Contents
Quality Quality Assurance: A Methodology for Wide-Spectrum Game Testing
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Video Game Watchdog National Institute On Media And The Family Shutting Down [11]
 
Modern Warfare 2 Infinity Ward's 'Most Successful PC Version' Yet [13]
 
New Tech, Design Details Of Project Natal To Emerge At Gamefest In February
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Trion Redwood City
Sr. Environment Artist
 
Trion Redwood City
Sr. Evnironment Modeler
 
Sucker Punch Productions
3D Environment Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Network Programmer
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Texture Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Character Artist
 
Crystal Dynamics
Sr. Level Designer
 
Monolith Productions
Sr. Software Engineer, Engine - Monolith Productions - #113767
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
arrow Upping The Craft: Susan O'Connor On Games Writing [6]
 
arrow Small Developers: Minimizing Risks in Large Productions - Part II [7]
 
arrow iPhone Piracy: The Inside Story [50]
 
arrow And Yet It Grows: Analyzing the Size and Growth of the European Game Market [5]
 
arrow NPD: Behind the Numbers, October 2009 [13]
 
arrow Reflecting On Uncharted 2: How They Did It [5]
 
arrow Sponsored Feature: Rasterization on Larrabee -- Adaptive Rasterization Helps Boost Efficiency
 
arrow Postmortem: Wadjet Eye's The Blackwell Convergence [2]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Time Fcuk - A Postmortem [2]
 
Accepting the Inherent Value of Games
 
Planckogenesis, Part II: Song Structure & Gravy Train [1]
spacer
About
spacer News Director:
Leigh Alexander
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Editor At Large:
Chris Remo
Advertising:
John 'Malik' Watson
Recruitment/Education:
Gina Gross
 
Features
  Quality Quality Assurance: A Methodology for Wide-Spectrum Game Testing
by David Wilson
4 comments
Share RSS
 
 
April 28, 2009 Article Start Previous Page 3 of 3
 

Team Hierarchies and Communication

For every project, there should be one person in charge of coordinating the various teams. Similarly, there should be one person who coordinates each team and reports to the project leader. This forms a chain of command that can easily be followed when problems within the various teams arise.

Advertisement

This is important for the situations in which one team needs help from one of the other teams; with this sort of chain of command, the leader from one team can talk to both the project leader and the leader of the team they would like help from.

If the team in question isn't too busy, this isn't a problem, and the team lead can agree to help. However, in those stressful crunch times near the end of a project cycle, it's possible that time is too tight to be able to help freely.

In situations like these, it will be up to the project leader to determine if the need is great enough to require the help of the other team or not.

This is why there also needs to be good communication between the teams; when one team is ahead of schedule, it allows teams that need extra help to know where to go to request help first. It also helps the entire team know how they are progressing overall, which allows the team leads and the project leader to be able to better manage the effort overall.

Weekly (or even daily) reports can be very effective in this effort, but even a simple verbal communication between leads on a regular basis can help immensely. A little bit of communication can go a long way to help keep things on track and running smoothly.

Matching the Right Testers to the Right Teams

Needless to say, some people are more competent at certain tasks than others. An effort should be made to match people to the skills they show the highest proficiency in. It can take time to figure out where a person's talents lie, but the effort is almost always worthwhile.

A person who is good at completing games should be assigned to game play, specifically game completion if possible. In this way, that person's talents will help to complete tasks related to checking the overall playability as well as the endings of a game.

Likewise, if someone is good with language and grammar, they should be used for checking the text in the game to make sure it reads as it should. Someone who is talented at noticing problems with graphics should check graphics and animations, and so on. In this way, a team can play to their strengths, and the tasks assigned to them can be accomplished more efficiently.

Weaving it all together

So, now that the general concepts have been put forward, how does it all come together? The first goal would be to set up an appropriate distribution of testing techniques.

A good starting point would be 40% test cases, 30% ad-hoc testing, and the final 30% should alternate until their strengths are determined.

The easiest way to deal with the third group is to assign them any low-priority test cases, as these will be the least detrimental if few members of the group are suited to such tasks. In each of those groups, half should be assigned to white-box testing and half should be assigned black-box testing.

Over the first week or two, it should be possible to determine which testers are best suited to which tasks. After this has been determined, the testers should be separated into the appropriate teams for the necessary testing tasks.

At this point, testing should be redistributed to about 60% test cases and 40% ad-hoc testing, as test cases tend to be more time-consuming, which usually translates to more manpower. Once the teams are formed, test plans should be written for each team explaining how they should go about their tasks and at what pace.

It's important to note that the first week or two is recommended for determining the strengths of unknown testers. If a tester is already known to be competent at certain tasks, it's easy enough to start them in the appropriate team.

Otherwise, it's more valuable in the long run to figure out where a tester would be best appropriated before giving them their final assignment.

Finally, a few words of advice specifically for developers. Documentation for various mechanics and functions can always be helpful. The more information that a testing team receives, the better they'll be able to test the software.

Also, if there's supposed to be any spoken text in a game, try to get the text edited first. In this way, there will be fewer errors in the audio, and the text will not have to be changed to match those errors.

Lastly, ask for the opinions of your testers every once in a while; they may have some opinions that would enhance your software in a way you hadn't considered before. We all want our projects to succeed, and with a little teamwork, we can ship a title with as few errors and as much polish as possible.

---

Photos by choking sun, used under Creative Commons license.

 
Article Start Previous Page 3 of 3
 
Comments

jaime kuroiwa
profile image
"Documentation for various mechanics and functions can always be helpful. The more information that a testing team receives, the better they'll be able to test the software."

I would like to emphasize this statement, because documentation enhances communication in so many ways. Documentation establishes nomenclature, which helps testers better describe issues to the developer. Documentation tells testers which user styles to emulate -- this is especially helpful in ad-hoc testing. Documentation shows the software's progress and direction to the test team, which helps in focus. Documentation may even allow the test team to catch bugs before the code is implemented (e.g. grammar, continuity, etc.).

Most of all, documentation gets the test team involved in the overall process. Believe it or not, testers are not only there to test; they want to learn and share.

Victor Gont
profile image
This article sums up perfectly the process of testing a game, be it an AAA or an iPhone casual title. Despite that, i feel that the essential part of successfully applying this process has not been sufficiently emphasized. Documentation and communication with the dev team both help a great deal, but the real issues arise when the management of the teams responsible for parts of the work (especially in multi-platform environments) is done in an irresponsible manner. Adaptability and quick response are of the essence, and applying methods known from previous projects can restrict and seriously harm current test activities, despite the experience and success encountered earlier.
The team management must also focus on assigning relevant tasks to its members, discovering everybody's strong points and preferences early in the work flow. Trying to turn a gameplay tester into a generalist and assign him to look for level design bugs is a sound and rather often employed method for crashing the team's morale and efficiency. There is also a problem when the tests are becoming some sort of daily 'grind', as there is not enough attention focused towards rotation of the tasks and creating new testcases between different versions of the project.
When these issues appear at the same time, and the project is delayed or completely redone (leading to a title being in testing for extremely long periods of time), the morale of the team is the most important thing to be considered. Having 90 bored or on the point of breakdown professional testers trying to find flaws in a title they may have otherwise enjoyed counts for little. It's a small thing, but it can be easily overlooked when taking note of the test team just through the number and severity of the bugs they submit in a database.

Johnathan Murrill
profile image
I will glady work as a game tester if anyone could assist me to find this job or hire me in my area it would be a big help because this is what ive been longing to do this is what I want to do in my life.

Nicholas Muise
profile image
Thanks for a great informative article David


none
 
Comment:
 


Submit Comment