I love Hannibal TV series. It's something you don't want to watch while in delicate mental state or eating, but other than that I think it's finally something that meets the level of quality that the legacy of Hannibal Lecter deserves and raises the bar (almost) to the height where it was after Silence of the Lambs.
Speaking of quality, in one the latest episodes of Hannibal Dr. Lecter stated: "It's the distinction that adds an expectation of quality." This is something that attracted my attention to the extent of writing this blog post.
The context is a dinner Dr. Lecter (psychologist) serves to his colleague Dr. Sutcliffe (neurologist). The full dialog from the episode goes as follows (ripped from Subtitleseeker):
Dr. Lecter: The Jamón Ibérico.
Dr. Sutcliffe: Still love your little rare treats, don't you, Hannibal? The more expensive and difficult they are to obtain, the better?
Dr. Lecter: It's the distinction that adds an expectation of quality.
Dr. Sutcliffe: Not always.
Dr. Lecter: Well, for Iberico, only a few thousand are selected each year. But is the pig, once fattened and slaughtered and air-cured, really superior to any other pig? Or is it simply a matter of reputation preceding product?
Dr. Sutcliffe: It's irrelevant. If the meat-eater thinks it's superior, then belief determines value.
Dr. Lecter: A case of psychology overriding neurology.
The major suspense revolves around the suspicion that Dr. Lecter might be serving human being to his colleague. But my focus was on the quality-bit of this discussion. Of course... :)
I find it fascinating to look at this phenomenon in our line of work, software development and testing. Expectations towards software products' quality are rarely affected by their distinction. Majority of software development is duplication. Either you duplicate entire products or you duplicate parts of them. Some parts and algorithms may be distinctive, but not in a sense that they add an expectation of quality.
Majority of professional software is built to fit the purpose. The quality is built to acceptable level, at best. As I learned in BBST Foundations 2.0 course, testers live and breathe tradeoffs. People don't walk the extra mile to make something unique, because it doesn't pay off. "It's unprofessional to produce over-quality", some say. We have come to accept that software is just software and it doesn't have to represent the highest quality.
This makes me sad.
When it comes to Jamón Ibérico, Kobe beef or Westvleteren 12 it's the refinement that separates them from the rest, that gives them distinction. People take very good care of these products and making them. Care beyond serious. They bring quality to the level that it's hard to improve. I have rarely or perhaps never seen that in software development and testing industry. Excluding video games...
Last week I was at Nordic Testing Days (blog post coming up ;) and got to meet wonderful people. With some of them we discussed about this subject and we came to a conclusion; People making video games may not have the latest methodologies and techniques in use, but they more than offset that with care and love towards video games. They make it their personal responsibility to refine the game to a state that it becomes distinctive. They want to create something unique. Of course there are video games that are not developed like this, but the ones that matter are. And always have been.
|I <3 BF4|
I expect a lot from these games, gaming companies and people. I expect refinement. I expect display of love towards video games. I expect the pride that only the people who create something distinctive can carry.
I expect quality.
Couple of my last posts have missed quotes. Let's fix that. Apart from the quotes from Hannibal, I didn't find anything that would fit this post. So I tried to come up with something witty myself:
"When you love what you do, you refine the history that your future is built on." -Sami Söderblom