Talk:Game tester

Requested move

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. From Game tester to Game testing: 2 vs. 2, no consensus. –Hajor 03:40, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

Does anyone else feel that this article should be titled "Computer and video game tester" or just "video game tester"? Computer game just seems awkward when we have articles on game programmer, game producer, etc. That said, perhaps it should just be "Game tester"? Of course, then it'd have to have a section on non-video and computer-game testers as well. Anyone else? — Frecklefoot | Talk 02:35, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards "Game tester". I agree with your feeling that it's awkward to have Computer game tester as the title name. More commonly aren't they considered "Beta game tester"(s)? K1Bond007 05:09, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

No. Beta testers are usually "regular people" who are among the target audience for the game and are given pre-release versions of the game to try. This article is about people who are professional game testers ("professional" here meaning they actually get paid to do QA on games). Also beta testers generally don't get paid, but may get other bonuses such as free copies of the final, shipping game. If no one else objects within a few days, I'll move it to Game tester. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:14, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Those days turned to months :) I took care of it. K1Bond007 July 2, 2005 05:28 (UTC)

Beta testers are not usually "regular people" privileged to play a pre-final build. That's playtesting. "Beta testing" is a misnomer when the software development cycle for video games is considered (e.g., alpha to beta to final to post-production support); however, some studios/publishers do have closed beta and open beta testing of their titles. Closed/open beta testing is typically reserved for massively multiplayer titles when there are not enough on-site paid testers either to playtest or analyze test scenarios requiring a massive number of testers. This testing is usually done late in the beta stage and is also useful for stress/load testing. Beta testing, in general, is simply the testing of a title that satisfies the criteria for Beta status, and is more commonly done by on-site paid testers rather than gamers who simply want to try the game first. Adraeus 23:16, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It should be called Video Game Tester since even on computer they usually have videos or cinematics like Command & Conquer Tiberian Sun for example. Xsoldier 17:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Game testing can encompass game tester and game testing processes more effectively than game tester is capable.

Support. Game testing is proper encyclopedic form for an article concerning software quality assurance processes in computer and video games production. Adraeus 23:53, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Monkbel 01:24, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This same thing came up in regards to game programmer vs. game programming. I suggested that they were two different things (and still do). One is a job (or "position"), the other is an activity. Unless the topics are too narrow in focus to develop into full articles, keep them seperate. — Frecklefoot | Talk 13:54, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ~~for now. See my discussion)~~ - agree with Frecklefoot. K1Bond007 17:33, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We don't have separate articles for hunter and hunting, even though there's surely a thousand times more that could be written about "hunters" than about "game testers". Wikipedia does not include separate articles on the activity and the activator unless they're (1) clearly both distinct and extremely noteworthy topics, and (2) clearly both lengthy enough to justify (or, better yet, necessitate) a split. Considering that game testing (which, of the two topics, is clearly the more noteworthy by far) is currently a substub, the latter clearly doesn't apply here, and I'd strongly dispute the former as well. -Silence 10:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Well I don't think we need two different articles on this. What a game tester does (i.e. game testing) can easily be added to the article. This is totally different than say, game programming which is far more intricate. Since this article seems to be more centered around the position than the actual activity, I'm leaning towards oppose for now. Just add the process of game testing here for now and make game testing a redirect. If in the future this page calls to be seperated then we can do that. If in the future it makes more sense to be at game testing then we can do that. K1Bond007 17:33, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Game testing is not intricate? Game testing is a significant component of the production system that programming would be lost without. There are many topics that cannot be covered in this article because what a mere game tester does is limited, but the entire practice of game testing is far more extensive than those who haven't worked in the industry believe. In addition, xxgamers.com provides two good editorials about what it's like to work at a publishing house's test farms.

Game testing

Types of testing

Black box testing

Playtesting

White box testing

Methodology

Identification

Defect typing

Analysis

Debugging tools

Recording tools

Reporting

Standard practices

Tracking

Defect tracking systems

Verification

Regression testing

Test group organization

Producer

Test Manager

Test Lead(s)

Test Engineers(s)

Test Analyst(s)

Testers

Playtesters ("Beta Testers")

Test tools team organization

Technical Lead

Technical Engineer

Game testing early in the production cycle

Conception

High concept

Proposal

Concept document

Preproduction

Game design document

Art production plan

Technical design document

Project plan

Prototype

Game testing during development

Pre-Alpha

Alpha

Beta

Pre-Final

Gold

Game testing during testing cycle

Pre-Alpha

Beta

Compatibility testing

Localization

Open playtesting

Pre-Final

Code freeze

Gold

Post-production support

Patches

Upgrades

Software quality assurance

Determining game quality

Reviews

Inspections

I'll stop right there since the list continues for some time. Just look at the table of contents for the book Game Testing All In One. The book provides a good overview of the whole practice, but like many other SQA books, it doesn't go into much detail. The great thing about Game Testing All In One is that its content is practical knowledge rather than purely useless Cem Kanerish summaries. Adraeus 01:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then we should probably go with two seperate articles. One of the positions the other on what they do. K1Bond007 17:00, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really that bad?

This article makes it sound like a video game tester is the worst job is the world. Is that really true? This article, Tom Sloper's advice "Working as a Tester", under "External links" does not make it seem that bad. Anyone want to comment on this? -Hyad 20:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I liked it for a while, but after playing the game about 20 times in one day, it got downright tedious. If you're brought on near the end, when the game is nearly done--and it's a fun game--it's not that bad. It can be good or bad, depending on your disposition. I really wanted to be a game programmer, not a tester, so it was just a step on the road to glory, not the final destination. — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It depends entirely on you. If you're the type of person who would spend 8+ hours a day playing video games anyway, then the job itself is not so bad, though pay is pretty mediocre and as a temp you get no benefits (even national holidays don't apply). Many of my colleagues noted that the In-n-out burger joint pays more and gives better treatment. As a result, if you are single, renting, and live modestly, you can be happy in your daily job. On the other hand, if you want to own a house, car, support a family, or just can't help but deck yourself out in bling, you can't do that on game tester pay -- all of the colleagues I've known who were married and had kids, their spouses left them because of financial problems. I did game testing for about 2 years, even got to be a lead tester, but in the end it really burned me out, sapped away my work ethic and ambition, and I wouldn't want to go back to that. The highlight of my stint in QA was attending CES with all expenses paid by the company. Nothing like a free week in Vegas to lift your spirits. I went to E3 as well, but I'm from LA so no biggie there. Like Frecklefoot above, I was using it as a step towards a game development job, which in actuality can be just as bad, but at a minimum you do get somewhat more pay, regular employee benefits, and most importantly for me, creative involvement in the process and a sense of challenge and accomplishment. As a tester, you're basically just checking somebody else's work, and nobody ever gives you credit for that (though they do blame you if something goes wrong). Ham Pastrami 05:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it come from that it only pays a small amount? I have seen people make $8-$123 an hour! Brandonrc2 00:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

$8 is pretty low unless you are straight out of high school. I assume $123 is a typo, and you meant $12 or $13, which is the same ballpark. It equates to an annual salary of about $20k, but since testers are employed as temps, you don't necessarily have work the whole year, so the average tester ends up well below the poverty line. Again, that's ok if you are just starting to work, or have no obligations, but as a full-time career it's no better than burger flipping (less greasy though). Ham Pastrami 05:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When came to getting paid for game testing I wouldn't care how much time it takes because you are being paid by the hour. Xsoldier 16:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a typo. It's just what I've heard. I'm a bit to young to get a good job, so to me, that would be a HUGE amount of money, compared to what I usually have. It takes a year or two for my alowance to total $50-$100. Also, Just as a side note, and it probably doesn't belong here, could someone direct me to a job that actually hires 10-12 year olds? I will dance on the side of the road in A monkey suit, if it pays by the hour, or dance on the side of the road without a costume, if it pays by the day.Brandonrc2 00:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any outfit that hires employees that young. I guess your best bet is babysitting. In the US, the biggest problem is insurance. I worked at a media store (CDs, video, software) that had work that any 14 year-old could do. But they couldn't hire anyone under 18 simply because their insurance prohibited it. Also, child labor laws are pretty strict on who you can hire and how old they have to be vs. how many hours they can work. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QA vs QC

I worked in the testing departement of Gameloft for 2 years. One thing that people keep saying is that it's QA ... for quality assurance ... I believe the more exact term is quality control.

Quality assurance refers to a much wider job which accounts for the whole compagny workflow.

Anyone has thoughts on this ?

At every game company I've worked for, we always referred to it as "QA"; no one ever refered to it as QC or "quality control." While your observations are accurate in some contexts, in the video game industry, testing is QA. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I guess people just don't really care that there is a spelling mistake in the department name. The thing is that quality assurance is a software engineering concept that goes a long way.

We could even argue, that quality control would imply that the found bugs must be fixed but the QC department. I wonder if there would be some kind of official statement to all this. What terms do gouvernements use for example. Might give us a hint.

It's my understanding that QA usually only applies to ensuring software product stability, while the term QC applies to every other business in the world that creates a functioning product, and thus, needs to be controlled. - Woozy8 23:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While we're at it, maybe the difference in roles played by development testers and publisher testers should also be added as a subheading, though I lack the details on either. - Woozy8 23:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article says: "As games have become more complex, a larger pool of quality assessment (QA) resources is necessary (sometimes it is called "quality assurance")." I have never heard it called quality assessment. Furthermore, quality control usually refers to a higher level of testing; in other words, QC checks QA. Timocrates 09:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Calling game testing "quality assurance" is something of a fudge. General software QA is highly technical, much closer to the code, and pays fairly. Game QA on the other hand is basically just called that to sound professional. "Game testing" is entirely black box -- you never touch the code or perform unit tests, nor are you expected to have any knowledge of such things. You are given the game as a completed product and that's what you test. While you do need some wits to make a good game tester, it doesn't require any particular knowledge of computing. Because games are never mission-critical applications, I question whether honest-to-goodness QA even exists in the games industry. If something goes wrong, they just patch it later, since nobody is going to lose their bank account over some crash bug. Quality control, to my knowledge, doesn't really apply to software. QC is when you pull samples off an assembly line to check for manufacturing defects -- as opposed to QA where you check for design defects. I don't ever see QC credits in games. Ham Pastrami 13:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History!

You need more history! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.203.141.2 (talk • contribs)

I have plenty of history. Or did you mean the article? The problem is a lack of credible resources to cite. — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've done a lot of work on this and related pages, Freckle. Kudos. I think linking to more IGDA, gamedev, next-gen, and gamecareerguide articles would help. Also, whoever keeps putting the link to gamertestingground.com back in should stop, as the site is just a sales pitch, and offers no helpful information whatesoever. - Woozy8 23:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and add in the links you mention. They all sound like credible, well-known sites (except for gamecareerguide, which I've never heard of, but I'm willing to take a look). — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Video Game Tester Hub

Mastermuh6, I deleted a link to your blog because links to sites like yours are discouraged by Wikipedia's restrictions on linking. Your site is not recognized by any authority. It's just your site, and you're trying to promote it. There are hundreds of sites on video game testing, and we're not going to link to all of them. What makes yours so special? On what grounds do you claim your site really should be included? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 15:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

For the reference of anyone who is interested.

I copyedited the article, removing anything unsourced and controversial and converting essay into prose. Not a single reference (besides salaries) was given. I believe the burden of proof for anything removed lies with the original author(s). I know the information was genuine by someone from industry, but it contained unnecessary trivia and almost PoV. It is pointless to discuss merges and poor sourcing any further, as no improvement in quality is seen from the discussions stemming from 200X. I will add some sourced on the general information.

The article has been discussed to be put up for merging with Game testing several times now with more votes towards merge but no consensus or actions taken. I have not merged it yet, except for moving some material into game testing. I will copyedit the game testing article. If there is strong indication that the articles are redundantly paraphrasing each other, I will consider a merge. I am confident this would result in a more meaningful and constructive information display (See Level design for a merged example of what was previously 2 articles - l.design and l.designer) — H3llkn0wz ▎talk 23:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See merger explanation.— H3llkn0wz ▎talk 15:32, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]