Broken communication - Lack of responses

My files were submitted on june 4th so yea.

hi guys,

same here, I’ve submitted my new environment pack on june 12th and can’t get a reply or feedback from thenhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=1jYgfeR1EVsdefinetly would like to have more info on the submission status as now Im a bit worried if epic support seen my pack and reviewed it on the first place

Well, I’m still waiting for a submission made on May 18th. So… Keep waiting and keep hoping guys!

All we can do is wait, though there isn’t a whole lot of hope unfortunately.

Such laziness it’s so sad :frowning:

I don’t think it’s laziness, it is somewhat a different form of “elitism” perhaps. Epic wants the marketplace to be better curated than Unity’s asset store. There are tons of junk in the Unity’s asset store because anyone can upload anything. The problem is, if a “wanna-be-developer” shopping around market place can’t tell the difference between quality content and bad content, why would this concern Epic this much? Just put a giant label telling that the content is not approved by Epic Games and we’ll be all fine. Even though there are lots of junk in unity’s asset store, there are also many good examples as well, it doesn’t take rocket science or days and days to find them.

I assure you that Epic did not spend 5 months of their time curating my plugin. Delays != curation.

Not just your plugin, they check the “quality” of every single texture or mesh, submitted, thus delays. I’d prefer though “open store”, where anyone can upload anything, Epic just makes sure it’s not virus or trojan, that’s it. Let the community decide on quality.

Yes, but it does not take as long as they make it look like to review assets. They are plenty of things they could automate, for example: We couldn’t change our own prices, descriptions, or engine compatibilities, for around 2 years, which was nothing but wasted time for the marketplace staff.

Well, on a good note, Epic has never ‘lost’ anything; just takes time in my experience. It could be, however, that the marketplace isn’t really generating much profit. Hence, it’s not really much of a ‘priority’…

I believe, that the marketplace is generating profit, perhaps not on the level of “fortenite” sales. Yet it’s almost impossible to calculate the amount of “goodwill” and/or Pr, and/or Marketing that the marketplace is worth, besides the objective dollars. Back to the dollars for a second, having seen some of the numbers that certain sellers are paying in terms of a 30% “commission”, they most definitely are making money.

The real value of the marketplace, is in the PR and/or Marketing (however you perceive it) that the marketplace represents. If Epic Games is not looking at the marketplace in this fashion, then upper level management is totally lost in the woods.

To update my own situation (OP).

After 42 days the submission has failed to pass the review.
I will list here what my failures are:


Metallic is always 0 by default. Giving a “Fail” for not having a 0 connected to 0 makes no sense.
I didn’t leave is disconnected on purpose. That’s only 1 material I missed.
But that rule needs to be erased. Submissions get delayed for that. People’s time is being played with… But okay.


An open world landscape is not actually an Overview Map is it? based on the Submission Guidelines this is an Overview Map… But okay.


One mesh is missing a SM_ prefix and that’s reason to fail a submission?.. But okay.


This one is NOT okay.

This issue is discussed here.

Besides that ^
Which of these two makes more sense?
A) Grass Types files inside GrassTypes folder.
B) Grass Types files inside Landscapes or something of a similar name folder.

And landscape layers are saved inside the default path “UE4 suggests” when you want to save a map. As with every UE4 project. “Maps>Landscape>Landscape_sharedassets” in my case.

Some of the items on the checklist really make no sense and it makes it almost impossible for large packages to pass the submission in one go because you’re always looking for one missing SM_ prefix and such things among tons of files to reject it.

So to sum it up, it takes me some time to make the changes, but it takes much much more time to have the package reviewed again, as everyone is familiar with the length of the reviews. And this isn’t the only package we have submitted. Currently 2 are submitted and 7 more are being prepared for submission. Please do something to improve the situation in return of the 30% split we’re paying on every package.

Further more, the Failures mentioned above, from connecting 0 to 0 until moving Grass Types to anywhere other than Grass Types folder, these are actually no failures on our part but are results of the reviewers having no production experience or knowledge of Epic’s own engine. Please update your rules.

We have nearly 20 packages on the Marketplace so we’re not new here. And I’m personally against degrading the end user experience and doing something very unprofessional just because there are faulty rules built in the new review process.

             @ Out of all the issues, the suggested folder hierarchy is the worst. Can you please help us to not create a mess out of our already clean and organized content packs? The suggested hierarchy makes it work really bad for everyone (creators and users) [as you see](https://forums.unrealengine.com/showthread.php?111598-Package-folder-structure&p=742494&viewfull=1#post742494) everyone agrees. You can even grab our project and have a look around, see that the content are way better organized at the moment. It allows people to navigate better and find what they want in a matter of seconds instead of browsing through tens of files in one folder. I'll be plugging 0 to Metallic, renaming Landscape to Overview and adding SM_ to plane mesh but I'm sincerely not going to move the files around like that until I have your input here as you're really the only person we get to have a conversation with sometimes.

Thanks in advance.
Waiting to hear from you.

I think this demonstrates that the people in charge of the review process aren’t familiar with the development process themselves. First of all, many of these things are so trivial and in many cases Epic doesn’t even follow these guidelines in their own example content.

Secondly, and it wasn’t posted here but it’s there, one of the criteria on the review sheet is “No overlapping UVs”. Seriously? Again, not only do Epic themselves use overlapping UVs, it is pretty much standard in many texturing methods. Whether using trim sheets, or saving UV space on an object with repetitive elements. It doesn’t look like actual artists are involved with crafting the review process, which is why so many inconsistencies abound with assets that are rejected and accepted.

I’ve got two packs sitting in the queue right now. One of them is comprised of content that has already been accepted on this very marketplace except in bundle form. It’s been 20 days since I heard anything on that. The other is an shader that was rejected with baseless reasons. After the outrage from myself and other members of the seller community over it they acknowledged that the reasons given didn’t apply and requested the files. That was over 10 days ago, I still haven’t heard a thing despite contacting @ twice about it.

What’s a shame about this is that it takes us a very long time to develop high quality assets for the marketplace. The time investment without even seeing a return yet on it is immense, and a gamble. And once we’ve completed the development process and want to put the content out, we are met with delays, lack of communication or baseless rejections. It’s especially demoralizing for those of us who work on the marketplace full time such as myself. This is my main source of income, and yet two of my packs are stuck in limbo and I haven’t been able to reach anyone in the marketplace staff about it despite my repeated efforts. I also have another pack in the works that I’m having to seriously consider whether it’s worth finishing it or not. At this rate, it’d be finished before my other two packs are released which is a shame. When you take into effect the long development process, the unnecessarily extensive review period and the 45 day wait before we see our first paycheck on a new product, we only have a few months before our earnings are pushed into 2018.

What’s happening right now is not only demoralizing to the seller community, it’s causing many high quality content creators to abandon the platform altogether.

@-Dev I feel you, I received my checklist yesterday afternoon. I received similar fails you did, naming conventions, folder hierarchy, although I also received a fail for the easier to read and clean Blueprints check and got recommended for comments and pass / fail conditions.

But in my case, I agree with all of the comments made in the checklist. The folder hierarchy was a bit off for my own assets, although I did follow what they currently have in their own TPP/FPP templates, so I still had to change those assets as well as my own and make sure they had prefixes. And I did miss a few assets with the prefix naming conventions. After updating these, it does make the project more legible.

And I guess animation blueprints are not included in the blueprint count in the technical details. I wish I knew that before submitting, but oh well.

It took me about 5-6 hours to update my project last night, renaming and moving assets, straightening out and aligning blueprint nodes and connections, and adding more and more comments. No actual logic changes to the template itself, but even after these changes, I had to recompile and test to make sure the game still worked the same.

Now I’m just praying that if we are at this point in the review process, it will be a quicker review and they can just smoke-test the project and see that all of the fails are now passes. But other than the two emails I have received (the file submission and this checklist one), I don’t have a clue when this will go live or if I will get a response within the next few days or even weeks.

It relay dose feel like the reviewers have little experience with development. I have had to fix may issues that were made on epics end with the mannequin for most of my projects.
45 days is bad when it comes to getting payed, but if you don’t make $100 in that time you want even see that money for a year but they still get their cut from that.

Looks like another seller was told their product would be released today and it didn’t. This is why even when I get release dates I don’t usually announce them before hand as you never know what can happen…

Mine released, just quite late in the day. Maybe they are trying to employ some random reinforcement psychological conditioning strategy. You have to keep checking because you never know when the MP will be updated.

My last submission was submitted right before 4.16 was released it was approved a couple weeks later but hasn’t been released yet. At the current rate 4.17 might be out before it gets released,so that when it finally gets released it will be 2 versions behind.

Going into 3-4 weeks now with no response to my email inquiries. Two submissions still stuck in limbo. =/

They won’t respond to anything I ask about my other submissions, or requests for marketplace entitlement to my recently released product.