Record and playback testing: What is it?

Software testing remains a critical step in a product’s development life cycle. It has evolved significantly, with various methodologies now available. Among these methods is the record and playback testing technique.

Unlike manual scripting, record and playback testing, also known as capture and replay, is an automated testing method that uses a testing tool to capture user actions such as clicks, keystrokes, or navigation within software. These actions are then converted into an automated test script that can be replayed at a later time.

The goal is to verify and confirm that the software’s behavior is consistent across different scenarios, checking for expected outcomes such as page loads and form submissions.

This approach is particularly useful for UI testing, regression testing (by ensuring that all new code changes do not break existing functionality), and user journey validation and is also important for teams aiming to accelerate testing cycles in an Agile environment.

At its core, a technical implementation of record and playback testing involves three primary phases.

How record and playback testing works?

At its core, a technical implementation of record and playback testing involves three primary phases:

1. Recording

This phase involves the tester using a record and playback tool to monitor and capture all live interactions with the software UI. This may include entering data into forms, navigating through menus, clicking on links and buttons, etc.

The tool then stores and translates the recorded session into a reusable test script or module (often in a language like JavaScript or Python), alongside the exact state of the application at the time of each action.

Although it can be done so easily now, it wasn’t always this way. Early tools that made record and playback testing accessible were heavily criticized for producing brittle test scripts that often broke whenever the app UI was modified.

This was because these tools relied on static locators like element IDs or XPaths, which were sensitive to even minor UI changes, resulting in a lot of script maintenance.

Modern tools like Tricentis Tosca introduce visual editors and AI-powered smart locators to identify UI elements while also allowing testers to include assertions during recording to verify certain outcomes, like if a form redirects to a particular page on submission.

2. Editing

Once recording is done, the tester goes ahead with refining the entire script to remove unnecessary steps, like accidental button clicks. Here, you can also parameterize the inputs to test different scenarios, incorporate conditionals (like if statements), and add complex loop logic.

3. Playback (or replay)

During playback, the test scripts are executed, and the tool then interacts with the application, performing the same clicks, inputs, and navigations as the original recording. It compares both and looks for discrepancies.

If any are found (like an unresponsive button), the test fails, and a report is generated with details like screenshots, logs, or error messages. Some advanced tools may include diagnostic features such as failure suggestions to help the tester properly identify the actual root cause of the failures.

To fully understand where record and playback testing fit, you need to first understand how it integrates with other testing techniques.

But where does it fit in an overall testing strategy?

Record and playback testing is a valuable and powerful testing method. The role it plays within an overall testing strategy largely depends on several factors like the goal of the project, the expertise level of the team, application complexity, etc.

To fully understand where it fits, you need to first understand how it integrates with other testing techniques, and what its strengths and limitations are in specific contexts.

We know that a comprehensive testing procedure comprises various layers such as Unit Testing, Integration Testing, Functional Testing, Regression Testing, Performance Testing, Security Testing, User Acceptance Testing, and Exploratory Testing.

Record and playback testing primarily fits into functional testing and regression testing, but can also be extended to the remaining areas depending on the tool and approach adopted.

Benefits of record and playback testing

There are many benefits that come with incorporating record and playback testing in your overall process:

1. Reduces the time of test creation

Manual testing can take weeks or potentially months to complete. But with the recording feature of playback testing, within minutes, an entire application process can be recorded and stored, while the tool uses these recordings to complete the rest of the process, taking away manual workload from the testers.

2. Great for proof of concept projects

For teams at the MVP stage, or about to get funding, record and playback testing can easily provide proof of concept to investors and boards on the stability of their software, increasing trust in the team.

3. Minimal coding required

Compared to some of the coded automation frameworks available, another amazing advantage of automated record and playback testing is its ability to be used by testers who don’t have strong coding backgrounds.

Though having someone on your team with some technical experience might be great, you don’t need any knowledge of platform syntax (e.g., JavaScript) or even how the application was built.

This equalization of software testing has made it possible for product managers, subject matter experts (SMEs), business analysts, and even sole business owners to create tests in minutes or hours.

4. Faster feedback loops

Playbacks allow quicker test executions, hence providing faster feedback on whether recent changes have in any way introduced regressions.

Challenges and limitations of record and playback testing

Despite its initial appeal, this form of testing also comes with some significant challenges and limitations that you need to consider:

1. Too much or too little recording

Finding the right balance in recording is important. If a tester chooses to record every single interaction, it could lead to bloated and fragile tests, and too little recording can also result in incomplete validations.

2. Potential false positives/negatives

Some tests may pass because the UI elements were recognized, even though the underlying functionality might be broken. On the other hand, test cases might fail unexpectedly due to small UI changes that in no way affect the actual functionality.

3. Dependency on UI stability

This type of testing is highly reliant on having a consistent UI structure; hence, changes in element IDs, layouts, or interactions can break the tests.

4. Limited flexibility and logic

In most cases, the recorded scripts might lack flexibility and control flows like conditional statements, which are needed to properly test more complex functionality.

5. Dynamic content handling

Some software has very dynamic UIs. These kinds of software constantly have pop-ups and consistent real-time updates. As a result of this, it becomes problematic for record and playback to be effectively used for these kinds of software.

6. Test script maintenance

Since it heavily depends on the data that was obtained at the time of recording, it can be hard to maintain current test results, as software is very dynamic.

Record and playback vs. model-based testing

To provide a broader perspective on record and playback testing, it’s worth comparing it to another approach called model-based testing. You can check out this detailed comparison.

Comparing record and playback testing to other testing techniques

Best practices for effective record and playback testing

Here are some best practices for getting started with record and playback testing:

Plan ahead

Before starting any test, regardless of the mode of testing, planning out your entire flow is the way to go. This will ensure that you have an understanding of all the potential outcomes of the result and an idea of what you need to do after the test execution.

Modularise recordings

Instead of running long end-to-end tests on your software, you should break down your record and playback tests into smaller, reusable components. This is particularly necessary to ensure that maintaining the tests when your software changes doesn’t become a bottleneck.

Use clear and consistent naming conventions

Just like with software development, it’s necessary to use consistent names with your test cases to enhance clarity and make it easy for teams to efficiently locate, modify, and execute test cases, especially when testing very large software.

Document test results

Documenting test results and expected test results can help in creating additional logic and also in knowledge transfers.

Integrating record and playback testing into CI/CD pipelines

While record and playback tools are primarily run on a GUI, depending on the tool, you can modify your pipeline script and include a step that runs your record and playback tests.

You can start by selecting your preferred record and playback tool that supports CI/CD integration. Tricentis Tosca Automation Recording Assistant (ARA) is a strong choice. One of its main selling points is to make record and playback testing accessible to non-technical and manual testers. To test it out, you can request a free trial. ARA seamlessly integrates with and supports CI/CD tools like Jenkins and GitHub Actions.

From version 15.2, Tricentis introduced the Tosca Execution Client, a command-line tool that you can use to run your Tosca ARA scripts in your own CI/CD pipeline.

Then, you can proceed to use the tool to record, add assertions, and perform any other refinements as needed. After that, you can configure your CI/CD pipeline to include your tests. And you can create a process break where, if it doesn’t pass the test, the application doesn’t build.

Click to Download the Tosca Execution Client.

Record and playback testing is the future of testing, and while it still has some critiques, its potential is amazing.

In summary

Record and playback testing is the future of testing, and while it still has some critiques, its potential is amazing. In a world where technical knowledge is being democratized, this method of testing software is highly likely to stay and expand.

John D. McGregor, a software testing expert and the author of A Practical Guide to Testing Object-Oriented Software, said about software testing: “In many ways, being a good tester is harder than being a good developer because testing requires not only a very good understanding of the development process and its products, but it also demands an ability to anticipate likely faults and errors.”

Software developers can’t do excellent work without testers, as the relationship between them is closely linked, and because of this, testers must find a way to simplify the testing process while still retaining the high accuracy of test results.

This post was written by Wisdom Ekpotu. Wisdom is a software & technical writer based in Nigeria. Wisdom is passionate about web/mobile technologies, open source, and building communities. He also helps companies improve the quality of their technical documentation.