To supplement my previous post, here’s an example of what I’m talking about. This is the folder structure for my bundle project. This is organized, and makes finding content efficient. Everything is under the Starter Bundle folder which is what my product is. The folders have to be setup this way, otherwise 1. There’d be no way to differentiate between the different products this bundle comprises of, and 2. there would be too many textures/materials in 1 folder.
If users were to manually merge my content in their project under 1 folder, it’d look no different than this.
Just to give an analogy - Imagine you have five 1000 piece puzzles. Instead of putting 1000 pieces in each box, these guidelines want you to put all 5000 pieces in the same box. All that does is create mass confusion, and then the creator gets the blame because the product isn’t easy to use.
Now just to highlight the hypocrisy of the review sheet, this is the Elemental Demo - 4.16 version
Notice there aren’t “Textures” “Meshes” “Materials” etc. folders under the folder “Elemental”. It has folders based on asset type, more specific assets, and then it includes those folders.
This setup is not much different from @-Dev. Difference? It seems good enough for Epic to distribute content like this, but we are held to a whole different “standard”. And the reason I put quotes is because the proposed folder structure isn’t a standard, it’s preference. The method of organization shouldn’t matter so long as it’s organized. Same with naming schemes, which your own rules say. The Elemental Demo’s Maps folder isn’t even under the Elemental directory, it’s inside the content folder alongside Elemental. This is just one example out of the many Epic content examples.