I'd say it's more a bulletin or news board than a news website itself. Journalists don't work for Twitter and write news articles, they just share it via Twitter as a medium.
I had a short stint at a AAA games company and I worked on one of the games. It was all written in C++ and we had absolutely 0 unit tests. All the testing was done by an army of QA guys.
That is wildly interesting. Every SaaS startup doing some 100k of $$$ in ARR will probably have long testing suites. AAA games making possibly tens of millions. 0 tests.
Lots of things are at play here (excuse the bad pun):
* SaaS stuff can be built very quickly (if you use cached node_modules or PHP composer's vendor directory) and deployed to parallel CI test runners that don't have much requirements. In contrast, your typical game takes much longer to (re)compile and as soon as you touch anything that requires graphics, you need some sort of (beefy) GPU in the server. Anyone who has ever tried virtualization with PCIe passthrough knows what a pain that is to set up, not to mention NVIDIA explicitly disallowing to virtualize their GPUs.
* It's easy to do unit tests for simple entities and operations (e.g. collision detection, physics)... but games are full of global state mutated from across the place.
* For everything that tests visual (or, god forbid, audio) output, computers are bad at testing. Change a texture? Great, now you have to re-check all your tests if they're still accurate and working. Humans are, for now, still better.
* Hardware-specific bugs: these are one of a goddamn nightmare. For most software, it behaves identically across computers - let's take most Docker containerized software... it will essentially run on anything that's amd64. But games integrate with OSes, especially the OS 3D stack (DX, OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal and on top of that the GPU drivers and GPU firmware) so incredibly deep that there are lots and lots of potential issues and workarounds. It's simply impossible to test for these.
* Closed source components in the loop: Games ship with all sorts of blobs, from video codecs to sound effect libraries. These are in your address space, but you can't really test them.
* Human tests are cheaper than writing test suites and setting up CI test farms (see the first point in my list).
This. We write unit tests when we do math on financial transactions, clear cut migrations of data, and other very well-defined, high risk circumstances.
The other use-case for tests is explaining the expectation to new developers / teams under tight timelines. Example - we had a "surge" team come in - we were writing software that pulls data out of emails in hundreds of formats.
We set up infrastructure for it that says - here is your input, here is your ouput, here is 100 sample records, make unit tests pass for them. This worked amazingly well when you had a team writing RegEx, another team writing csv stuff, one team using ML, etc. Basically, the goal was "make it work, in 2 weeks, no one will ever touch this code again." Btw, the latter is ALWAYS, ALWAYS a lie - if a company sinks a few hundred thousand into a project, you WILL touch it again.
Anyway, this was more of a rant - basically unit tests ARE useless 90% of the time. Unit tests in Angular that are basically integration tests are absolutely disgusting.
Keep in mind that if you have coverage, any time you modify a class, you are now fixing a bunch of broken tests.
I guess that's why I am for testing individual methods and SRP.
That's because in the games industry there is no expectation of a v 2.0 (most games never sell well enough to warrant it) and therefore little concern about mantainability or the future. It's hard enough to get the 1.0 release out the door without the studio running out of budget.
