Side, a seasoned services provider formerly known as PTW, has entered into a six‑month memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Denmark‑based artificial‑intelligence specialist Modl.ai. The agreement binds the two companies to co‑develop an AI‑enhanced quality‑assurance (QA) platform that aims to modernise how video‑game bugs are identified and resolved.
Modl.ai, a relatively new player in the gaming sector, was founded in 2018 and secured $1.7 million in seed funding two years later. Side brings decades of experience in delivering outsourced services across a range of industries, while Modl.ai contributes cutting‑edge machine‑learning expertise. "The MOU effectively brings the best of what Side has and the best of what Modl.ai has together in a unique solution," explains Martin McBride, Side’s chief commercial officer. "One of the crown‑jewel, holy‑grail experiences for the games industry right now has been using AI technology to better augment QA services.
No one's really found a great solution for that. We think we have." Historically, AI‑driven QA tools required developers to hand over entire game builds or even source code to the testing provider. Modl.ai’s earlier offering relied on a plugin and SDK that integrated directly with the developer’s environment, a process that proved cumbersome and created friction over time, according to founder Christoffer Holmgard. The new approach eliminates that need for deep integration.
"We take the product as you would give it to a QA tester, as you would eventually give it to the consumer," Holmgard says. "You put it on a very similar or even the same device.
Then our solution plays the game by looking at the screen, simulating key processes, generating a data set of everything that happens, and then hands it over to a second AI system that has a look at it and identifies bugs, raises it up to the human level and asks whether this is something we should act on." The first phase of the workflow is what Modl.ai calls building "game knowledge." Developers upload assets—artwork, design documents, level data—and converse with the AI in natural language to teach it the fundamentals of their title. "All of this is in natural language," Holmgard notes. "We just chat with the system about our game, but we're also adding in images, or we might upload our game design documents and so on." Once the AI has a baseline understanding, the development team defines the testing objectives. These can range from traditional test cases to novel scenarios that are specifically crafted to leverage the strengths of an AI‑driven engine.
"This is where you need some human expertise to adapt the prompting and the language to the AI agent to make it do the right things," Holmgard explains. The AI then runs a "session"—Modl.ai’s term for a test run—capturing screenshots, video snippets, logs, and other telemetry.
The system compiles this information into a bug report that is handed to a human QA specialist for review. "We get all the texts, and we get some video snippets that we call evidence along with all the log data and everything," Holmgard says. "This goes to a human QA specialist, an expert.
They review it, and then they decide what happens with it for the rest of our production." Distinguishing genuine bugs from intended features remains a nuanced challenge. The AI learns from the feedback loop provided by human testers, gradually refining its judgment. "Some of it comes from the prompting.
Some of it comes from that game knowledge that you've built up around the game ahead of time," Holmgard adds. "And then a good part of it also comes from feedback over time from the human testers. They will provide feedback to the bug reports and say: 'This was a bug; this was not a bug; this was not a bug for this reason' and so, over time, the system gets attuned." Side envisions this technology reshaping career trajectories within QA.
Rather than remaining in repetitive testing roles, staff can evolve into AI‑engineer positions, moving up the value chain and commanding higher salaries. "One of the cool parts about programs like this is that we get to move our people up the value chain," McBride says. "Instead of just doing testing and having a career at Side be a tester and moving up to senior tester, they can become an AI engineer.
It allows our people to get paid more, opens new career paths, and potentially brings jobs back to regions where they have disappeared because of low‑cost labour pressures." The automation of monotonous tasks also promises a more fulfilling work experience. Repetitive smoke tests and routine verifications often bog down testers, limiting their ability to think strategically. By offloading these chores to AI, testers can focus on analysis, creative problem‑solving, and higher‑order quality work.
"One of the things that this tool does very well right now is that it reduces the burden of repetitive tests," McBride notes. "By knocking these out and automating them, they get to have a more fulfilling career here with Side because they get to think more strategically and actually do more of the analysis and the kind of jobs that help them grow their career." Benedikte Mikkelsen, Modl.ai’s chief product officer, echoes this sentiment: "There are some very tedious tests that testers are performing right now. You don't really need a human doing the same flow over and over again.
That person could be doing something much more valuable, like assessing the gameplay itself or doing more creative kinds of testing. That, I think, is a value proposition of using AI." Both leaders stress that AI will not replace QA professionals; instead, it will augment them. "There's always going to be an opportunity for people to do a lot of the testing work because the price point of testing right now is so low in certain countries that it's very hard to augment it completely away," McBride explains. "But by giving our people tool sets like this, I'm allowing them to further their career, have a longer career, and keep them for longer by moving them up the value chain." Side’s philosophy treats AI as a "sliding scale" where human involvement never disappears.
"There will always be a human in the loop—that's sort of our ethos," McBride affirms. "The tool lets our people take the best of what AI can offer, reduce the burden, and also reduce mistakes. A lot of this work is tedious and prone to human error. You take that out of the equation, and everything ratchets up a notch and becomes better." When asked about the types of games the solution currently supports, COO Oliver Deslandes admits the technology is best suited for simpler titles—puzzle games, card games, and other experiences with repeatable mechanics—rather than fast‑paced 3D open‑world or fighting games.
"We have to focus on titles that are more appropriate. What we're aiming for at this stage is really clients that are willing to come on the journey with us because it could very much depend on what they want to do with this," Deslandes says.
He adds that the partnership is a pilot phase, and early adopters will help shape the future capabilities of the AI‑driven QA platform.