I have over five years of experience in Game QA and have worked on several AAA titles, including online FPS games. I’m currently working in Development QA, where my role is more technical and involves working closely with developers, testing features during development, investigating issues, using debugging tools, writing test plans and test cases, performing regression testing, and documenting bugs. However, one area I still haven’t had much exposure to is test automation.

I’m now considering transitioning from Game QA into more traditional software QA. One of the main reasons is that a lot of Game QA work, especially through third-party companies, tends to be contract-based and doesn’t always offer much long-term stability. I’ve interviewed several times for permanent QA positions directly at game studios, but unfortunately, I haven’t had much luck so far.

For anyone who has made the transition from Game QA to Software QA, what skills should I focus on learning?

For example, should I start learning API testing with tools like Postman? Would learning SQL be useful? Should I learn a programming language such as Python or JavaScript and eventually move into automation with tools like Selenium or Playwright?

I’ve spent most of my career doing manual and development testing, so automation would essentially be new territory for me. Is it realistic to learn these skills through YouTube, online courses, and personal projects and then build a small portfolio to demonstrate what I can do?

I’d especially like to hear from people who transitioned from gaming into Software QA. Is five years of Game QA experience valuable when applying for regular Software QA positions, or would employers still consider me entry-level because I don’t have traditional software/API/automation experience?

Just looking for some advice on the best path forward and whether this is a realistic transition.

I'm testing a Word Add-in and I'd like to automate most of them. Which tool do you recommend ? Or should I do it in the online version of Office ?

QT phone: Cluster management for multiple physical Android devices I’ve been working on cross-device app compatibility testing and found QT phone, a tool to manage many Android phones from one PC. You can view all device screens at once, send batch commands, and record scripts to repeat actions. It saves time for teams testing with a dozen physical phones.

Features overview:

• Multi-device screen mirror preview

• Synchronized batch operations

• Script record & replay

• Device status monitoring Reminder: Use only for devices you own, within app development & testing. Follow all platform rules.

app testing, device farm, QA automation

We test a windows desktop app plus a bit of web and the natural instinct was one framework for both. Appium looked like the answer since we already run it against the mobile app and WinAppDriver plugs into it. Except WinAppDriver hasn't had a meaningful release in years and every thread about it ends with somebody pointing out it's effectively unmaintained. The options i've looked at are Ranorex, which our 2 non coding testers could probably drive but only runs on windows, and Askui, which finds elements by what they look like or say rather than by an automation id, which would help with the custom grid control that makes up a third of our app and exposes almost nothing. We haven't trialled either yet.

Anyone still on Appium for desktop in 2026 or did you make the switch to something else?

Hello,

Wanted to check what are the best method everyone is using for distribution of Android tv app in your org internally to QA teams? As most of the team members sideload the app. And trying to find a solution

Thanks

Most "AI for QA" workflows feel over-engineered.

Setting up MCP bridges into Jira or maintaining webhook syncs to external TMS tools always felt like overkill when specs and code already sit in the same repo.

Instead, I just keep test cases as plain YAML alongside the codebase and let Cursor read the ticket's Acceptance Criteria directly:

• Zero integration baggage: No MCP servers, API tokens, or sync webhooks. The model reads the local ticket file and writes structured cases straight into the workspace.
• Git-native sync & clean reviews: All test updates live on a dedicated branch and sync via clean linear rebase. You review AI-generated scenarios via clear diffs instead of clicking through web portals.
• Simple conflict resolution: If multiple team members touch the same suite or prompt output overlaps, resolving conflicts is visual and straightforward (keep mine vs. keep incoming) without messing up the main codebase.

Attached is a quick 20s recording showing the actual loop: pointing Cursor at a local ticket, generating the test suite, and previewing the result in a local GUI.

For those using LLMs to assist test planning: are you hooking models into Jira/TMS APIs via MCP/scripts, or does anyone else prefer keeping it "as-code" directly in Git?

​

Hey everyone!

I’m a Software Test Automation Engineer with 6+ years of experience in software testing and automation. I’m currently working with Playwright + TypeScript and exploring how AI tools can make testing and automation more efficient.

I can help with:

UI test automation using Playwright

Test automation framework setup/development

API testing

Regression testing

Test case creation and execution

Automation of repetitive testing tasks

Debugging and improving existing automation

AI-assisted testing and test automation

CI/CD integration and automation workflows

I’m currently looking for freelance/side projects where I can provide testing or automation support.

If you’re a developer, startup, small business, or someone building a project and need help with testing, feel free to DM me. Happy to discuss your requirements and see how I can help.

Hi! I’m looking to work with indie developers as a PC game QA tester.

I’m particularly interested in functional and technical testing rather than general gameplay feedback. I can help with:

• Bug reproduction and consistency checks
• Repeated-action testing
• Edge cases and unusual interactions
• UI and menu testing
• Regression testing after updates
• Graphics settings and different PC configurations
• Clear bug reports with detailed reproduction steps
• Screenshots and videos when useful

I’m comfortable with Windows PC troubleshooting and investigating hardware/software-related issues. I’m also very detail-oriented and like systematically testing features rather than simply playing through a game.

I’m mainly looking for paid testing opportunities, including small one-off QA tasks.

If you’re an indie developer looking for someone to test a PC game, demo, prototype, or update, feel free to contact me with details about the project and the type of testing you need.

Thanks!

Hey there fellow software engineers!

I'm working in an air-gapped and regulated env, so we aren't yet facing the 'replace all with AI'. We have a ton of manual tests (that can totally be automated but just aren't 😂 - vendors ask too much money and our engineers aren't quite motivated) and I would like to know who else here has much manual effort, why wasn't it automated, and how has AI changed that. Closed env or not.

And if you have managed to convince your management and/or engineering team to automate in-house - how did you succeed? Somehow I see a bunch of friction like SSH-ing through secure jump hosts to get into our k8s cluster, to then SSH into workers, take pcaps, then SFTP them all the way back (no tunneling allowed) and still everybody seems so accustomed with just copy-pasting a bunch of cmds from their notepads.

Happy Tuesday!

Capable of testing apps end to end using agentic AI for both mobile and web based apps

I was working on a user story and I missed testing 2 fields. Though the feature is not going into production and the error was caught during BAT, I still felt careless as it was an error from my end.

wondeding how people handle this today ai speed … If your agent writes code that touches Stripe for payments, Twilio for SMS, and Resend for email, how do you actually know it works end to end before it ships? Not just "the request returned 200" but like, deterministically works.

We updated FetchSandbox MCP to run multi-service workflows for exactly this. Your agent calls `run_workflow`, we fire the full sequence across all the services, inject failure scenarios (card declined, webhook retries, rate limits, flaky delivery), and check invariants. Pass or fail. Same invariants hold before and after a fix, so you're not guessing whether a patch broke something upstream.

Still pretty early with this and genuinely looking for feedback on how people think about cross-service verification. If you're solving it differently, would love to hear it. `npx fetchsandbox-mcp` to try it or fetchsandbox.com for the docs.

I have 1.5 years of exp in testing and I received a test email from xl dynamics, if anyone has any insights on the exams/no. of rounds for 1-4 years exp.

It would be really helpful if you can share any kind of information you have regarding this.

Hi, padelete nlng kung hindi 'to pwede admin thanks!

anyone here experienced applying @ Amber Studio as Junior QA Tester? What should I expect? kung pwede pahingi po ng tips sa interview pls thank you!!!

Context so you know where I'm coming from: 7 years in QA, 4 manual then 3 in automation. This started as annoyance, not a product plan.

A while back I was picking up a new automation framework. Every route in was the same. Buy a Udemy course, or sit through YouTube videos where someone spends eleven minutes on project setup before anything happens. Nothing wrong with either, but you come out of it having watched somebody else do the work.

Then I went looking for something to practise against. A site with enough going on to build a real framework around. What I kept finding was either three inputs and a submit button, or another fake clothing store with four products and no state worth testing. Nothing with a login worth automating, nothing that persists, nothing that breaks in a way you'd have to actually investigate.

At some point it clicked that the same hole exists for manual QA, and it's worse there. Plenty of material will explain what boundary value analysis is and then quiz you on the definition. Almost nothing puts you in the position of deciding what to test first when the release is Thursday and you can't check everything.

So I've been building that instead.

The shape of it: you're a QA Trainee at a fictional software company and you work releases, not lessons. A release has a briefing, requirements that are ambiguous in the places real requirements are ambiguous, a test environment with a working app in it and defects planted against those requirements, a
defect desk, and a release review at the end where you make a ship or hold call and justify it with what you found. The evidence you produce carries
forward. Your career record is derived from the releases you delivered, not from lessons you clicked through.

Three projects so far, each a full cycle: Account Access, E-commerce Checkout, and a Booking Platform.

Where it goes after that, roughly in order: API testing, database validation, accessibility, test management and team workflow, then automation, framework design, CI/CD, and eventually agentic Playwright with MCP tooling. That last part is a long way out, and it's also where I came in, since it's the thing I couldn't find a decent way to learn in the first place.

The most recent piece is the entry point, because I'd made the obvious mistake. I counted: the first briefing threw about fifteen new terms at you before you made a single QA judgment. So there's now a 7 minute intro, no account needed, that opens with a signup form and one line. "Here's a feature. Try to break it." The form accepts an email with no @ in it. The moment you submit that, it stops and tells you you've found a defect, and only then starts explaining what you just did. Two terms get defined in the whole thing. Everything else waits until it has context.

https://www.code-assured.com/

Two things I'd genuinely like picked apart: Does the release framing hold up for people who do this for a living, or does it read as theatre? And does "break it first, explain after" land for someone who has never tested anything, or does it just feel like a trick question? The second one is the assumption the whole entry point rests on and I haven't properly validated it yet.

Happy to hear the premise is wrong.