No Power to Change Because playing videogames all day as a career has been heavily glamorized, comp anies are

never at a loss for willing recruits. "Everyone in QA is expendable," says Frank. Reuben adds, "If management doesn't like someone, they just refuse t o renew their contract, thus avoiding any hassle at all. This leads to people wh o start asking questions about workload and length to be branded as trouble make rs and their contracts are simply not extended." Forming a union at the tester level is next to impossible Frank says, "Once the product ships, you're out of a job. There are no benefits, no perks and definitely no promise of being hired full time. There have been so many talented people I have worked with and it's a shame to see that talent get ting wasted." While some organizations offer job protection, "there is no union for QA contractors" he adds. Could testers form a union? While it is theoretically possible, Reuben believes it isn't realistic. "Forming a union at the tester level is next to impossible d ue to how contracts are handled. If you try, you'll find your contract not being extended. The part that really hurts is that the industry is so small that if f or some reason you are let go, most companies in your area know about it and won 't hire you." Facing the Blame Even after passing through QA, it's still commonplace for today's videogames to have bugs both small and game-breaking. Take the PlayStation 3 version of Bethes da's Skyrim. If QA testers work as fervently as they claim, how can such technic al travesties slip through the cracks? The truth, according to Phil, is that "many reported bugs don't get fixed." Furt hermore, developers often ignore the advice of QA testers. Frank says, "They sho t our opinions down without even a slight bit of consideration. They waste money and resources" before faulty projects are canned. The company blames us for all the bugs that make it into the final product. "Sometimes game companies have to pick and choose their battles and decide what bugs must be fixed," says Trent. "The thing about QA testing is that not everyon e games the same. There are millions of combinations of things a gamer could do that a team of 100 or less won't find and it ends up in the final product." This , combined with some bugs not being repeatable, explains why catastrophic glitch es are able to seep through. "There were plenty of times you would find a bug, b ut if you can't write up a detailed way to reproduce the bug, you can't count it , even if it's game breaking...You must be able to make it always happen or happ en often enough for it to be reported." Even when developers listen to the QA team, issues can still arise. Trent adds, "Sometimes the developers swear they fixed something, but the next build of the game breaks something else that wasn't an issue or sometimes their fix doesn't s olve the problem." Though many of these glitches may not be the fault of QA testers, Saul, who decl ined to name the company he worked for, stated. "The company blames us for all t he bugs that make it into the final product." Pete notes that "Producers don't l isten to QA anymore....but if a bug shows up when the game goes live or gold, th at's QA's fault, even if QA previously reported it as an issue." To avoid delays, Sam says publishers "bully" their QA testers to "get projects t o retail on expected time tables, meaning excessively long hours." He described one employer as "very totalitarian" in the way it treated QA staff. Among the te

sters who contacted IGN, this was a common complaint about a variety of publishe rs. Conclusion While the popular view of the game tester living an easy life is a misconception , there are alternatives to the over-worked, mistake-prone model that testers ha ve reached out to talk about. Companies like Valve and Blizzard are famed for ta king their time finishing games and eradicating bugs although, for different rea sons, this is not always a luxury available to companies squeezed by stock-holde r expectations. Other companies are opening up their games to the public via cro wd-sourced beta programs, which creates a whole new set of issues. History has demonstrated that when QA testers are a more integral part of the de velopment cycle, game companies end up with a better product, greater sales, and most importantly, perhaps create more humane working conditions as a result. IGN would like to thank all the QA testers who spoke to us. Let us know your tho ughts in the Comments section.