Is there a common place where game bugs are documented? I’ve had a lot of fun playing with known “unexpected game behavior” bugs in Infocom games after completing a game. These are mostly bugs that cause unexpected effects within the context of the game – more like exploits, rather than just inconsistencies or crashes. I’ve been referencing Graeme Cree’s and @Nathan‘s lists, but these don’t seem to be frequently maintained anymore and aren’t really collaborative.
For example, would it make sense for an IFDB entry to have an optional section with a table of known bugs, with each bug categorized? I realize that GitHub is the place to document outright source code bugs, but most game players aren’t going to check there.
IFWiki seems like a better place to try that, if only because it already has the infrastructure for free-form collaboration on or near per-game pages.
But it sounds like you’ll still have the problem of the fragmentation of bug info between possibly-no-longer-curated bug lists, projects like The Infocom Files, and this new repository of knowledge.
I’m not up on the state of documentation of Infocom bugs, but on a quick look (all of this is stuff you’ve linked to or in threads you’ve linked to):
Nathan Simpson’s addendum shows as last updated in November 2024, so it might still be possible to get new entries on there.
The Infocom Files records bugs in GitHub issues. (Some of which get fed back to Nathan’s list, per the thread you linked.) On a quick look, lots of activity in 2021, dunno if it’s ongoing. (And the aims of that project don’t necessarily align precisely with documenting bugs in released versions of games – e.g.)
I’m still working on it, but I admit there’s an indefinite wait after you send me a bug report. I always have a backlog, mostly emails. Some bugs take a lot of work to verify, and I’ve always tried to be careful about it.
I’m definitely planning another update this year. I’ve found some fun bugs in the v6 parser games.
Thanks. I see what you mean for IFDB vs IFWiki. Originally, I was thinking that since IMDB has “Goofs”, then IFDB could have "Bugs”. But it does seem like the the IFDB format is not really flexible enough for that. The only drawback may be that the IFWiki game entries are generally fairly sparse compared to IFDB, so it’s not clear to me how often they are referenced. I can’t think of a better alternative, tho.
That’s good to hear. And thanks for your diligence on the list! It seems much better to have a vetted and tested bug list. Would you prefer to have bugs emailed to you or just messaged here in infiction.org?
Emails are easiest to keep track of, but however people want to share bugs is fine by me.
And to be clear, I have no objection to tracking bugs on the IFWiki. I love the openness and immediacy of editing a wiki.
If you and/or Graeme would like to consolidate both lists into a community resource, perhaps the best way would be to have them as part of each game’s page (e.g. as a section on Ballyhoo - IFWiki or Enchanter - IFWiki). These could be linked to from the main https://www.ifwiki.org/Infocom_bugs page.
I can see Fred’s point about having a vetted and tested list, but perhaps the wiki’s edit history (and, touch wood, lack of vandalism over the years) would be a sufficient safeguard.
Thanks! Yeah, I was thinking about updating the game page. Having the Infocom_bugs page link to it is a good idea. I just finished Beyond Zork, so was considering adding a preliminary “Known Bugs” section and seeing what folks thought.
Info I’m thinking each bug should have:
Description
Version(s)
Category (crash, wrong game behavior, unexpected game behavior, spelling/grammar, etc). This seems a little fuzzy, so open to suggestions.
Source (Graeme’s list, Nathan’s list, web sites, etc)
Discoverer’s name, if known
Links with more discussion (could be to blogs or walk-thru’s)
