English | EN 
Testing games and immersive applications has been a game-changer for QE&T. What began as a proof of concept for automating Unity-based platforms turned into an eye-opening journey, revealing the need for new tools, tailored approaches, and a fresh mindset.
Testing these applications is a whole new ballgame, full of unique challenges that push you to rethink your approach. These applications demand testing for complex dynamics, high interactivity, and real-time responses that render traditional methodologies inadequate. It challenges us to rethink and innovate.
Before I deep dive into test automation of games or immersive applications, I first wanted to share what I’ve learned about testing VR, AR, and complex games and what makes it different from the usual way, and why it demands tools and techniques that are evolving in my opinion.
So, what makes testing of Game and Immersive Application different?
Everything is Dynamic:
Traditional applications follow a clear set of functionality or workflows. While the Immersive apps also follow it but not everything, for example, games. They’re built on real-time interactions, dynamic environments, and AI behaviors. The rules change constantly, making it tough to plan the test.
Many Platforms and Many Variations
Unlike testing a web app across browsers or a mobile app on Android and iOS, game testing spans PCs, consoles, VR headsets, AR devices, and mobile phones and there are different engines such as Unity, Unreal and all behave differently. For a tester, it’s really challenging to design and execute tests ensuring consistency of user experience everywhere.
Real-Time Graphics:
We are not just checking functionality but also validating real-time rendering, smooth animations, running animations, dynamic load of animations and simulations. For example: imagine a Temple run or a Subway surfer game where an anime keeps moving while the environment dynamically renders in the background, and the speed keeps increasing during gameplay. Automation tools aren’t advanced enough for this level of complexity, so manual testing often fills the gap.
The “Feel” Factor Matters:
Games and immersive apps aren’t just software; they’re experiences. Testing isn’t about button clicks, inputs and workflows; it’s about how something feels. For instance: is the motion tracking off? Does the audio match the visuals? Is there a weird lag that makes users dizzy in VR? These are subjective things that are hard to quantify or automate.
So, what Real Challenges Testers Face
Endless Testing Cycles:
Games change constantly with minor or major updates, bug fixes, and promotions. Over the decades, the world of gaming has drastically evolved—from cartridges to consoles, to cloud-based games and multiplayer experiences across locations. A single tweak can mess up animations, UI, or gameplay mechanics. Regression testing across different devices, platforms for every update becomes a massive time sink, and much of it is still manual.
Tools are still evolving
We’ve got plenty of solid automation frameworks for web and mobile, but games and immersive apps? Yes, but still evolving. While there are tools that can help automate some of the repetitive gameplay tests, but testing visuals, motions, and complex interactions still requires custom tools or manual effort. That’s still a gap
Finding defects but unable to reproduce:
Reproducing a bug in a game sometimes eats up time, only to realize it’s tied to some random in-game event. It’s frustrating but it’s part of the job.
Underrated work:
Based on my research and experience, I somewhat felt game testing doesn’t get the respect it deserves. There might be a perception that testers just “play games,” but it’s some of the hardest and most meticulous work out there. Unfortunately, they may not be appreciated to match the effort compared to functional domain expert who tests the core functionality of an ERP system.
The Crunch Culture:
The lifecycle of a game development is very short and mostly rolled out to different platforms making it notorious for crunch—those all-hands-on-deck, sleep-deprived final weeks before launch. Testers are expected to keep up, working long hours to get the product shipped. It’s exhausting and unsustainable.
Key Learnings
Diving into game testing has taught me that automation and manual testing both have their place. Automation can help with repetitive stuff like build verification tests, smoke test, sanity tests across different platforms and core part of game-play tests, but for the creative, immersive parts—manual testing is still essential.
Here are some key takeaways:
- The industry needs tools that can handle the complexity of games—from dynamic visuals to AI validation.
- Testing games isn’t just technical. It’s creative. We need to understand game engines, scripting, and how players interact with your product.
- Game testers deserve better recognition and appreciation. It’s skilled work, and the industry needs to acknowledge that.
- It’s a team effort where developers, designers, and testers need to work together to deliver amazing results
What’s Next?
This journey into game testing has been challenging but rewarding. There’s so much potential to explore and improve especially with automation. In my next blog, I’ll dive into the proof of concept I worked on for automating game testing using Gamedriver.IO tool. I’ll talk about what worked, what didn’t, and the tools and approaches we can use to make game testing smarter and more efficient.
Stay tuned—I’m excited to share the details in my next post!
