The green Area is the actual Landscape.
The grey area is made out of multiple background-meshes that also have lower detail than the landscape in the middle.
This is a normal way to do that, and should not be a reason for a refund - because this is how it worked since we use landscape in games.
BUT, he should have shown that in the Asset-Description at the Marketplace - so there would not be this missunderstanding in the first place. (Also the Name “infinite” affordable landscapes is missleading)
That is somewhat a home-made problem (in this case)…
EDIT: “24+ affordable landscapes” or something like that should have done the job too, but would not imply (to users who do not know how this works) that they are “infinite”.
The Name is missleading people who do not know how this stuff works.
And “forever” is also wrong, 2 years would be the correct term.
What did happen is the following:
Customer reads “infinite landscapes”
customer thinks “infinite world!”
customer buys pack
notices seams on the “not so infinite” landscapes (regardless of the fact that this is how it works…)
creates video about it
content-creator create thread about it because he is annoyed.
BOTH of them are right.
The content itself is working as intended, but the name indicates something different for some people. (especially since no screenshot shows that the landscapes have a border…)
If anybody could bother themselves looking at how a landscape in UE4 looks like…
This is really fully we are arguing about such basic things for 2 days.
are images from the PDF I published along with the update.
^ Up to that point thats what people are paying for. It’s non of my fault that a landscape has a certain size and then ends. Still, when you are playing on the landscape surface as long as you don’t go close to the edges you don’t see the landscape ends.
^ That’s of my good will for buyers. So when they play on the landscape they see a far view outside as well.
But when people start viewing a landscape from this angle:
And see there are holes below it they ask for a refund. It’s exactly as if I moved the camera inside a closed wooden crate purchased from marketplace and then ask for a refund because inside the crate everything was black. Player is never supposed to be inside the closed crate, player is never supposed to view a landscape from kilometers after the landscape ends.
Edit: If you’re standing on the landscape you don’t see below the landscape is empty.
Bottom line is, remove the free meshes and have fun with the landscape alone. The meshes could still be moved around, rotated and scaled to user preference (But I guess that’s too hard to do?)
NO NO NO NO… Nobody bothered reading a single line from description and technical details? if they don’t read anything I have provided them to read before buying then they are still not entitled to a refund. That’s not the case though. I’m sure anybody take a look at the description and technical detail even if a pack is $30. Let alone the $100 packs. I have clearly stated many times how many landscape are in this package and images too show that they don’t continue to an eternity.
I did not say that the are entitled for a refund.
But obviously the can try to get one.
It should not be a huge problem to get rid of the claims?
Sadly… this is not the case.
I know that people do not read manuals and/or instructions. (There is a Reason for the “RTFM”-Jokes…)
I (as Epic) would NOT give him a Refund, but i would SUGGEST to you to change the title.
The assets are fine and there is a documentation.
EDIT: Also, you are one of the people who actually have a proper description for their Stuff.
Many MP-Assets just have 1 line of text (that is the video-link) and the list what is included.
Those should straight up not be allowed on the marketplace.
Solving the “Epic not properly curating the marketplace” problem would go a long way to simplifying the refund.
I think it’d be a good idea to throw some of the more solid members of the community a few bucks a month to handle curation. I’d be happy to take a few hours a week to properly vet submitted content for quality, liaise with the creators on how to get their work up to snuff, etc. A bunch of us doing that could definitely improve things. Probably easier and more viable than hiring full-time employees specifically for that job, and also a better alternative than some kind of Greenlight-esque crowdsourcing approach.
I love the work I do and I give it my everything. When people try to make it look bad in public and imply there is a lot wrong with it only to get back a $100 which is nothing that’s what bothers me the most.
Edit: I even had cases in the past where buyer claimed they can’t walk on the background meshes.:eek:
I thought that was a joke… they accepted that?
How should you fill up the infinite (literally infinite) space below a landscape?
Really?
Regardless of the fact that EPIC themselves does it that way?
Proof:
This is EPICs “Elemental” Demo… and it also has nothing below the Landscape. (this should be enough to proof that you are right, and they are wrong, and that this is not a refund-reason) http://www2.pic-upload.de/img/31262550/Unbenannt.png
So it comes down to “Epic should care more about the Marketplace!”?
and
“stupidity” should not be a valid refund-reason.
I don’t know how some people do not understand that landscape needs to have an end, those people are probably new to the game development and don’t know much about it.
“See my landscape has edges” is nowhere near a valid reason for a refund.
This is a refund reason as I have posted in the OP.
It doesn’t have mountains yes. It has smaller deformations. And the landscape floats in the air. Why am I given a 2 days deadline? to fix what?
The big for me is not giving a refund. It’s that when I face this I understand there is no good moderation on the refund reasons buyer brings up. because most of the time it’s twisting the facts and like I said MP team aren’t actually game developers to know exactly what’s going on in which case then it should be seller’s right to decide for the refund not given a deadline. This as a whole should not repeat again for anybody.
If the customer cannot read the description before buying the pack, and as a result of not reading it, gets a refund, they should not be buying from the marketplace.
Be glad you’ve even been informed of the reasons you’ve had sales refunded.
The first and only time I know is when I check my progress report and the negative sales in the listing.
I’ve not been marked as a marketplace creator yet despite having several asset packs on the marketplace since March.
I began using the engine back in the early weeks of it being a monthly subscription service but I’m still marked as a patron.
Patron is just a forum title derived automatically from the number of forum posts you’ve made.
As for the badge, as Jamendxman3 says you need to ask them specifically since that’s not an automated process. I just hope you don’t have to ask them specifically as many times as I did…
I’ve never bee contacted about refunds either. I just check the sales report to find negative numbers. I can only assume it to be related to my content being stuck on 4.11
Mass refunds have taken place, due to charge-backs and fraudulent purchases. Some sellers have had hundreds of $$$ refunded on the same day due to this.
In US civil suites, you can only claim damages. There’s compensatory and punitive damages. Compensatory is the amount you have been “harmed” by the unlawful conduct of the defendant. So in this case, $100. No matter how many copies of their game they sold with their illegal content, you are still only out $100 (the amount one license would have cost them to legally use your assets as many times as they wished). Now, the court could award punitive damages to punish the defendant (to try to send a message), but the amount is not determined by you, but by the court. So after legal fees (unless you got the court to make the defendant pay those too), it’s likely it would be a net loss for you. And that’s assuming both parties are even in the US
I’m sure it gets much more complicated, but that’s as much as I could remember from one Business Law class I took over a decade ago (and after a quick Google). The point being, as an individual you have little reasonable recourse in such a situation.
A landscape might be 4km or 20km. It will always have an end and therefor have a seam where it ends.
A landscape might be 4km or 20km. If it is viewed from outside the landscape bounds it will always be seen floating in the air.
A landscape is meant for players to play upon, not to view it from outside the landscape bounds.
A landscape might be 4km, in that case, it shouldn’t be bashed for not being 20km or 40km and hence not suitable for a flight simulator type of game.
A landscape might be hilly with small deformations and free of any mountains, in that case it shouldn’t be accused of not having mountains.
A landscape might have features in it’s shader such as dust or snow particles moving on the ground, which can be disabled with a simple click on the material instance.
A landscape might have some background meshes placed after it ends. Word background indicates those areas are not playable. Not pleasant if moved close to them. Simply low poly meshes to have something to look at in the far distant when standing on the original landscape.
Game developers know the above. I kindly ask the other few people to read the package descriptions, technical details and documentations before making their moves. And I kindly ask Epic to take refunds more seriously and do not forward deadlines to sellers and enforce refunds according to any false claims.
