Share Your Feedback

Took me a minute this morning to find the new placement of the publish button for figma make prototypes. This is an action I am frequently doing as I push changes/updates to those who have access to the designs. I liked the old placement of this much better which wasn't buried two levels deep. With this latest change, putting it under the share button > publish > 1st line item - it is less clicks to change the URL of the prototype which is share button > ‘update’ icon, which is an action I would never want to do. If anything updating the URL of the prototype should be several levels deep; not publishing changes. 

After a late switch from Sketch to Figma about six months ago, here is my conclusion regarding the UX of Figma:While Figma has many great features that Sketch does not have (dev mode, way more capable prototyping, variables,…) the general UX of the tool is just sooo bad! Here are the things that annoy me most:Visibility of functions: There are so many functions hidden below a small icon that has no label. Much stuff is hard to find. And what drives me really nuts: When a function is not available, then its UI element (or entry in context menu) is hidden – not disabled! I’m using Figma for UX Design, and it just feels so wrong to use this tool that does not handle UX basics correctly itself.   Library management – publishing components: You can do this from the book button on the top left where you usually update components from other files, but publishing is mixed in here if you click on “This file”. But then you can only publish all changes. If you want to publish only a few changes,

Hi Figma team and community,I'd like to suggest reverting (or making optional) the loading animation behavior during AI image generation.Current behavior: When generating an image with AI, the Frame displays a dark blue gradient animation while waiting. This completely covers the canvas area and blocks visibility of all layers above the image layer.Previous behavior: The loading state used to show a transparent checkered background, which allowed me to continue editing other layers and making layout adjustments while the image was being generated in the background.Why this matters: The dark blue animation blocks the entire work area during generation It's no longer possible to edit or inspect layers above the image while waiting This interrupts the design workflow, especially for longer generation times Suggested fix: Revert the loading animation back to transparent, or Add a user preference to choose between the two behaviors Thank you for considering this!

When I open the plugin, a connection error is displayed, and registration/login is unavailable.Help me!

Dear Figma official team,Hello!We are a formal enterprise located in Chinese mainland, and we intend to purchase your Figma enterprise version service. Now we consult you about invoice related issues:Can your company issue formal valid invoices for enterprises in Chinese mainland? What types of invoices can be provided? Can it be used for domestic enterprise financial reimbursement and account entry? What are the specific steps and requirements to apply for invoices after payment? Can the invoice be issued with our full Chinese company name and complete enterprise information as the invoice title?Please tell us the relevant detailed rules of invoice issuance, so that we can complete the subsequent payment and financial procedures.Looking forward to your reply, thank you very much!Best regardsYour nameCompany nameContact information

This is really strange to me. I have a “Team”, apparent only from the URL, none of the UI elements show whether or not I’m dealing with an organization or a team. This team has members, whom I pay for, and the seats are set up for each one of them. They are all listed under the URL “…..team/<id>/team-admin-console/members...”, and show up properly.When I access “...team/<id>/all-projects….” and press the small down-arrow next to the Team name, and select “show members”, only my account is visible.The experience is this: all of the people in the team(shown under the team-admin-console) need to be manually approved/invited to each file for editing, even though they have been invited and accepted into the team.According to the documentation: “For example: if you invite someone to a team, they’ll have access to the projects and files in that team, based on the permissions you give them (can view or can edit). If you invite someone to a specific file, but not the team, they get

Can Figma generate Flutter source code?  Yes — with the help of plugins and AI-powered tools, Figma designs can now be converted into Flutter code much faster. It helps developers speed up UI building, reduce repetitive work, and turn design concepts into functional mobile app layouts more efficiently.

Are customer inquiries or bug report requests originally this easily ignored?Is it because I can't speak English and translate it?Simple inquiries come in response, but reports and handling of bugs are ignored without reply, even though only manual answers are provided and additional answers are continuously requested.Is it always like that? I've raised the issue in Figma Make where I keep going back to the previous version of work and keep using credits repeatedly, and I've sent 3 additional requests for answers since the last message 22 days ago saying I'll look closely, but I'm being ignored.

Figma has been a pain in a**. The entire Figma feels shit. Figma never fails to disappoint me everyday. If you are giving big a** boxes then it should be entirely clickable why do I’ve to stick my cursor to text. It happens everywhere in layers, design panel, variables. For each select I’ve to press at least 3 times then it selects fully and that too when I hit that small clickable text area. Everything is so irritating. And after making components why the hell does it need to add useless “State=” word in it. I cant even batch rename it. The rename box should be expandable so I can see the entire name if its big. The color picker should’ve pin feature. Thousand time I’ve to click that color to open it. And in variable when we are adding colors it comes in the way of variables.  If I’ve created H1 regular Text Style and want to create H2 Regular Text Style, the duplicate option adds the same style inside the H1, it should create some H1’ or H2. Cause only two change are needed, and I’ve

I have noticed a regression on text property function in components. In the past, I was able to apply different text colors across variants, but this is no longer working. The text property now overrides styling in a way that prevents variant-specific color adjustments. In another case, the text property does not properly handle different variant states. For example, when creating an accordion component with open and closed states, the text property does not adapt correctly even though the text layer on the header remains the same. This limits the ability to manage dynamic components effectively and requires manual text update when designing variation of screen sizes and states. The text property was introduced to simplify updating text across multiple variants, but the current behaviour makes this workflow more difficult. At its core, this feature should allow users to update text values regardless of styling or variant differences, as long as the text layer is assigned to the propert

I’ve found slots incredibly buggy right now unfortunately. I love the idea, but they’ve been rather frustrating lately.I’ve had two bugs that seem related I have repeatedly had, but am unable to set up a test file for these. Slot sizes not adjustingSomething like this hierarchy. Despite the fact the two components are bound in an autolayout with gutter, it doesn’t seem to paint properly. I often have to double click the children components individually.Component >↪ Slot↪↪  Rows [Autolayout]↪↪↪ Row [Autolayout]↪↪↪↪ [Component]↪↪↪↪ [Component] Slot content not refreshingSometimes a colleague uses my account on their computer to check something. When checking an instance of a component with a slot, sometimes they see the default content and not the content I’ve put in there. Despite it being saved. I have found no solution for this except detaching the instance. 

The Problem: When using the Auto Layout grid feature (e.g., creating a 3x3 product card layout), the actual dimensions of nested objects like buttons or text layers are hidden in Design mode. To see the exact width or height, you are forced to hover over the resizing dropdowns in the right sidebar.When a nested element is set to Hug or Fill, its absolute W and H values disappear from the right sidebar entirely, leaving only the X and Y coordinates visible. Furthermore, the dimension tooltip does not appear under the object on the canvas.Why this is an issue: It disrupts the workflow and feels inconsistent. The dimensions of the parent grid container are clearly displayed right below the bounding box on the canvas when selected, but for any item nested inside, this information is completely hidden. It would be much more convenient if the actual rendered dimensions of "Hug" and "Fill" elements remained visible at a glance.Here I can see sizes:Here cannot:  

Before: you could type a text style in the search and if it was the only result, hitting Enter would just apply it to the selected element. This still works fine for color styles/variables by the way.Now: you have to search, arrow down to select it, then hit Enter, even when there's literally only one result.Completely unnecessary extra step that breaks learned workflows.Please revert.

We have a general collection of colors but for my specific file I want to add more variables. However this is not possible with extended collections. My work around is to use less frequently used variables (button-hover) for my usecase (color-bold) and this makes it very confusing and limiting.

With the strict enforcement of AI credit limits starting March 18, I’ve been looking at our organization's options for scaling usage. The current pricing structure for additional credits vs. adding new seats seems completely disconnected from reality for power users.Let’s look at the numbers for a Professional Plan (2026 pricing):Option A: Add a Full Seat. Cost: $16/mo. Cost/credit: ~$0.005 Cost for 3,000 credits: $16 Option B: Pay-As-You-Go (Overage). Cost/credit: $0.03 Cost for 3,000 credits: $90 Option C: Shared Credit Subscription. ​​​​​ Cost: $150/mo for 5,000 credits. Cost/credit: $0.03 Cost for 3,000 credits: ~$90 The Result: It is 5.6x more expensive to buy official "extra" credits than it is to simply spin up a secondary "ghost" seat and use that account for AI generation.The base credits for my team members who don't use AI are currently "locked" and wasted, while I’m expected to pay $90 for a 3,000-credit overage that could be covered by a $16 seat. We need a way to p

I really do not like the new confirmation dialog when deleting an account.  As an admin of an instance with 14k+ users, I delete people every single day and this new dialog gets in my way.

As mentioned in closed topic https://forum.figma.com/t/bug-autolayout-resizes-incorrectly-when-it-contains-no-visible-frames/14619, Is anybody facing the same problem? Even all contents inside “trailing-section” frame are invisible and frame resizing is set to “hug”, it still has 24 pixels of width.

I’m with Figma in this AI Design battle. I’d be happy to share my internal AI VScode + copilot workflow, maybe it would influence the Figma Make approach to what a designer needs from an actual “vibe designing”

I was looking at the release notes to double check my gut feeling that Figma itself has not been getting a lot of love lately. For my personal uses that has been the case. Only vague AI related things, which might be fine but makes me feel a lot of things are left behind. The trigger for posting this was looking at “Code Connect” after reading about a “bug” in Slots that seemed to be “intended behavior” (which is weird). This feature coming from 2024 (!) seems to be in Beta still (according to the blog post). The Github feels completely abandoned. This reminded me of things like branches (total abandonement), Percentage widths, Slots that feel half baked. The whole grid thing that seems to fizz out. New UI that was not a big success (I am still scanning everytime I select a diffferent layer where things are after all these years). Still not seeing the new App layout with the buttons on the left side (my team does, not me). Etc. Etc.I was just curious, I am getting the same kind of feel

The idea is to have “synchronized sections” (see Notion Synchronized Blocks) →I often need to have the same content in several files (maps, etc.), and synchronized sections would save me from having to maintain them all.  Notion Example:  

Just a thought, but the effect property in the annotation is very vertical. In general, when using variables/tokens, why are they not displayed in the annotation? Dev-team is referring to the token instead of the raw value. 

It would be great if I could use my right mouse button to drag the page like you can do in Miro. 

Hello,I’m really excited about being able to use AI to edit our app screens. It would make important stakeholders able to work by their own.However, for now, the results I get are far from being usable.First, despite the announcement, I have no icon related to this… strange.But it’s accessible through the cmd-k menu → “first draft” or “make a change”My first “first draft” was a banger. With only a vague prompt, it created a neat design with nice architecture (better than those of most of designers I’ve worked with ;-) )But as soon as I use the “make a change” menu, which is where the work begins, it’s really bad. Most of the time it doesn’t stick to the selection I gave and change something else. It doesn’t understand some basic command (selecting a menu, I just ask to add 2 entries… it renamed the others and change the colors...).So, am I missing or mis-using something? Do you have similar experiences or much better?Peace,Franck

I cannot understand the following. Figma Make makes a destructive mistake and uses credits. It then uses additional credits to fix the mistake it made. If it applies the wrong “fix”, it uses even more credits to address the issue. If it recognizes it’s addressing an issue caused by the AI, why does it continue charging a user to address the problem. This is my hugest pain point with this product and pricing model.

I upgraded my seat to `Dev` on 9. May 2025 expecting to use the Figma MCP server for development work. Despite the upgrade, MCP calls to files outside my organisation are still rejected with a "View seat" rate-limit error, even though whoami confirms my seat type as Full.I specifically upgraded to access that one single file. As the designer continues working on that file I can keep duplicating it into my own team, so, there is a clear workaround, but it’s ugly. This is causing me inconvenience and I won’t be continuing with my Dev plan after this month.I don’t see any value for Figma, other than trying to push their customers to upgrade through annoyance and inconvenience. Also, I feel misled, as I specifically upgraded to access with MCP this one file, and in the end I could but I am jumping through hoops.