Is software testing different when we are dealing with game development?

Question

I was reading this paper about the differences between software development in general and game development and the authors made some good points regarding software testing, pointing out, for instance, that "game developers are hesitant to use automated testing because of these tests 'rapid obsolescence in the face of shifting creative desires of game designers'".

So, this reading made me think, what other aspects in software testing should we consider as different or particular when we are dealing with a game / testing a game? Anyone has experience with this or heard something else about it?

Answer 1

In game testing, a tester focuses mainly on the following points (from Johan Hoberg's blog):

• Fun Factor Testing
• Balance Testing
• Game Level/World Testing
• AI Testing
• Multiplayer/Network Testing
• Audio Testing
• Physics Testing
• Realism Testing
• Modification API Testing

I personally believe that testing a game required very sharp judgment capability, fast decision making, attention to details, efficiency, focus on the application, layman approach, flexibility with the situation, greater observation on the specific area, these all instance happen in at the same time & tester require a rhythm to handle all these factors. Here is the very good blog with better explanation about software testing and game testing

https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JohanHoberg/20140721/221444/Differences_between_Software_Testing_and_Game_Testing.php

Answer 2

• Software testing against Games is potentially cheaper as you can ask players to do it for you for free during closed beta, open beta or even early access stage, when games actually test your game for you after they pay you. (Assuming your game is not free).
• Software testing against Games is rarely life-threatening, unlikely when you are testing a life-supporting piece of software.
• Games are more immersive and interactive than other software, gamers will try almost everything beyond your imagination; it is more than likely for them to cheat, modifying key parameters to crash your game. You cannot brute-test everything, even with test automation, as test automation is not creative enough to simulate a gamer.
• Test automation is used to mainly test simpler, non-interactive game aspects, such as making sure there is no gap on this map, all trees are taller than 3 meters and etc.

Answer 3

As an ex-video game tester, some of the article is fairly inaccurate.

Whilst we were encouraged to raise defects (we actually had weekly targets) we weren't allowed to comment on the 'fun factor'. I remember suggesting that one game we tested shouldn't have a physical release because there was a lack of content and fun... just to be shunned and reminded that we're testers, not developers or publishers.

So we would execute Game Level / World testing, Multiplayer / Network testing, Audio testing and Physics testing... never Fun Factor testing (that's not a thing), Balance testing, AI testing, Realism testing, etc.

Testing video games is very similar to testing software in terms of functional and non-functional testing. A tester's job is to find faults in what they've been given and gain confidence in the product on the stakeholder's behalf - no matter if that's in banking, aviation, gaming, finance, and so on.

Answer 4

There is a distinction to be made between whether the software does what the developers intended (the most basic type of testing for bugs), and whether the software does something desired by the user.

With games, the former almost doesn't matter so long as the user enjoys playing the result. So yes, that's a major difference.

I say almost doesn't matter, but in practice, the game is unlikely to be a huge hit without the developers' and game designers' creative intentions actually being carried out. Nevertheless, some games are quite famous for glitches deliberately left in after being discovered.

When the entire game is riddled with glitches that prevent playing the game at all, though, game testing will fail for lack of prior software testing.

Answer 5

Below is a list of Methodologies that I tried to compile of different types that make the game testing especially.

• Fun Factor Testing
• Balance Testing
• Game Level/World Testing
• AI Testing
• Multiplayer/Network Testing
• Audio Testing
• Physics Testing
• Realism Testing
• Modification API Testing

Game tester should the same general knowledge base as an sofware tester but with a special focus of what makes games unique.

Of course Game testing is every bit complex as any other testing. though it should be treated in the same way. There is a place for live user test or alpa and beta test though its much bigger larger puzzle.

For instance Fun factor testing is something unique to games. since they are an entertainment product. Games are not only supposed to work intuitively and provide a good user experience.

two other big things I think differ is: In Software testing greatly utilizes automation scripts and it is the matter of testing a software application.

Also the scripts can be created before or after producing written test cases, either can be used to supplement the testing. A number of tools and frameworks have been developed to make automation quicker as setting up automation scripts cant take more time.

In Software testing makes greater of test-cases and test scripts. this generally makes the software testing job more technical.
Software testing is an engineering discipline wheter it is games applications or other types of software.

the things I mention I base the knowledge base partly from article belowThings are partly taken from gamasutra Regards

Answer 6

To answer your title question, I wouldn’t really say there are differences between testing software and games as what is a game but a piece of delightfully visual software?

Components of a game still have to work properly together (functionality) just as the components of a program like Microsoft Word or Adobe Photoshop. The rest depends on what where you’re working (company-wise and their specific values), what they specifically expect, and your leverage. At the company where I work at now, they’re very open to feedback for the games we produce because our core value to the quality of the game that we put out for the player. There are other places where I worked where my voice didn’t carry much weight so they much rather have functionality over anything else even if it was boggled with things that didn't make sense (there’s also places that care about bug quota).

For example, things I mostly test for (in no particular order):

• Functionality
• Coherent/Consistent UX/UI design
• Core Mechanic/secondary mechanics (in the case of software, primary functions/secondary functions)
• Bugs/defects
• Interactivity (how things interact with each other and the user)

The list can get very long on specifics depending on the project but all of these things, I test no matter what the project is (game or software).

For background, I’m currently a QA Lead at a mobile game company (I still actively test every game for every release) and a former QA tester, both freelance (software and hardware) and through agency, where we often took on many different projects to QA (Anywhere from games to websites).