Jumpthru bug?

No software is perfect, no matter what testing process is in place, and so customers will always need a way to report problems and get them fixed.

We've had pretty much the same process for nearly 10 years now and it generally works well. Hundreds (if not, thousands?) of customers are happy to co-operate and the issues they file are often fixed.

We also need all the requested information to be able to actually help. Usually if someone only mentions a problem in passing on a forum or a comment, it's impossible to help. Most bugs are not obvious. Construct is mature software and most obvious problems are already solved; remaining problems tend to be a subtle combination of certain settings, devices, and circumstances, which is why it's impossible to help if you don't explain what these are. So in that sense, it's the only option - nothing else will work for actually solving customer's problems.

mOOnpunk - You're right, and that's also an amazing idea!

It'd rule out false reporting if someone claimed to use a specific version too, as C3 would just collect this info in the bug report.

Anything to speed up the reporting process.

We already deal with thousands of issue reports, and there are mountains of forum posts every day on the forum. If you only mention something on the forum, it will easily be quickly buried and lost. Posting it to the issue tracker helps keep it all organised in one place. The issue tracker also has good tools specific for dealing with issues, such as assigning to a developer, adding tags, tracking releases, and more. All of this ensures we can effectively help you.

If you post straight to the issue tracker, you'll avoid having to post in two places.

And as I said before, if you only mention something on the forum and skip the required information, 9 times out of 10 the information is not enough to do anything. It's a great deal of work even just checking every possible thing that might have gone wrong based on passing mentions on comments and forum posts, and most of the time it's a waste of time because we're missing important details. As a small team with limited resources, we just can't afford to waste our time chasing impossible bug reports. So we ask people to go directly to the issue tracker and provide all the requested details, so we don't end up wasting so much time trying to achieve the impossible. Unfortunately I'm not telepathic - we need all the key details to be able to help.

As I said we've been doing exactly this for years and years, and have gradually refined the process based on what provides the greatest chance of actually solving customer's problems. If you find this process objectionable for any reason, you don't have to file any issues - but then it is much less likely the specific problem you're having will be solved.

"It's a great deal of work even just checking every possible thing that might have gone wrong based on passing mentions on comments and forum posts, and most of the time it's a waste of time because we're missing important details. As a small team with limited resources, we just can't afford to waste our time chasing impossible bug reports"

It's like you don't have any pride in your own code at all? Your reliance on your customers to narrow down bugs so much so, you don't have to seek it out yourself, is concerning. So your whole model, your product is reliant on us doing a good work reporting YOUR bugs. Strange.

Well, i can always take my bussines elsewhere.

I mean, the OP of this post is clear as anything - The GIF shows the issue, Sine behaviour + jumpthru on the platform, platform movement on the player.

It's certainly to do with the Sine platform skipping beyond the player as it moves up, right? - It can't be the player moving too fast DOWN because I think the platform behaviour has stepping and such to prevent this.

Just from the OP, no detail appears to be missing in this case.

Thing is, I wouldn't have reported this bug if I encountered it, because I have the strongest feeling I would spend time making a repro c3p file, fill otu everything, make a screenshot, upload it all, post it on Github... then I'd wait unknown amount of days, and eventually get a reply saying "Ah it's complicated" and that's it, no workaround offered or anything.

This happened with me posting a bug about the Drawing Canvas - an actual feature in C3 is to "Paste Effects into Drawing Canvas"...and it's broken for a bunch of effects. No fix, no timeframe like "This may be fixed in a year, or when we recreate the effects compositor", no workaround (ironically, posting to the forum afterwards, someone from the community offered a workaround).

I respect things can be complicated, but what would make that whole experience less frustrating would be either: A) If the reporting process was much faster (e.g. reporting directly within C3), or B) If more could be offered if a bug cannot be fixed, such as a suggested workaround or something.

I´m glad to see people have time to write several lengthy posts complaining about how things work and coming up with alternatives instead of just posting a bugreport that probably takes a whopping 5 minutes and actually helps solving the problem.

Just imagine you release your game and someone just says "Level 2 doesn´t work, here´s a screenshot of me wedged into a wall" and when you ask him for more info on how he did it he starts complaining about how he is basically your bugfinding slave and starts a revolution.

WackyToaster I'm glad we have the freedom of talking to each other in the manner we like, as long as we follow the rules. How i spend my time, is my choice. Since im paying for construct 3, i believe it has some validity. You may disagree with me totally (my general stance towards bug reporting/fixing), and that's fine.

I just think i wouldn't have been so reliant on my customers to chase down bugs. I would feel bad for doing that towards my customers. But hey, that's me. Maybe im in the wrong here, or maybe im old fashioned, i don't know. Frankly it doesn't matter. At the end of the day, as a customer, i can always choose.

Dont get me wrong, i realy like Construct 3. That's why i am actualy spending time writing for once.

I think this thread has served its purpose and risks turning in to an argument, so closing.

The OP issue was filed here and it will be investigated in due course as per our normal procedures.

For the record, in this comment on the filed issue I've tried to explain the complexity of the problem, how we sometimes have to make changes over time, and the difficulty in getting it to work in all cases. Hopefully it will work better in the next release.