As a bug reporter, I feel that the current handling of reports in #bug-reports:catalog-asset-bugs is less than ideal. This concern was first brought up by @Alpkurt2 in “The Big Bug Reporting Update”. I would like to build upon their concerns with communication in the following points containing reports for reference (some are used more than once).
Some issues are partially fixed and then abandoned (1, 2). This is a big pet peeve of mine. I don’t understand why the issues aren’t fixed to completion in the first place. Leaving issues partially fixed will only contribute to the backlog of reports. If an issue isn’t going to be fixed further, then the report should be closed and locked to not give false hope.
Gears have been deprecated since 2019, but the category’s description fails to state this (1, 2). However, I feel that an alternative solution should be looked into here instead of immediately closing the reports. I feel that the lack of consideration is disrespectful to the reporters.
Radio silence when criticism emerges (1, 2, 3, 4). Sometimes an engineer’s response to an issue is controversial (e.g., closing when there’s still an issue, partially fixing an issue and abandoning it) and criticism emerges. Instead of being ignored, criticism should be embraced and responded to. Criticism should be fully addressed until the report can be brought to a respectful close.
Lack of quality control testing (1, 2, 3, 4). Sometimes a fix is implemented, but it either doesn’t completely resolve the issue or causes more issues. Before a fix is applied to a catalog asset, it should be thoroughly tested to ensure it actually resolves the issue. This will save time by not having to implement further fixes and not having to go back and forth with users on the bug report. Also, this is often the cause of the issue mentioned in point 1.
If Roblox is able to address this issue, it would improve my experience reporting bugs in the Catalog Asset Bugs category by improving how it’s handled in the situations mentioned. I’m not saying this to be rude; I just want to see improvement. I’m a little frustrated and disheartened by these issues with this category. Hopefully, this can be looked into.
This seems quite low impact (it’s just about differences in opinion on artistic intent, with maybe a few rendering bugs mixed in) but I’ve forwarded your thread for consideration.
I’ve closed out one of the threads you linked because there was no impact (I am unsure why the report was made in the first place since none of the people in that thread owned the item). Try to only report bugs when there is impact to you yourself so that we’re not just posting issues for the sake of posting them.
That’s understandable! If I remember correctly, I actually filed that report prior to the accessory being confirmed as a Make-A-Wish item. To prevent this from occurring again, I suggest stating that the accessory is limited to one user in its description. I’ll definitely take a mental note of this for future reports.
As a suggestion, maybe a program similar to Retexture Artists could be implemented. For example, a program where its members send their fixes of catalog assets to the team, and the team reviews the proposed fixes. As of 5-23-24, there are a total of approximately 110 unresolved bug reports in the Catalog Asset Bugs category. I understand that the amount of unresolved reports in Catalog Asset Bugs is overwhelming. There are a lot of users (including UGC creators) who are very passionate about Roblox-created accessories. The community could help this team address the backlog of reports.
Although I think some of my reports don’t get solved due to there being differences in opinion on artistic intent like you said, reports which have genuine issues that impact players that wear and play with players that wear said items also get thrown aside to not be fixed for years! I understand catalog reports are low priority compared to other types of reports but I wish there was more transparency as its unfair to have a genuine report left to rot for over a year. Let me show a few examples.
This first issue concerns 2 items which have their particle emitter placed in the accessory object instead of the handle object, this causes the particles to spawn at 0,0,0 instead of on the player. Not only does the particles not show on the item itself, this can cause minor obstructions due to the particles spawning in a place its not supposed to be. I reported this issue nearly a year ago.
This issue concerns a deprecated object still being used on some accessories to this day. Not only does this default to the hat attachment on accessories that shouldn’t have it. It also causes visual issues in games that do anything with the players accessories which I’ve listed in the thread. Developers shouldn’t have to account for an object deprecated in 2016 being used in games when it shouldn’t be used in any accessory in the first place. I reported this a year ago.
The final issue I’d like to talk about is several bundles that don’t have wrap targets. Not only does this create visual oddities which can obstruct players gameplay, it prevents players who want to use said bundles with layered clothing from doing so. The only saving grace with this report is that at least one of bundles I reported got fixed, but that wasn’t even conveyed to me in the report and I had to find out myself later on. I reported this a year ago.
I really do understand that engineers most likely have a lot on their plate and fixing catalog bugs just isn’t a high priority but there are many people who care so much about these items and want to see them in the best condition possible. If its going to take a while I’d at least like to see some transparency with some of these reports. Like Proven Right said I think it’d be cool to see a program which people who are passionate about said items can make the fixes themselves and have roblox implement them.
Some of the artistic bugs that are not related to the engine are most likely handled by the artists at Roblox, like 3D Generalists and Art Leads. But those artists probably have a lot on their plate, between working on new characters and new overhauled templates.
With all due respect, could you please provide sources for your claims? I want to believe you, but you need proof. Specifically, I’m referring to these statements.
Only someone who works at Roblox could know this. IMO it isn’t right for a report to be unresolved without any communication from the team for over a year regardless of workload.
I believe Roblox’s last Make-A-Wish, Hallows Valk, is still accessible, so I don’t know where you’re getting this information.
Last public Make-A-Wish, this bug report is an example of Roblox’s ability to remove catalog pages for hidden/private assets, andnthe make-a-wish items most likely fall under this.
I’m speaking based on what I’ve observed from public sources. For example staff members like Klaugrana001 responding/most likely being assigned to catalog asset bug reports (1, 2), and MisoPonyo is a 3D generalist as noted in one of the Roblox Level Up videos. They most likely work on asset bugs due to their skill set and Roblox groups. We also know that there are most likely not engineers handling 3D art assets, as there are most likely dedicated artists that are not part of the engineering force. I also generalized a bit; if a catalog bug was related to rendering or the website, an engineer from those teams would be most likely assigned to the issue. My conclusion could be wrong, but I believe that there being dedicated artists that handle bugs like these are the most likely case scenario
I see your point, but your reasoning is merely based off of speculation without any official statements as you said. Even though Roblox has the ability to hide accessories, this hasn’t been confirmed to be used on any Make-A-Wish items AFAIK (appeals to ignorance fallacy). Also, we don’t know Klaugrana001’s exact job position, and MisoPonyo was last seen on the forum in 2022. However, I do acknowledge that you could be right.
@Hooksmith Out of curiosity, has anything happened in response to this feature request? I just wanted to follow up because it’s been a week since this request was filed. Thanks again!
Could you please check if this category still covers issues with accessories in terms of aesthetics? The reason why I ask: I recently saw this post on a report by a member of the team which states,“…we won’t be making any aesthetic changes”. Like the situation with gears, I fear this will set a precedent that will jeopardize similar reports such as this report about asymmetry with the Summer Valk. Currently, the category’s description states,”This category is for reporting issues with…Roblox-created catalog assets on the Marketplace…” Although examples of issues that are applicable to the category are provided, this statement is vague and makes it appear that both technical and aesthetic issues can be reported (as no limitations are stated). If aesthetic issues with accessories are no longer going to be considered, then the category’s description should state this.
Hooksmith, I really appreciate and respect you because you seem to care about this feature request despite not being directly responsible for this category to my knowledge. I think it would be very appropriate and professional if the team who is responsible for this category directly acknowledged and addressed this request. It has been over 2 weeks now which is plenty of time for this to have been reviewed and considered. I’m very eager and hope to see something happen soon!
Also, are issues with an accessory’s position considered obsolete due to the planned revamp to the Avatar Editor for custom positioning, scaling, and rotating of accessories? You might remember that I first voiced this concern with this post in “The Big Bug Reporting Update”. My report about the Timeless Valkyrie Helm’s position was closed for this reason. I feel that it would be nice to know which types of issues (e.g., aesthetic, gears, and position) with catalog assets are considered obsolete before I make a report. These are important questions that need to be answered because the response to each of them will set a precedent that will impact the state of similar reports in the category.
If this is a problem, I would suggest stating in the category’s description that it’s a requirement to own the asset in order to report issues with it. I feel that most users (including myself) report issues with a catalog asset whenever they see them regardless if they own the item or not.
Even if it isn’t owned, the model asset can be used in games to increase the visual fidelity of the game or to make cool NPC armor and things like that. These are bugs, and they need to be fixed.
I was nice at the start of making this request, but I’m going to be very frank after waiting for a month now. I’m very disappointed; The lack of response to my questions and this request is unacceptable and embarrassing. I hope some higher-ups have seen this request.
I’m afraid that this request was immediately disregarded as “low impact” even though I mentioned precedents that have been possibly set that will impact reports in the category. Users are wasting their time and the team’s time by reporting issues that are considered obsolete. I hope that those precedents have genuine reasons to support them and aren’t just phony excuses to close reports in order to reduce the backlog (doing this just looks lazy).
Overall, I’m very concerned by incompetence. From seeing the backlog, it’s obvious that there are issues with the handling of these reports. I understand that high impact issues are often prioritized over low impact issues; However, I think there should be a decent balance between triaging both. As minor issues build up over time, addressing them will only become more overwhelming. Additionally, the lack of response to my questions and this request explains a lot about the current condition of the category. If a well written request can’t even be answered in a timely manner (i.e., 1-2 weeks), then how can it be expected that the backlog of reports in the category will be eventually addressed?
Hooksmith has done all he can do. It’s the team(s) assigned to the category turn to acknowledge this request and make improvements for the better.
As a side note, isn’t it ironic that the criticism in this request hasn’t been addressed? It appears that the team(s) involved with this category dislike criticism. Let’s be open to criticism and not be stubborn. Don’t be scared of me, I just want answers.
Hi. I’m getting caught up on this particular thread and will help get the right people in the conversation as well.
Just to provide some internal context, as much as I can.
There’s definitely no internal effort to try and silence any criticism or not address it. Nor is there any attempt to ignore it and hope it goes away.
To my knowledge there’s also not been any explicit de-prioritizing of any category of bugs or feedback.
There’s been a lot of growth at the company that in some cases has complicated ownership and processes around various reporting channels. Just growing pain stuff, not intentional.
I can very much appreciate that it’s frustrating in addition to having bad optics, but we don’t take that lightly and are focused on trying to make the whole platform and ecosystem better wherever we can.
There’s a lot of disparate asset types at this point in time and some of those have some deep roots in various systems across the platform, so it’s not always trivial or even straightforward to resolve some bugs, especially if it involves data structures or other functionality exposed to devs or is tied to other internal functionality that would hurt backwards compatibility (again, speaking generally in case that context is helpful to understand why some things seemingly take forever).
All of that being said, I’m sorry this has been frustrating for you and we do appreciate the honesty.
I really appreciate the transparency in your response, but will staff follow up soon? I believe the handling of this category will become more efficient if the issues mentioned in this thread are addressed. Currently, this response appears to be all talk, no action because it’s been almost a month since a follow up(s) from staff was promised. I hope this is being actively discussed internally, and that’s why there hasn’t been a response yet.
Just to reiterate, here are the main questions that I have besides the problems mentioned in the OP.
Does this category still cover issues with accessories in terms of aesthetics?
Are issues with an accessory’s position considered obsolete due to the planned revamp to the Avatar Editor for custom positioning, scaling, and rotating of accessories?
Is it a requirement to own the catalog asset in order to report issues with it?
It’s been over 2 months since my last reply, and staff have yet to provide a follow up or update on this request. Although the staff member who last posted on this thread seemed to have good intentions, it appears that they’re inactive on the forum. Can I please receive an update on this request?
Just to confirm, some of the issues that were mentioned in the OP are still occurring. For example, this report about the incorrect naming of specific accessories is currently marked as “Fixed” despite the names still being incorrect. This has been pointed out on that report, but staff haven’t followed up yet.
Also, when can we expect old reports in this category to be addressed? Right now, it appears that only new reports are being addressed. As Alpkurt2 said, some of these old reports have a decent impact. These old reports aren’t going to fix themselves.
