You're a game developer facing a recurring bug. How do you ensure it stays fixed for good?

To ensure a recurring bug stays fixed, I’d thoroughly document the issue, analyze the root cause, and implement robust testing protocols. Continuous monitoring and updating the codebase with preventive measures can help maintain stability and avoid the bug's return.

The first thing to understand is what was the cause of the bug and why is it being so recurrent, probably a bad practice by a Programmer, Artist, TA, or another professional involved is causing it to re-appear from time to time. Having the cause isolated is time to address the person or group responsible from the task in which the bug appeared and clarify with them why is being recurrent in the project and how is it planned to be solved. Having the problem identified and effective communication with the people involved in the issue and the proposed solutions will raise awareness about bad practices/mistakes and mitigate the possibilities of occurring again in the future.

As a game developer, I tackle bugs by identifying their root causes rather than just fixing symptoms. I document each bug and its solution in a tracking system, building a reference for future issues. Writing test cases after fixing bugs ensures they don’t resurface, and I regularly review and refactor my code to catch potential problems early. I learn from past mistakes, applying those insights to improve my coding practices. By staying updated with the latest tools and techniques, I continuously enhance my workflow, reducing the chance of recurring bugs and improving overall development quality.

As an experienced developer, you might rely on intuition to find bugs. However, a systematic approach is essential for consistent quality. Use user testing, automated testing, and code review to identify and fix issues early. Remember, "Debug Often, Debug Everything."

Replicating bugs can be a problem if the team don't know why is happening or in which part of the code structure is located. There are different approaches to this, one could be delegating clear tasks and responsibilities to different team members, which will result in helping to identify easily the area where the bug appeared and who was responsible of that script. Another approach is to create debugging tools to create a diagnosis net and start enclosing the bug(s). An effective debugging can pinpoint where the error or warning is generated.

Replicating bugs can be a challenge, even for seasoned developers. Just like speedrunners have their rituals to induce glitches, we need specific conditions to trigger bugs. While automated tests can quickly verify different inputs, they can't fully replace human creativity. Effective communication with your testers is crucial to understand their experiences and identify the root causes of issues.

Pair programming can help a lot with code review, having two programmers working together in the features can help them to see what the other ignored maybe because of eye fatigue, distraction, bad practices or lack of knowledge, but in general, a good cooperation will lead to better code writing, review and feedback.

Having a QA staff in your company is great for testing fixes, since sometimes fixing an issue can lead to breaking another thing in other part of the project, and by doing only individual testing can lead to a false positive thinking that the issue was effectively fixed. While having a specific person in charge of QA the fix can reach uncommon areas where the code breaks because of the fix and report that back to you.

Implement the fix and test it against the original issue, then conduct comprehensive regression testing to verify that the rest of the system remains unaffected. This rigorous approach minimizes the risk of new problems arising from the fix and ensures that your game maintains its overall quality and functionality.

Fixing a bug without considering its broader impact can lead to unintended consequences. Monitor the results of your bugfixes and track changes throughout your development process. Sometimes, if a bug is difficult to replicate or has a low impact, prioritizing its fix might not be worth the risk of introducing new problems.

A key point here, in my opinion: it’s fundamental to get into the habit of testing and identifying these issues as soon as possible, ideally prior to submission. The reason for this is that bugs have an annoying tendency to fester; the longer we take to address them, the more convoluted the solution can become in terms of impact on other areas, and the more time required to resolve it. Depending the nature of the issue, the time investment to resolve can sometimes grow exponentially and bring in a myriad of related bugs. Throughout my career I’ve had the doubtful pleasure of seeing a project peak at around 10 blockers daily. It’s… not fun. On the bright side, I believe I technically qualify for government support after that one, though.