There’s been some pretty awful software that met all the requirements and where all the functionality worked correctly without issues. Users might have different expectations than our requirements.
Some users may have unusual expectations for standard software features. It’s important not to overcomplicate simple definitions Requirements can take different forms, and it’s essential for everyone in the software development field to understand this. It’s not just about what’s “written on paper.” While you can add more details and corner cases to your definition, it’s better to find the most simple, direct, and broad definition. This is the most logical approach. If someone needs more details, I can explain, but it’s not necessary to include everything in the definition to cover all possible questions
I’d like to explain this as imagine you’re on a website and it’s slow/doesn’t work. What I’m trying to do is prevent that from happening by working with the software project team. I find it helps if you can find a way to make it relatable.
When it comes to software testing in games, I think it’s important to explain how testing differs from just “playing games” because that is often a reply I get.
“So you play games for a living?”
I usually try to talk in the same terminology as I define test competence:
Focus on the scientific method and complex problem solving, as well as methods and processes specific for software testing.
I’m learning what the users want to accomplish with the software, how they want to interact with it and what the software needs to do. Then I’m exploring what the software does currently and look for differences in comparison to what I have learned so I can inform developers what they need to change about it.
Requirements can take different forms, and it’s essential for everyone in the software development field to understand this. It’s not just about what’s “written on paper.” While you can add more details and corner cases to your definition, it’s better to find the most simple, direct, and broad definition. This is the most logical approach. If someone needs more details, I can explain, but it’s not necessary to include everything in the definition to cover all possible questions 
because that is often a reply I get.
(Sorry, couldn’t resist)