When Should I Use Automated Functional Testing On My Mobile Game?

When Should I Use Automated Functional Testing On My Mobile Game?
When creating any type of game, the biggest question developers are asked is, “Will it work on everything?” Now in the past and even today with the consoles and handheld game devices, the answers have been pretty simple, either it does or doesn’t, leading to little issues compared to the PC and Mac games that fight to work with the many different configurations of computers. Today with the growth of mobile, making sure things function correctly has been a very difficult and time consuming issue. Automation is the answer. It’s already used in many of the regression testing going on in companies today, so why not add it to your functional testing as well.


Role of automated functional testing

Manual functional testing is great in the beginning as the opportunity to find bugs are easy as testers can sometimes do things that no computer could do on a device. But as the list of devices grew, so did the need to test all of them. So the need to manual test is still the same, but the amount of devices are growing. This workload might ask companies for more testers or more time to test, costing a development company maybe more money and time than they can afford.
Another issue with manual functional testing is the monotony of the whole testing process. Though some people are fine with the work, finding those who can do it and do it well is an HR nightmare and could spend many companies’ time and money in searching for these testers. Testers are people who want to find the bugs, but not through repetitive work that bores them and disinterests them in the fun of discovering and finding bugs that are fixed or haven’t been seen yet.
With automation, the task is taken by a computer, run through its task, and if highly prepared, able to provide reporting on the issues in easy to follow reports that a QA lead can convey quickly to the developers. Most would enjoy this if it was fast and cheaper than manual labor.


What we do

TestBird found this out when talking with developers in 2012 and created our own automated functional service in 2013. By creating our “Eagle-Eye” technology, we were able to find ways to automate the functional testing needed for mobile devices that were typical done by hand. This allows us to finish the task on all our phones at the same time, add screenshots and status of the phone records every second, and build reports automatically. This has saved over 4,000 of our client’s time and money.
With over 1,000 mobile devices that serve 90% of the world market and 95% of the Chinese market, we’ve helped over 100,000 games and apps with quick and inexpensive reports that have built better functionality to the smallest and largest games on the market today.


When to automate

When we talk to the many developers who have worked with us, they start to use our services between beta and final release. Most of the functionality issues within the games UI and game mechanics are pretty much complete. So developers told us that they are in need of final checks to see if things are running perfectly on all different device types.
Most issues we find are dependent on a specific hardware issues that crash a game, bad API calls due to do inadequate code, or a performance issues that leads to bad fps, crashes, and long load times. Understanding how all of these are happening and if they are only on certain devices helps in solving the riddles of where the bugs are and what to do about them.



As mentioned, automation is great due to its speed and, if properly setup, the reporting it can give to the QA Group. Not only does it save you money and time, but the assurance that it was done properly through its testing algorithms. Though manual is still a required need in the functional testing. Helping to keep the boring and repetitive work to the computer and not the human testers improves your management of the testing group and streamline what bugs still need a human touch to find.

Comments are closed.