When comparing Screenster vs Nightwatch.js, the Slant community recommends Nightwatch.js for most people. In the question“What are the best automated browser testing frameworks?” Nightwatch.js is ranked 2nd while Screenster is ranked 6th. The most important reason people chose Nightwatch.js is:
Nightwatch solves the [Paradox of Choice](http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice?language=en) among testing frameworks such as Jasmine, Cucumber or Mocha+Chai, by including its own BDD-style assertion library, based on Chai.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro CI integration
Integrations for TeamCity, Jenkins, CircleCI etc.
Pro Free version
Pro You don't have to choose a testing framework
Nightwatch solves the Paradox of Choice among testing frameworks such as Jasmine, Cucumber or Mocha+Chai, by including its own BDD-style assertion library, based on Chai.
Pro Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
Pro Test organization is out of the box
Supports page object model, custom commands, custom assertions, and globals.js.
Pro 3rd party integration with Cucumber
Though Cucumber is not officially supported, Nightwatch can be used with Cucumber.
Cons
Con No official BDD-style syntax support
Con Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
Unlike WebdriverIO, which lets you use various test frameworks and assertion libraries (e.g. Jasmine, Cucumber, Mocha + Chai), Nightwatch comes with its own BDD-style interface for performing assertions, based on Chai.
Here's a simple test example:
module.exports = {
'Demo test Google' : function (browser) {
browser
.url('http://www.google.com')
.waitForElementVisible('body', 1000)
.setValue('input[type=text]', 'nightwatch')
.waitForElementVisible('button[name=btnG]', 1000)
.click('button[name=btnG]')
.pause(1000)
.assert.containsText('#main', 'Night Watch')
.end();
}
};