Group6 Interactive
Overall Review Rating
4.3 (5 Ratings)
Overview
Established in 2011, Group6 Interactive is a leading web development company. Their team is comprised of highly knowledgeable and skilled individuals using the latest cutting-edge technology. Their mission is to help businesses foster growth, conquer the app market and increase customer base through smart and innovative digital products.
Services
- Web Development
- Magento
- Game Development
- Machine Learning
- Custom Application Development
- Cross Platform Development
- iOS App Development
- Azure Services
- Android App Development
- Mobile App Development
- IT Consulting
- Digital Strategy Management
Industries Served
Group6 Interactive Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Giulia Conti
Product Manager - Colosseum Digital SrlCustom workflows that match our sales motion exactly. No workarounds needed.
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
Our LMS was built for classroom-first delivery. Hybrid learning had exposed every assumption it was built on, and student satisfaction data confirmed it.
Dominic Fairfax
Head of Digital Transformation - Arcadian Consulting LtdAd spend efficiency improved 40% without reducing reach. The targeting work was the difference.
Three months post-launch our key metrics are all moving in the right direction — user adoption ahead of target, support volume down, time-on-task reduced for our core workflows. The product team has started planning features that were never viable on the previous platform. That is the real proof of the investment: it opened up possibilities rather than just replacing what was there before.
Project summary
A failed engagement the previous year had made us more rigorous about vendor selection. We took the time to find a partner we actually trusted before we committed.
Ananya Sharma
Engineering Manager - BlueMind Analytics Pvt LtdThe kind of game studio that treats production quality as non-negotiable
Honestly, I came into this engagement with some scepticism. We had a bad experience with a vendor twelve months earlier and I wanted to see evidence of competence, not just hear about it. The discovery documentation was the first signal. The sprint delivery consistency was the second. By go-live I had stopped being sceptical and started planning how to expand the engagement. The production system has been stable from day one and our internal team loves working with the codebase they left us.
Project summary
Our field service scheduling ran on a system that predated smartphones. Technician productivity was suffering and customer satisfaction scores reflected it.
Callum Parata
CTO - Kiwi Cloud Solutions LtdSales visibility we had requested for three years, delivered in fourteen weeks
We have worked with a few agencies over the years and the comparison is honestly not close. What stood out from the start was that they spent serious time understanding the problem before they proposed anything. Once development started, every sprint review was clean — no hidden surprises, no slipped milestones. The production system has been running for four months without a single critical issue. Our internal developers reviewed the codebase at handover and were genuinely complimentary about the quality. That does not happen often.
Project summary
The business case had been approved but the internal resource to execute it had not materialised. External delivery was the pragmatic solution.
Clémentine Aubert
Head of Digital Products - Arc-en-Ciel Digital SASObservability stack that caught three production issues before any user reported them
We received proposals from six vendors. Four of them quoted us prices that bore no relationship to the actual scope. This team came back with something realistic and then delivered against it exactly. I have worked on enough technology projects to know that the gap between what is proposed and what is delivered is where trust gets destroyed. There was no gap here. What was promised is what we got, and the ongoing relationship we have built from this is something we intend to continue.
Project summary
Our actuarial models had outgrown the reporting infrastructure feeding them. Data latency was introducing risk into pricing decisions at a rate the business would no longer accept.