Frontier Issues Tracker

[Paul_Crowther]

Hello all!
As part of our efforts to upgrade our forums and feedback process, we are excited to share the details of our brand new Issues Tracker with you!

The Issues Tracker is a new website that will replace the current forum system of reporting bugs with one that puts the power in your hands. The new Issues Tracker will not only make it easier to report new bugs and issues to us but will also help make clear to us which issues matter most to you.

Awesome New Features

• Search for existing reports using keywords
• Contribute to other players' reported issues
• Vote Up the confirmed Issues that matter most to highlight their importance
• See what the Top Issues are
• Follow all the progress from your own reports on a dedicated 'My Issues' page

How the Issue Tracker works

• Login with your Frontier Account
• You report an issue to us
  • The issue will be listed on our tracker in an 'Unconfirmed' status
  • Other players who are experiencing the same issue can contribute confirmation towards your issue
  • Once enough confirmations are received the Issue will be flagged as confirmed and people can begin voting on it
  • You can upload images to help support your case in your report
• You have 4 votes to spend on issues that you feel are important.
  • Voting on an issue will raise its awareness and importance
  • Votes do not replenish until an Issue is resolved
  • You can remove your vote from an issue at any time
• You can track the progress of all your issues on the 'My Issues' page and a search function allows you to find the Issues you are interested in quickly and easily

The Bug Report forums are set to be archived. Reports created from the 28th March up until the launch of the Issues Tracker will be added there by us, so we can ensure they are reviewed in the new system. All bugs from before the 25th March are being reviewed and added to internal tracking system when deemed they need to be.

At launch all reports you make will be shown under your Frontier ID rather than a display name but we may look to retroactively alter this to your forum display name in a future update.

We're excited to be launching this new site for you, to ensure that the Issues that matter most get the focus they deserve. We're aiming to launch the site at the beginning of April and will share all details with you once it's ready to go! Thank you all for your reports and support so far!

 

[Riverside]

'Once enough players confirm'?

I can see how there would be plenty with insufficient evidence but surely it only takes one report with sufficient evidence to acknowledge there is a problem?

 

[Paul_Crowther]

'Once enough players confirm'?

I can see how there would be plenty with insufficient evidence but surely it only takes one report with sufficient evidence to acknowledge there is a problem?

Individual reports are still reviewed, so we can tag them as confirmed on our side.

 

[wstephenson]

How will you handle brigading on issues which aren't strictly bugs, but more like matters of taste? I expect one or the other player groups may try to use the new site to manipulate the game's development direction. Are your producers canny enough to spot this and assess issues rationally, and not railroad it through to implementation as a Shining Example of Community Engagement to check off at their next performance review?

I reference a similar issue in a community I was part of (Ars Technica article), which was used as soon as issue voting was introduced to push things one way (that I agreed with at the time, granted) but which ended up being more divisive than it was worth.

 

[Paul_Crowther]

How will you handle brigading on issues which aren't strictly bugs, but more like matters of taste? I expect one or the other player groups may try to use the new site to manipulate the game's development direction. Are your producers canny enough to spot this and assess issues rationally, and not railroad it through to implementation as a Shining Example of Community Engagement to check off at their next performance review?

I reference a similar issue in a community I was part of (Ars Technica article), which was used as soon as issue voting was introduced to push things one way (that I agreed with at the time, granted) but which ended up being more divisive than it was worth.

Whilst players can vote all issues are still manually reviewed. The teams will be working to ensure the Issue Tracker focuses on resolving bugs. Feedback and suggestions on a games development will continue to be focused on the forums.

 

[Ozric]

Do we have an ETA? How will interaction work between us and QA?

One of the biggest issues with the current system is that there is so little response (I do understand that QA are busy) over 3/4 of the bugs that I reported since the release of 3.3 weren't replied to by staff. There are still lots of bugs that were reported during the 3.3 Beta that have not been fixed for Elite. I'm sorry but with the swell of support behind those bugs, some of the Exploration ones went over 15 pages of comments and reports added to the initial post, and they're still not deemed a priority enough to be fixed. Then I fail to see how letting people vote on an issue is going to make any difference at all.

Individual reports are still reviewed, so we can tag them as confirmed on our side.

Will they show as confirmed to us though?

 

[Paul_Crowther]

The vote system is to allow players to highlight the issues that matter most until they are resolved. The number isn't set in stone so could go up or down. It's a system that has worked great for other systems in the industry and we'd like to put it to use on Frontier. The reports will show a status of whether they are confirmed, fixed or closed.

 

[Paul_Crowther]

So bugs being fixed are going to boil down to a popularity contest. RIP console users.

Also instead of changing how bugs are reported, how about changing how they are fixed? How many weeks now since the last patch?

Voting helps our QA team identify which bugs are the most important at that time. Other votes will still be reviewed and investigated.

 

[rootsrat]

Is there going to be division by platform? And if so, how does that relate to 4 votes? 4 votes per platform or overall?

 

[Riverside]

Voting helps our QA team identify which bugs are the most important at that time. Other votes will still be reviewed and investigated.

Presumably there is a relatively small number of contributors that supply the majority of the reports (pareto rule). Could some community members be nominated as moderators to help with the duplication and prioritisaton workload? They could have an elevated number of votes and the ability to merge threads. I rarely post bug reports if they have already been raised, I am not volunteering myself.

 

[Redden Alt-Mer]

Presumably there is a relatively small number of contributors that supply the majority of the reports (pareto rule). Could some community members be nominated as moderators to help with the duplication and prioritisaton workload? They could have an elevated number of votes and the ability to merge threads. I rarely post bug reports if they have already been raised, I am not volunteering myself.

I like this idea!
An alternative, as I previously suggested, would be a reputation based system: you upvote an issue that gets confirmed by QA -> you get more rep. You upvote an issue that's flagged as not good -> you lose rep. Same for opening issues that are relevant/non duplicated. The more rep you gain, the more votes you get.

 

[Factabulous]

How will you handle brigading on issues which aren't strictly bugs, but more like matters of taste? I expect one or the other player groups may try to use the new site to manipulate the game's development direction. Are your producers canny enough to spot this and assess issues rationally, and not railroad it through to implementation as a Shining Example of Community Engagement to check off at their next performance review?

I reference a similar issue in a community I was part of (Ars Technica article), which was used as soon as issue voting was introduced to push things one way (that I agreed with at the time, granted) but which ended up being more divisive than it was worth.

Bugs != Features. Hopefully fdev know this, even if a large part of the community struggles to understand.

 

[Stigbob]

Presumably there is a relatively small number of contributors that supply the majority of the reports (pareto rule). Could some community members be nominated as moderators to help with the duplication and prioritisaton workload? They could have an elevated number of votes and the ability to merge threads. I rarely post bug reports if they have already been raised, I am not volunteering myself.

You need to be able to filter out the single issue obsessives.

 

[Paul_Crowther]

Is there going to be division by platform? And if so, how does that relate to 4 votes? 4 votes per platform or overall?

Bugs will be sorted by game and platform (And other criteria) but votes are 4 per person. However, the number of votes is currently an arbitrary number so can be increased or decreased if needed.

Presumably there is a relatively small number of contributors that supply the majority of the reports (pareto rule). Could some community members be nominated as moderators to help with the duplication and prioritisaton workload? They could have an elevated number of votes and the ability to merge threads. I rarely post bug reports if they have already been raised, I am not volunteering myself.

Currently we aren't looking at having bug tracking volunteer moderators. The Issues Tracker queues will be monitored and organised internally.

 

[Riverside]

You need to be able to filter out the single issue obsessives.

The support team should have a fair idea of who submits good data, it just strikes me as something the community can help with.

I think single issue obsessives would only be able to use a single vote on their issue but the general issue of bias is not unique to this and could just as equally be applied to FDev employees if someone wanted to be churlish (I do not claim this).

 

[Speedcuffs]

Sounds good.

When is it due?

Where will it be located?

 

[Duck & Jenny]

The Bug Report forums are set to be archived. Reports created from the 28th March up until the launch of the Issues Tracker will be added there by us, so we can ensure they are reviewed in the new system. All bugs from before the 25th March are being reviewed and added to internal tracking system when deemed they need to be.

So your QA team will go through ALL bug reports since 3.3 launched, correct? I'm guessing you'll add bugs to the new system that have yet to be fixed, and bugs not added to the new system have either been fixed or fall under the "require more information" category. Is this correct? I put a lot of effort into many of my bug reports (some going back a year ago, acknowledged by QA as issues, but are not yet fixed). It would be greatly frustrating if I have to resubmit these.

At launch all reports you make will be shown under your Frontier ID rather than a display name but we may look to retroactively alter this to your forum display name in a future update.

This is a deal-breaker for me. It'll be quite easy for anyone to tie "Old Duck", which is an anonymous handle, to my Frontier ID, which ties to "me" personally. I'm not willing to give up my privacy to report bugs. Unless my Frontier ID is hidden from the public and only seen by myself and Frontier personnel. Is this the case?

 

[Riverside]

Bugs will be sorted by game and platform (And other criteria) but votes are 4 per person. However, the number of votes is currently an arbitrary number so can be increased or decreased if needed.



Currently we aren't looking at having bug tracking volunteer moderators. The Issues Tracker queues will be monitored and organised internally.

Okay thanks Paul.

 

[babelfisch]

Will there be Achievements?

 

[Stigbob]

The support team should have a fair idea of who submits good data, it just strikes me as something the community can help with.

I think single issue obsessives would only be able to use a single vote on their issue but the general issue of bias is not unique to this and could just as equally be applied to FDev employees if someone wanted to be churlish (I do not claim this).

Paul already explained that bit to you.