Slashdot Mirror
QA as a Bridge to a Game Career?
An anonymous reader writes "Over at educational site Game Career Guide, there's a new article asking whether game testing is a good way to get into the game industry. Veteran game tester Zachary Slater comments of the conundrum: 'QA could be a worthwhile career path for console and computer games if only it were treated and respected as such ... It isn't and probably won't be. Game developers and publishers seem to regard QA as an unfortunate expense required in the development process. It is a problem for anyone who wants to actually focus on it that they won't be respected for doing so.'"
The best way to get into the game industry (not that I understand why anybody would want to given the horrid working conditions) is as something that has a part in the creation of the game. Development, artists, that sort of thing.
Testers are the people who annoy everybody by coming back with a build and saying "it doesn't meet xbox certification criteria 347-15a", thereby causing the developers to have to work another 12 hour day to fix it.
If you actually want to be a tester, then its fine. If your goal is to move into something like development, testing isn't a good place to start.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
You'll read stories about "Ye Olde Thymes" when testers were often able to pursue opportunities and become designers or "higher" positions in a video gaming organization. Given the larger requirements for positions, the necessity of degrees, and other factors it is not the best way to make your big break.
If you really want to design video games, the best thing you can do is make them yourself. You won't be able to make a super AAA title that way, but you'll have full creative control over your work and something to show for it in a portfolio.
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
I work for a large game development studio.
If you didn't go to school, but you are energetic, disciplined and passionate, apply for QA roles and then commit to understanding the mechanics you see when you are testing. I know an Executive Producer of an extremely successful 2006 game that started in QA years before and absorbed the processes he saw around himself. He moved into design years later and applied this knowledge while absorbing process from the new disciplines around him. Then he was a respected Producer for years, mainly because he understood what it took to get things done in each area. Most recently he applied all of this with a talented team and made a great game.
Even young punks who think they know it all can grow up in QA. It is quite an eye-opener for these know-it-alls to be around disciplined, confident CompSci and other graduates who really do know their stuff. They often mature during this process can move onto roles with more responsibility. The ones that don't are easy to spot. If you have the education, the only thing that you need if you are missing experience in the games industry is modesty and passion. Modesty to work on the boring systems, and passion to make those seem exciting.
The industry really needs more candidates. If you see business news about the growing game industry, remember that 85%+ of that growth is people. We routinely hire talent from other countries because we don't get enough local resumes.
There is a myth that you have to "break into" the game industry. The truth is if you have a clue what you are doing they will find you. Put a tech demo or game demo togother, put it on a website, and put the URL on your resume. If you don't have a demo, you probably aren't fit for the industry since most successful people there enjoy writing games/demos. Just because you like playing games doesn't mean you like making games. Also, keep in mind they nobody is going to hire you to make YOUR game, they are hiring you to make THEIR game, so your creative ideas are meaningless to potential employers.
word.
If you can define a career as something that lasts 6 months or less, I guess you're good to go.
I know many people who got into unix, embedded and appliance development by starting in QA. If you do QA at places like Cisco, Sun, NetApp, Juniper, etc it is possible (with the effort and the right amount of pressure on your boss) to move into a development role. Some people who do QA move into other positions like support, docs, management, etc.
Really the key to moving ahead in QA is to have a good boss who recognizes your abilities and is willing to help you archive your goals. I can't imagine it is any different in the game industry if it happens to be like this in the other industries I have worked in.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
It's a hard road that doesn't pay very well and has very poor job security. It's mindless, grueling work.
But I know several game designers who got their start in QA and used it to prove that they knew how to make good games. If you really do think you would excel as a game designer, if you're a bright, motivated person who can distinguish themselves from the other testers, and you can't find a way into the industry another way, it's not a bad way to go. If all this applies, and you live in the bay area, I know at least one company that would be interested in hiring you.
An acquaintance of mine was a tester for Electronic Arts for several years, although he was certainly qualified as a computer programmer. He always got laid off from QA when the work was slow and then because he made a point of remaining available, he was rehired again whenever they needed more testers.
Eventually (only recently, in fact), they finally took him on in a permanent capacity as a full-time developer. But this whole process took YEARS.. and in that whole time, there was never any real indication of hope that he was ever going to be anything more than a tester for them.
So I'm inclined to believe that it can work, but one may have to stick it through a lot of periods of unstable employment. Bear in mind also that the fact that the fellow I know got hired on as a developer may have only been fortuitous for him, I can offer no guarantee that this tactic would always work.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
You'll find that the industry places varying degrees of importance on QA. Some places give it minimal importance, hiring contractors and disposable employees to do just enough QA to get by. Those places will have horrible hours, low pay, and be miserable experiences, taking advantage of the fact that a lot of people want to do gaming. Other places will give it proper importance, making it a clear part of the lifecycle. They'll pay decently, actually listen to input, and give the requisite resources and time to make sure that quality is taken care of.
The key is to get in at one of the latter places, though to be fair, it'll also be harder to get in there because more people will be interested, and they'll have tougher requirements when doing the hiring. They're also the places that you'll do things worth putting on a resume and can lead you to becoming even more involved in the industry, should to want to leave QA.
And never forget about positions on the edge of the industry, as those can be some of the best ways in, since there's not the same demand as getting in to an actual game developer, but you'll still make the contacts and learn relevant things. I gave up on getting into the gaming industry years ago. But 5 years ago, I decided to move to Seattle, and got a position at Microsoft (yeah, I know what people here think, but I haven't regretted it for a moment) - and realized I had an opportunity to get into gaming here, and now I've got a position on the Xbox team (UI test). I've been learning a lot, making contacts, and I've found that quite a few people have gone on from this team to take up positions at game developers.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
I've known some people who have "broken in" to development after spending a lot of (grueling, low-pay, poor security) time in QA. Which is to say... it is possible to get into dev through QA.
That said, I've known many a game developer, and the general consensus is that, while it is possible, the possibility is also remote enough that it's a pretty crappy idea. A lot of game development, from the code side anyway (I'm assuming since this is Slashdot that this is the case), require extensive understanding of computer science fundamentals, so unless you are some genius self-trained uber-coder, it's probably best if you go to school and learn the nuts and bolts necessary in this industry.
The games industry is too broad for a question like that to be applicable industry-wide. The answer will always be "Yes and No". As someone who works in the industry I have seen quite a few folks make the jump from QA to development. You will still have the throngs of QA folks that see it as a dead-end and occupy that stereotypical middle ground. The folks who move up are extremely motivated and talented individuals who earned their positions. Encouraging or discouraging the route based on a generalization isn't the right way to frame it as it will always come down to the employer and the person of interest.
Trying to get into game development while starting as a tester is not really much of a bridge. It is very hard to cross over into a development role. When it does happen, it is mostly going to happen by you becoming either a designer or a producer.
It is not much of a bridge. Crossing a bridge is easy. This sort of career path is more akin to trying to swim across a large river. There is no guarantee you will make it across, and you run the risk of drowning half way across.
Of course, once your across, your across. And going by this route will give result in you being much more able to consider the big picture / end product of a game. Developers often end up with tunnel vision, only really being aware of their own particular area of responsibility rather than the game as a whole. Testers have to deal with the nearly finished project, and they are not hindered by any sort of attachment to how things are supposed to work. It is either working or it is not.
END COMMUNICATION
Interesting article. I worked at QA at two different places: one was a large publishing house, and one was a smaller dev house / self-publisher. My take on it is that QA really, really sucks to be in, no matter where you are, but it's way worse to be at a publisher. As mentioned in the article, testers there are temps, and completely removed from the development process. They are treated with little respect, and paid poorly. There is little to no chance of moving into a more substantive role, other than up the QA ladder. However, it will give you some experience to put on your resume to get to QA in a smaller dev house, where lateral movement is possible IF you are talented in a different field, AND can show it. I know someone who became friends with the art department, demonstrated that he was a competent 3d artist, started doing small art assignments, and eventually moved full time into the department. It's up to you to go meet those people and make them aware of your skills. It's still difficult to do. The job sucks balls, but it's a decent gig if you're a) straight out of school and simply just need some scratch to get by, or b) have recently had a lobotomy. With all the available tools out there, your best bet is to go make some games yourself.
The thing is, developers don't always make good testers and testers don't always make good developers. Of course, if you're a tester you'll probably want to seek a higher goal, and there's really no where to go on your ladder except for lead tester/middle manager, or to the development side. And it's probably a whole lot easier to move up within testing than it is to jump over to development. Anyways, if you want to do development, you'd better actually know how to develop and design, the barrier of entry is significantly different between testing and development. If you're a tester and want to switch sides, think about how you would get the job if you were an outside hire: demos, website, etc. But since you're already in the company, you no doubt have a few connections that will make the initial "hey, look at me and my game!" a whole lot easier.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
... for a while. But it can be a dead end job and your future in QA will decrease as you get older (30+ is ancient) if you're not willing to sacrifice your entire life to the video game gods. When I became a lead tester at Atari after being a tester for three years, I knew my days were numbered as I was 30 and I had no interest in becoming an associate producer. I went back to school part-time to learn computer programming and earned my certifications (A+, Network+, and MCP). It was rough going as I had ten titles during that time, the office politics was vicious as every new company acquired was given an opportunity to run the company into the ground, and management was suspicious of my loyalty to the video game gods since I had a future outside of the video game industry. After three years as a lead tester, I quit the video game industry and been happy ever since.
I think Question and Answer sessions are useful for all sorts of things, even games! QA is what you do in the interview with the interviewer before you get a job programming games!
QA, customer service, support or any other part of the company you can get into is a good way to get into a game career!
At the game company I work for, we've had lead programmers start in customer service, software engineers with master's degrees start in tech support, or producers start in billing. The key is getting your foot in the door at the company you want to work for. The ones that weren't pulled from the lower echelons internally were pulled from similar positions at other companies where they likely started somewhere near the bottom.
*Your ad here*
In the above statement, your "best" certainly doesn't mean "easiest." Breaking in as an artist, designer, or programmer is substantially harder than breaking in on other tracks. These positions have huge pools of outside applicants, and there is a sufficient amount of domain-specific knowledge required that companies almost always hire people who are already inside the industry. This is not to say that it's impossible to break into one of these positions, but it creates an extra hurdle, in addition to the already high one you're facing just to break in.
The real best way to get into the industry is through an internship, but obviously, that isn't available to just anyone.
QA is certainly not an ideal way to get in, but it's better than banging your head against a wall you can't get over. Here is my advice for those who take this path:
1.) Do your QA job well. It may not be the one you wanted, but if you don't do it well, the only place you're going is the unemployment office. The company's perception of your competence will be important if you want to get into another department.
2.) Network, network, network. Get to know the people in the department you want to be in. Make friends. You might even find a mentor.
3.) Work on your skills in your chosen field in your free time. If you want to be an artist, beef up your portfolio. If you want to be a programmer, work on a demo. If you're a designer, work on some design docs, make a board game, or find a wannabe programmer to team up with for a demo.
The important thing to remember is: There's no game dev fairy who is going to flutter down and wave her magic wand and get you out of QA. Sitting on your butt and doing the minimal work isn't going to cut it. You've got to put in the effort, or you're just wasting your time.
... and I can vouch for this. Breaking into gaming via QA is not a good idea. Pay is below burger flipping with no health care. Unless you are very good at QA, expect to go through multiple layoff/rehire cycles. It's a mindnumbing job, with mindnumbing hours - especially during crunch time. You don't have to make enemies out of developers, but again, unless you are very good at QA, you probably will.
The end result is this: if you are good enough to break into gaming via QA, you are good enough to break into it via a better job. Someone compared this approach to swimming across a river instead of driving over a bridge, and I agree. It is the crappiest, worst-paid, longest and most draining way to get into a gaming company. That said, it is not impossible. And finally, if you do want to use QA to break into gaming, start at EA. Their testing department is the best I've seen, and you'll be able to leverage that experience into a much better position at another gaming company.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Game development is not like being a rock star...not even close. The pay is horrible, the hours are horrible, and family life is horrible, and everybody screws you over...your publisher, your producer, your CEO, Your investors, your team leaders....
The only reason you should be in game development is if you enjoy the problem solving and can't find that elsewhere.
I'm sure no one will believe me, but as someone who has been there, its not what you fantasize it will be. You think you are being paid to do what is fun, but its only 20% fun.
Yes, there are exceptions to this. There are companies that produce rockstars like Carmack, and they enjoy their jobs because they have so much creative control. For most of us, however, you have very little control and end up being mostly unhappy.
Breaking into the game industry means different things based on the position you are looking for. From what I have seen QA works very well if you want to go into game production, or maybe if you are an artist working on your demo reel. What being employed in QA will buy you is quick and easy access to HR. I worked for EA as an engineer a few years ago and from what I was told they get something like a thousand applications a day on their website. Because so much stuff comes in they relay more on word of mouth then a resume on a job board (unless you already are in the game industry ... ). If you are an engineer, hook up with some open source engine group and work with them in your off time. That will look better on your resume then QA tester. I have seen it happen many times where new grads go into QA while they "Brush up" on the their programming skills and never leave.
As a couple people have noted, including a fellow MS tester in games, it really depends on where the QA position is, and what the actual role is about.
I agree that pure QA game testing, where all you're doing is manually testing games to find bugs, discover balance issues, etc. is pretty grueling, not often respected, and unfortunately "a dime a dozen" at many places. However, there is much more to QA than that. Especially on the platform side, where I am, QA is far more technical. We're just as knee-deep in code as developers, as we're expected to do much of our testing via automation, write various tools to make processes more efficient, investigate the "tough bugs" that even developers have a hard time tracking down, and also responsible for performance/stress testing as well.
But as you may guess, being that type of QA is not the "easy way" to break into the industry. It's a position that's pretty demanding, and requires just as much skill and talent as your typical game developer. Many of us also hold BS or even MS degrees in Engineering and Computer Science, and have had years of software experiences in other places.
-- jchenx
But you have to be working at a developer, not a publisher. I know several games programmers who moved into their roles from QA. The head of production at Rebellion used to be my QA team lead.
The problem is, games QA is ultimately a mcjob. The pay's terrible, and there's only 2 ways to advance:
a) move to another role within the games industry - ultimately this relies on both luck and skills.
b) move to doing real QA - relies on you finding a company that's got low enough standards for testers. An ISTQB certification would help, but if they want a degree and you haven't got one, tough shit.
From what I've heard, it's a lot easier in Britain than America.
I spent a year in QA and watched the best testers (dedicated, observant, smart, literate) get ignored while the slackers who turned up for Full Contract interviews in suits got the full time contracts instead. Great logic there. (For the record I don't consider myself one of the "good" testers and got the hell out of there as fast as I could).
To this day I keep in touch with people in the department, most are either still there or got moved up the ladder one notch... in QA. Very occasionally you'll hear about people who became designers from QA through a combination of much luck and huge determination (we're talking practically writing entire design docs themselves to prove they had what it took). From my experience and talking to other people who spent years in test, we're talking one in a hundred maybe. The senior testers will sometimes be lucky enough to move into web production or marketing but there are much better routes to those positions. I have personally met one person who made it into design from test. One.
The real trick here is to find a small company or a group of developers. The #1 mistake most people make starting out is they think like 50 year olds and go for a big company with way too many people. This results in less risk and a nicer resume', but it also leads to just being another cog in the works and a total lack of real opportunities.
The simple fact is that quality control and customer support gets worse as the company is bigger. That is, unless you go in as one of the original 10-20 employees at the very beginning.
As for how to make it in software, it's not impossible to make a good game by yourself or with a couple of people.
Kingdom of Loathing and many other online games are perfect examples of this. And honestly, if I was running a company, I'd be hiring these people who made their own smaller games first.
As for commercial games, Defcon is a perfect example of what a small group can do on a shoestring budget. I can guarantee that every one of the people involved in it already has multiple offers for real work if they want it.
It all gets back to the basic rule of science, and by extension, computing: There is no free lunch. You want to make games, you have to MAKE games and do the coding. QC/QA is most often a dead-end career path unless they pay for your masters degree or something similar while doing it.
As someone who has experience with hardware, software, web, and game QA, I can attest that QA has always been an entry point to development, regardless of the field. Testers learn the development process, common mistakes, common fixes, and, eventually, how to work the process to their advantage without stepping on toes or burning out. Testers can focus on technical, business, or process specialties without losing focus on their current jobs. This enables them to move rather easily into development, marketing, or project management roles.
Hopefully, the good ones decide to stick around. Good testers are hard to find.
Modding is the way to go. Q&A will probably get you a job quick, but no where near a real position in a project. Modding with a good team on the other hand can get you attention with the big boys quite fast actually. I know a lead modeler from the Star Wars Movie Battles Crew and they are on the radar of Lucas Arts for quite some time now. (Not that Lucas Arts is where you want to be ... but that's another story). Modding is fun and rewarding in itself and as soon as you are good enough you get to pass all the crap standard career people have to go through. You might even get your own project from the beginning if you sell it well. Q&A sounds to me more like a thing to put you off if you need a reason to get out of the gaming industry.
Bottom Line: Start modding. Join a good modding crew and work yourself up - it's pretty much the same as with any running OSS project. You'll find out pretty fast if you've got the stuff it takes to do larger game projects and you'll have a good skill kit if you chose to make it your profession.
My 2 cents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
When it comes to game design, experience is most important.
Most gamers have totally unrealistic expectations when it comes to game design. What they teach in schools and colleges just doesn't capture the realities of....well, of anything really.
The best possible way to figure out the madness that is the game development industry is to work in it and witness that madness first-hand. Only once you've done that, do you have a chance of convincing someone that you "get it".
If busting your ass as a QA tester, working long hours for low pay, gives you an opportunity to help out in some small way with an aspect of game design, you're a helluva lot more qualified then the other 10 million clueless folks out there who are convinced game design is easy and they have all the answers.
From my personal experience in the game industry I can say that you can get your start in the game industry from QA if you are trying to move into producer roles. I have seen probably around 5-6 people move into producer roles from management positions in QA. However if you want to move into programming or art roles being in QA will actually hurt your chances more then help them(I haven't seen work that once).
QA can give you some bonuses to your career path.
You can get your name on a lot of titles quickly in QA. You have the opportunity to familiarize yourself with the inner workings on the industry. You even can, though entirely rare, make contacts in other departments while in QA.
QA is generally just a bad place to be.
Have you ever wondered why the turn over rate in most QA departments is so terrible? They are working just as many hours as you are and have to display just as much dedication to the projects as the rest of the dev team. Then on top of that all the benefits that development takes for granted (company library, well supplied break rooms, having diner provided while working crunch, stock options, bonuses, time off after completing a project, health, dental and vision) is not offered to the majority of QA employees. It is a thankless job and the horrible way they are treated by the rest of the company doesn't make it any better.
Testers work on a project from early to mid alpha until completion however they do this on multiple projects a year. If a project completes (weather it fails or not) they either lose there jobs or get moved onto another projects crunch. Even though hourly workers are paid overtime that still doesn't even bring there yearly income up above 30k.
Being in QA has a lot of career risks assigned to it.
You can loose you job at the drop of a hat. If a project ends, enough new employees are coming in, you're starting to look a little tired from the continuous crunching, you miss your bug quota for a week or so, miss something while going though a preplanned testing checklist, or you just got on the bad side of a dev/artist/producer/ manager, and you are out of a job.
People can be denied from getting jobs in development because QA would not allow them to transfer departments. The job could be in the bag and you could have a starting date in the other department, but QA can come in and tell the other department they don't want to let him go and the job will go to someone else (seen happen first hand)
It is hard to move out of QA
The time you have to dedicate to working in QA (crunch most of the year) is time that you are not working on keeping your programming/art skills up to snuff and just like most skills if you don't loose it you loose it. Though, this is why it can work for producer positions. Take a good tester's skill set and add a bit of management experience and a bit more communications skills and you have the skill set of an entry level producer.
QA is not respected at all by the development staff. Most people in other departments don't see testers as coworkers; they see them as peons, juvenile annoyances that you have to put up with regardless of weather they are good testers or not. To move out you must continuously prove that the QA stigma that testers are juvenile idiotic button mashers that walked in off the street does not apply to you, you must have a management position in QA(I have never seen anyone below sr. tester get transferred to other departments) and you must have contacts in other departments that will vouch for you.
The titles that you have on your resume are just about worthless until you also have at least one title under your belt outside of QA.
So. My advice for anyone thinking about QA. Don't.
*FYI: I have credits on more then 20 titles working in QA at Electronic Arts over the course of 2 and a half years (low level management in a 3rd parts specialist role most of the time) and am now an independent game developer and educator.*
I got into development through QA. But there's a caveat: I didn't directly work my way up. In fact, there's oftentimes no direct path from QA to anything else. I wouldn't expect to be promoted from Tester to anything other than Lead Tester.
The reason a QA job is helpful is that it introduces you to lots of people. Other testers, project managers, producers, programmers, artists, designers - if you make enough friends, eventually you'll be able to leverage that for your career. A tester will get hired as an entry-level producer at some other company and pass along your resume to the engineering lead. You'll impress a programmer with your testing skills and get hired as a project manager.
It comes down to the adage that getting a job is about who you know. Being in a game company, even in a tester role, is a great way to get to know lots of people.
I yearn for you tragically. A. T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.
The article is right on. No one respects a bad or mediocre tester. I've ran across a few amazing testers that I respected. And by a few I mean exactly 2 over the course of developing for 7 years. I've seen good developers I know ruin their resume (and stall their career advancement) by taking testing positions. It's a a damn shame, but its the truth. Testing is thankless.
If you want to be part of building games, learn to program software. I don't mean C++, theres very few game developers who do this sort of work (building engines and stuff). 85% of the work done on games these days is scripting prebuilt engines, this isnt a monumental challenge. Just learn the ins and outs of the Unreal 2 engine scripting environment (unreal 3 engine isnt that far off). Creating an Unreal 2 mod is about a 5-6 month fulltime unpaid job for a newbie. During that time you should also work your way through a few beginner level programming books. But think of this as an unpaid intership. When you are done, you will definately be able edge your way into an entry level game development position.
If it doesnt work the first time, repeat this process until you've got a job and you'll be on your way to a rewarding, difficult, and severely underpaid career as a game developer.
The first Friday I worked as a games tester at EA, the whole company was having beer. About 1/3 of the beers were pop-top bottles (ie can't undo with your hands) and people were damaging the brand new furniture trying to open their bottles with brute force. I walked across to the office manager who was having a drink and politely explained the situation about the pop-tops and suggested that next week they get some bottle openers.
I found out 6 months later through the grape-vine that I was almost fired for this, for being "needy" and violating the hierarchy, stepping out of my place as a tester.
The way I see it, (a mechanical designer with a background in QA and manufacturing of mechanical components), the people with QA or manufacturing experience make MUCH better designers. Those people know what works, what doesn't, what's expensive, what's cheap, and especially which of those expensive difficult things are necessary. That being said, most mechanical designers (and I get the impression it's the same way in gaming) do NOT see this as a valid skillset. From my understanding, it's difficult to impossible to work one's way up from QA/test to design, triply so if one doesn't have a degree, but even the experience in the field doesn't count. It's a sad, but true statement.
It's all right here, kids:
http://www.leisuretown.com/library/qac/14.html
http://www.leisuretown.com/library/qac/
Mod parent up. Underrated and insightful.
Greetings from a former white box tester turned data center manager.
We need more software QA testers. The sheer amount of show stopper bugs making it into released products today says that much.
Testers need more respect and they need to be held to higher standards.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
QA is in no way a path into "real" work in the games industry. If you want to be a games programmer, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of programming. If you want to do graphics, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of graphics. If you want to do sound and music, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of sound and music. The only advantage your QA job gives you is that you don't need an envelope and a stamp to send in your job application if you're already working in the same building. To be totally honest, the studios I've worked, QA were regarded with such withering contempt that working there would probably be a handicap. You'd get a better response if you were some random guy off the street.
QA is in no way a path into "real" work in the games industry.
If you want to be a games programmer, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of programming. If you want to do graphics, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of graphics. If you want to do sound and music, you're going to need to impress with your portfolio of sound and music.
The only advantage your QA job gives you is that you don't need an envelope and a stamp to send in your job application if you're already working in the same building.
To be totally honest, the studios I've worked, QA were regarded with such withering contempt that working there would probably be a handicap. You'd get a better response if you were some random guy off the street.
From QA to an assistant producer or assistant project manager position ---> common
From QA to programmer or artist ---> almost never
From QA to level designer or general design position ---> infrequent, but it does happen
This all depends on the skills of the person, obviously. 95% of people in QA stay in QA.
What exactly does "get into the game industry" mean? If you get a job doing QA for a games company, then guess what? You're in the games industry.
As for moving up, if you're not a complete twat, and can show you have a brain, motivation and organization skills, there's no reaosn you can't move up to "project manager".
Mod making is the best way to look good. Just don't fall into that "we must make our mod as good as a professional game" trap. Yea, make a game that kicks butt, but don't get caught up in making it "as pretty as a real game". Too many mod developers fall into that trap of thinking they need to compete with game developers. OK yea they do, but only on the level of gameplay, not visuals that one "buys" with big budgets.
Game developers and publishers seem to regard QA as an unfortunate expense required in the development process.
There seems to be a few minor typos. Let me polish that up for ya...
Game publishers seem to regard developers and QA as an unfortunate expense required in the production process.