ISSUE #57 - May 6, 2018
Manual testing of video games is not your dream job. In this issue we look at the manual QA, and next time we’ll take on test automation for games.
Testers express their frustration at the tedium, pointlessness of working on game that never gets released, filing bugs that never get addressed, grueling schedule, low compensation, and lack of both respect and career growth. A pretty emotional post:
More confirmation of the same points here… and apparently, there was a TV reality show, The Tester, about QA’ing Sony PlayStation.
This post adds reflection on the organizational setup and QA process at game companies, with good insights into tester’s job being not so much finding bugs as reproducing them, explanation of triage process, and compliance testing.
On usability testing of video games and how bias can creep into the findings:
What a developer should look out for when “playtesting” their game: loopholes, gameplay problems, dead ends.
More ideas on how to do exploratory testing of a game, and bugs to look out for:
Testing at Nitro Nation from the perspective of the manual QA organization (in the next issue, I will quote the sister post from their devs):
Let’s invert the testing vector… On the use of video games as intelligence tests for AI:
If you received this email directly then you’re already signed up, thanks! Else if this newsletter issue was forwarded to you and you’d like to get one weekly, then you can subscribe at http://testersdigest.mehras.net
If you come across content worth sharing, please send me a link at firstname.lastname@example.org