The Importance of Terminology in Localization for Compliance

If you missed it, make sure to catch up on chapter 1 on our blog - or, if you are in a hurry, check out our 5 key points summary on LinkedIn.

As mentioned in chapter one, the goal of Compliance testing is ensuring that a game adheres to the technical requirements of the platforms that will support it.

The three most common manufacturers demanding titles to pass Certification are Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.

In our first article we analyzed some of Microsoft’s requirements whose scope overlaps with LQA’s work, such as BVT-05 and XR-003-02.

Today we will dive into what is possibly the hardest requirement from a Localization perspective: Terminology.

Terminology: the Achille’s heel of Compliance Testing?

Once again, we will refer to Microsoft requirements as they are readily available on their website, unlike others.

XR-022 Offical Naming standards indicates that ‘‘Titles must use the naming standards defined in the latest release of the Terminology List for Xbox console and/or Xbox network features.’’ 

This definition alone tells us two things:

• both hardware and features of a platform have specific names determined by the manufacturer
• Said names are referred to as Terminology and must be correctly used in any supported title to pass Certification.

Diving deeper into the details of XR-022, the requirement is further clarified in the examples provided as expected and failed results:

Expected Result
All text adheres to the most recent terminology list. Images must not display components of the console system or components of peripherals using terms that are not specifically included in the terminology list.

Fail Examples

1. The title uses a proprietary term or image from a competitive platform.
2. A title refers to a component of the console system or component of a peripheral using any term that is not included in the terminology list.

Per our previous article, XR-022 is listed amongst the  most failed requirements for MSF, and for good reason: MSF Terminology Lists includes 50+ terms translated in 26 languages, labeled under Console, Controllerhardware and  Xcloud terminology.

Rest assured that both Nintendo and Sony have equally detailed terminology requirements: each platform has their own terminology list and their own specifications, such as a difference between Core and Priority terms for NX or Recommended and Required terminology for PS5.

Ensuring that terminology is correctly spelled and implemented in game is a minutious task, made harder by each supported language.

This requirement simply cannot be tested without the support of an LQA team and not just for obvious reasons.

Of course, it is imperative that the localized game should be tested by a localization specialist to ensure that the terminology used matches the terms provided by the manufacturers for a specific language.

However, it is especially vital to have skilled linguists reviewing the translated content once it turns out that the same term in English might have different translations across platforms.

Going through the list of approved terminology for the aforementioned manufacturers, we can notice a common element: all lists include terms referring to specific parts of hardware.

Some of these terms are manufacturer specific, such as the console itself (e.g., Xbox Series X|S), but others are more common terms that we can find across two or all three terminologies: button, controller, stick, vibration and more.

It makes sense that some terms in English would be approved and accepted across platforms: they are extremely common and generally used in the gaming world (and beyond).

However, what might come as a surprise is that those common terms used across all types of platforms in English can have different, equally common translations in other languages.

This resulted in different manufacturers picking different translations to be part of their official terminology for the same English word.

For instance, ‘button’ should be translated differently in French and in Italian depending on whether the game is running on PS5 (touche, tasto), MSF (touche, pulsante) or NX (bouton, pulsante).

‘Stick’ has three different translations in French, Spanish (both SPA and LATAM) and Portuguese (Both BR and EU) across PS5, MSF and NX.

• For Sony, it would be joystick (FRE), joystick (SPA/LATAM) and controle analógico (PTBR) and controlo analógico (PTEU).
• For MSF, terminology requires stick analogique (FRE), stick (SPA/LATAM) and direcional analógico (PT EU/BR).
• For NX, the approved translations are stick (FRE), palanca (SPA/LATAM) and botão analógico (PT EU/BR).

Not as simple and straightforward as in English, is it?

As established, dealing with terminology can be complex, especially from a localization perspective.

There are a few things that can be done to prepare ahead of submission and prevent failing Terminology requirements.

There is only one sure way to ensure terminology with different translations is correctly implemented in each platform: console dedicated strings of text.

This means that for every string of text in game that contains one of these localization-complex terms there must be a dedicated string that will only be triggered for the appropriate console.

Following the examples above, if a string contains the word ‘‘button’’ which is used to refer to the piece of hardware that can be found on the controller, said string must have three variations: one to be displayed on Xbox, one on PS5 and one on NX.

Terminology should not be under LQA radar only. It is vital that translators working on videogames are aware of terminology requirements and are provided with terminology lists for each platform that will be supporting the game.

The need for duplicate strings or simply incorrect translations can be spotted as early as in the translation phase of localization.

An attentive review and proofreading of strings containing terminology can go a long way, especially if there are delays in implementing translated text

Make sure not to head towards a submission in a rush and give all your QA team the necessary time to test the games for compliance issues. For LQA and terminology, this is especially important because implementation issues can also cause a failure to meet terminology requirements.

For instance, stick analogique is significantly longer than stick. It will not matter whether the string was correctly translated or not, if half of it is cut off and unreadable due to lack of space.

In conclusion to this second focus on the complex world of Compliance testing and Certification, it is relevant to address the elephant in the room: no matter how well prepared your title is, the likelihood of never failing a submission are slim.

Whether because of technical issues or localization error – or more probably because of a bit of both - a submission might fail.

Preparing for Certification means also preparing to fail: give your timeline some bandwidth to support an extra submission round without impacting major deadlines.

Most importantly, make sure to include a round of ‘‘Pre-submission’’ into your schedule: while you should still aim to submit a compliant and complete build of your game to all necessary manufacturers, pre-submissions are a great way to get feedback and highlight bugs that would prevent you from passing an actual submission.

Navigating the maze of requirements across multiple platforms might be the most complex form of QA in gaming. There are no shortcuts to Certification and testing is vital: make sure to set up your QA teams for success, by granting them appropriate testing time, fixing reported bugs timely and valuing your testers’ expertise. All games can be successfully shipped with the right crew!