EA CEO Andrew Wilson recently stated publicly that 85% of EA’s QA testing work including the “Battlefield 6/Battlefield 6” and “The Sims” series has introduced AI automation tools. At the same time, he emphasized that AI does not replace human workers, but makes work better. We now employ more QA personnel than ever before.
But this figure immediately aroused doubts among keen observers.
Analysts and practitioners in the game industry point out that QA work usually accounts for 15% to 25% of game development costs, and any efficiency improvement in this link without a corresponding quality assurance mechanism can easily lead to gray areas such as layoffs or non-renewal of contracts. Although EA claims to have increased hiring, it is difficult to fully convince the public that there has been no reduction until the actual hiring data is made public.
When AI becomes the main force of QA, who will ensure quality?
The core anxiety of players is not “Will AI make someone lose their job?” but “When you hand over 85% of testing to algorithms, will the room for human error expand?” The list of “first-release failure” games in the past few years makes this worry not unfounded.
There is a time gap that needs to be observed between the EA’s statement and the actual strategy
Wilson’s argument is consistent with the industry’s overall narrative on the “AI+QA” topic, but each instance ultimately depends on the implementation results. If there are obvious testing loopholes in “Battlefield 6” when it launches, the community will immediately point the finger at EA’s AI QA declaration, making this statement the strongest satirical material.