cat_herder said:
I've come to conclusion that when these rides and mazes are being put together they are going for the "wow" factor in the looks department, and don't test it at all the volume of people that will be going through it.
I also think they have a testing problem and it's more than what cat_herder said. This isn't a knock on the VMK staff, it has always been an issue with software. I tested software for years in addition to writing software.
Most likely they are doing positive testing under light loads. Positive testing is when you test to make sure the software works as it was designed to work. That's how most software seems to be tested. Often the problem is compounded by the tester also being the person who wrote the software. The problem with that is, they know how it is supposed to work and that's how they use it so it does work and passes the positive test. For a VMK ride-a-thon, an example of a positive test would be to get on the ride and do nothing. If you end up in the final room and get your prize, the test is successful.
I think they need to do more negative testing and testing under heavy loads. The unfortunate problem is both of those require a lot of resources. Negative testing is very hard to do well, it requires a lot of lateral thinking. Testing under heavy loads is difficult to do because it either requires a lot of people doing live testing at the same time or a really good usage simulator.
Negative testing is when you test for mistakes a user might make. Negative testing was one of my specialties. For some reason, I'm able to reduce myself to a complete idiot and totally misinterpret how software is supposed to be used.

One of the easiest ways to do negative testing is to have someone who is unfamiliar with your software use it without reading any instructions. The way I had to do it was similar to that fun "game" where you give a person step by step instructions for doing something like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Your job is to be as precise as possible. The other person's job is to misinterpret your instructions. The final result often doesn't resemble a peanut butter and jelly sandwich at all.
For a VMK ride-a-thon, an example of a negative test would be to get on the ride and then get off the track where you aren't supposed to get off the track and try to get back on. If you can't get off the track at all, the test is successful. If you can get off the track and get back on from each piece of track, the test is successful. If you can get off the track, walk around the room and then get back on the track, the test is successful. If you get off the track and can't get back on, the test is not successful and you have a bug. I hope you can see from this example just how resource intensive negative testing can be.
I think a lot of frustration with the ride-a-thon this morning is the rides didn't work as they had been advertised. They weren't charging to ride (hopefully on purpose because VMK anticipated us having to help them discover problems) and they were giving out only one prize per person. In my opinion, that's a failed positive test and shouldn't have happened. On top of that, there weren't any instructions for using the switches and doors. In my opinion, that's a failed negative test but is understandable. That would be something to make note of so it doesn't happen in the next ride-a-thon.
In any case, I am enjoying the rides and discovering new items in the rooms. I figured out how to use the switches - you can double click on them as soon as you enter the room, you don't have to be near them. I'm still having problems with the doors because I keep single clicking on them instead of double clicking. I'm also clicking on the symbol on the door rather than on the symbol at the top. That may be uncovering a design flaw in the user interface, it may be more intuitive to click on the door itself.
Oh, I just love the way the ride vehicles float above the track! I keep wishing I could make mine fly around the room!
