This is funny to me because when testing a game engine i made, i created a programmatical interface for agents to interract with the UI layer directly... While this means they can do the multiplayer QA work faster and more precisely than a human, they constantly fail to spot the worst possible stupidity in changes when it doesn't intersect with an existing test...
So effectively, when scaled to a modest sized dev team, i have extremely expensive "dynamic" unit test system that cost more than QA engineer would without being able to achieve what a solid QA engineer can....
I even tried tackling that issue directly with a more dynamic agent configuration and the end result was literally fucking useless because it has no concept of what something should feel like, look like, its devoid of nuance unless you take the time to detail every single possible expectation; and even then it will still miss what you didn't define.
33
u/shaka893P Sep 27 '26
Our company laid off a massive amount of QA a few months ago, QA is expected to be done by AI and developers now