The False lure of console QA.

No update since Friday. I've been rather busy of late.

This article in the Seattle Weekly talks about QA, the dusty, forgotten corner of the industry. Of course, as is the case with all game-related articles in mainstream media, the piece is liberally swabbed with elements of disdain for gamers and gaming culture, with a dash of BS, and some flim-flam thrown in for good measure. (The writer claims that 90% of gamers are male...Enough said) Regardless, there are some points to be found in here, much like digging through that bargain bin for a good game, among all the copies of Madden 2001. Among other things.

Not surprisingly, the quotes are where the creamy goodness is to be found, since they are given by actual people in the industry versus a news writer who fancies herself an expert on the industry and the dubious subject of video game addiction that seems to pop up more and more nowadays.

You can quote me on this: I hate QA. Working in it at least.

While a lot of what went on at the lab in the article is the most extreme case scenario that rarely happens, a lot of it is extremely accurate. If anyone at all reading this is thinking of testing games, and if they're thinking it'll be fun, allow me to set things straight: It's not fun.

Two things though, are worthy of attention:

"Most of the girls who come through have enough intelligence, so that they're the ones who get other jobs quickly or move up," Theuret says. "Stuck in the tester position are the other guys. It's just the difference between the gals and the guys."

Now many would say that females being promoted over men can and does happen in any corporate environment, but this seems to be amplified when you take a look at the industry. This is the reality in a culture that seems to worship female participation. "Gamer girls" are a badge of honour for some, sought after much like one would search for a rare baseball card.

Why the pedestal? Beyond sex and gender, we're all just in it for the games. That should be something that goes beyond not only sex and gender, but race, religion, creed, orientation, and really any other criteria we have for dividing ourselves.

The second point touches on money. Most game testers make minimum wage, or slightly above it. This seems fine for entry level stuff until the realization that the average income of a tester hardly changes. Yes, it does fluctuate a little if you are an in-house tester, but generally, it's seen as the grunt work, and treated as such.

That's not right.

QA is perhaps the most important step in the development process if you like playing games of the bug-free variety.

Yet, QA gets a ridiculously small part of the game development pie.

Why is that?