What's the difference between a known issues page and a public bug tracker?

A known issues page is a curated list of major problems you choose to acknowledge; a full public tracker exposes your broader bug list and status. The known issues page captures most of the trust and deflection benefits with less exposure and commitment, since you control exactly what's shown, which is why many games prefer it as the middle path.

Does acknowledging bugs publicly make my game look bad?

Generally the opposite, players are more forgiving of a bug they know you're aware of and working on than one they think you're ignoring. A curated known issues page signals attentiveness, not incompetence. Because you choose which problems to list, you acknowledge the significant ones without advertising every minor flaw, so the trust gain outweighs the exposure.

Should I Add a Known Issues Page to My Game?

Q: Should I add a known issues page to my game?

For most live games, yes. It acknowledges problems publicly, which makes players far more patient, and it deflects the flood of duplicate reports by answering "is this known?" before it's asked, all at low cost. It's also a lighter commitment than a full public tracker, since you curate which issues to list. Finished titles with no active community can skip it.

Quick answer: Yes, for most live games. A known issues page tells players you're aware of problems and working on them, which builds patience and deflects a flood of duplicate reports, at low cost. It's a lighter commitment than a full public tracker.

A known issues page is a curated list of problems you're aware of and addressing. It sits between full transparency and saying nothing, and for most live games it's an easy yes: it captures most of the benefit of a public tracker (trust, deflection) with less exposure and commitment.

It Builds Patience by Acknowledging Problems

Players are dramatically more patient with a bug they know you're aware of than one they think you're ignoring. A known issues page does exactly that, acknowledges the problem publicly, which defuses frustration and the "does the dev even know?" anxiety that drives angry posts and reviews.

Bugnet's public pages let you publish acknowledged issues simply, fed from your real tracking. That acknowledgement is often worth more to players than the fix itself in the short term, it tells them they've been heard.

It Deflects Duplicate Reports

A big chunk of support volume is players reporting an issue you already know about. A known issues page answers "is this a known bug?" before they ask, so many of those duplicate reports and messages never get sent. That deflection meaningfully reduces your support load during a rough patch.

Bugnet's public tracker and known-issues view absorb these repeats, so you're not answering the same thing dozens of times. The page does support work for you, around the clock, at no per-view cost.

It's a Lighter Commitment Than a Full Tracker

Compared to a fully public bug tracker, a known issues page is curated, you choose which problems to list, so it carries less exposure and commitment. You acknowledge the major issues without advertising every minor flaw, getting most of the trust and deflection benefit with less downside.

Bugnet lets you publish a curated public view while keeping your full bug list internal, so you control exactly what's shown. For most live games, that curated known-issues page is an easy yes; the only games that might skip it are finished titles with no active community.

Yes, for most live games. It builds patience by acknowledging problems and deflects duplicate reports, at low cost, with less commitment than a full public tracker.