or how (dodgy pronunciation aside), it was that you don't speak the language. And if you were to respond in, say, Japanese, I wouldn't understand you either. But where does the burden of translation lie? Who is in the “right” in this situation? Is it the majority? The marginalised group? Or both?
I would say the solution is ultimately in education, patience, kindness, understanding and a desire to break down the language barrier. To accept that the problem exists on both sides and to work together with colleagues, friends, family and so on, to find new ways to communicate that work for everyone.
Wow, I'm really going to need a bigger soapbox… maybe I can get one with room for a comfy chair or something.
Anyway, on to the main topic - 500 words to make your head spin!
The Actual Topic
This is hardly a revolutionary idea (see what I did there? No?), but it’s something I always advocate for in my QA teams: rotation (OK now do you see what I did there? Revolution, Turntables… forget it).
To be 100% clear on this, I am in no way advocating for some kind of revolving door short-term contract hiring policy when it comes to QA - I've been one of those zero hours contract people and I'm wholeheartedly against putting anyone else through it. No, what I'm talking about is utilising your existing team(s) in a way that keeps them engaged, fresh and therefore more able to “see the wood for the trees”.
...new perspectives, new insights and new ideas on how to solve problems...
The problem is that spending a long time (sometimes years) focusing on the same game, or worse the same part of a game (if you're in a team large enough to split things up like that) can leave you with a bit of snow blindness. Areas that haven't been worked on in a long time, especially if they've been left in a “that'll do for now” state, will inevitably have their quirks. The problem is that these quirks should be considered bugs. But since it's poor form to report missing functionality on in-progress work (“Yes, I know that menu isn't complete, I haven't completed it yet!”), they can all too easily slip through the cracks.
Then when you reach a point where nothing should be in a “that'll do” state, you still don't bug the issues, because they've just… always been there.
This is where team rotation and fresh eyes (and ears) come in. Placeholder content shines out like a beacon, missing sound effects ring louder than church bells, the missing features on that menu pull you into the void like a… sorry, this is all getting a bit overdramatic. Remind me not to write these after watching Doctor Who.
The point is that the team members newly rotated into the project will notice the bits that everyone else has stopped seeing. Even just rotating teams round for a week can be enough to rejuvenate them, after all we do love finding bugs, and give your project a much needed boost as well.
Fresh perspectives are also invaluable for more qualitative feedback. New or recently updated features can be assessed from a point of view more in line with new users, rather than by someone who's experienced their incremental iteration over a longer period of time. This can lead to new perspectives, new insights and new ideas on how to solve problems and make the experience the best it can be for players - which is ultimately our job.
I would recommend keeping the same Lead on the project for consistency (sorry Leads), unless you have a robust hand-over process, but otherwise your team will thank you, your project will thank you and your players will thank you!
Well, except few of them know the noble sacrifice of QA, or-… sorry. I’m watching Doctor Who again…
500 - done!
