Ok, that’s just strange. Had that a while when my projects where wrong. Try to run GenerateProjectFiles, just in case. Might be something with that. Sorry I can’t be of much help.
EDIT: If you want, you can add me on skype and we debug there, should be faster
I just compiled ue 4 and it works,vs is showing me the same but it works.I think that vs just got confused because I replaced engine folder.
Edit: I fixed the problem, just needed to click reload project.
Are you talking about the version that also comes in japanese?
Yeah, that one
I have update for my scene 
http://imgur.com/KqgSRAG
Looking ! Have a tip to prevent the leaking on the ceiling. You have an emissive part on the side, but as (I assume) there is no “top” to it, rays from the top hit it anyway. Try to get some geometry in the middle, like a box or something.
I just had an idea that will test later to help reduce leaking, so for now try that.
Thanks for the tip.
I think I found a bug (in the latest build) In the material editor.After some time in material editor it starts to use more and more RAM and then engine crashes.
Hmm interesting, will try to reproduce it. I know there are some problems with the material editor, that’s on the list of bugs to fix.
EDIT: I tried to reproduce it. I saw the increase of memory, will look into it, but couldn’t get it to crash. Can you post a screen? Also, a couple versions back the engine crashed when I switched from the material editor back to the viewport, if I had the mat editor still opened. That went away as magically as it appeared, so it’s probably related.
That is the same problem that I have right now.
Well, at least it’s not a new bug. That’s something. Will look into it, but as I showed on the roadmap, want to dedicate more time on getting the features up and running and doing the bugfixing at last. I worked around that just by being careful and closing the mat editor when i went to the viewport. I know it’s annoying, but just have two hands 
EDIT: If you find it to be too bad, maybe it works worst on you system, tell me, will look into it
Ok,no problem,maybe in the next build will magically diseppear.
I will make a scene next week becouse I need to do some things for school.
Sorry.
No never can’t do school stuff! How dares you! /sarcasm also I am wondering how your guys lighting would fair on my system. Have two to test it on. One Iam on right now which is an AMD A8-3870K 3Ghz Quad (not OCed atm), 16GB DDR3 RAM, eVGA nVidia GeForceGTX660 SuperClocked 2GB and my other rig I need to finish setting up is a Intel i7950 QuadCore, 24GB DDR3 with a GeForceGTX 480Ti which I plan on using for a dedicated Physx card and the 660SC as my main. Would love to test it if you want/need input for indoor stuff. Making arena’s for our game and indoor lighting is still just not feeling right compared to UE3/UDK though could just be me overlooking something rather simple.
Haha 
With that system you can run it without any problems.
I have:
GPU R9 270 2 Gb
CPU AMD Phenom II x3
6Gb RAM
And it runs pretty good.
Nice. Seems to be coming along rather well then.
did very good job of optimizing .
I just found guy trying to repllicate last of us indirect shadows (which tomorrow children is also going to use) in ue4 , the early results were very good but sadly it seems that Arnage stoped implementing the tecnique altogether , I am pasting to demonstrate how inportant such a would be for ahr , another similar solution would be to imput the indirect lightning information as direct lights to the screen space directional oclusion that some people are requesting ( i dont know how different the two options would be , but has been itching my mind since long ago and if someone thinks the latter is not desirable or if the first is used some kind of ao would still be needed please explain why)
Yeahs.
what is your take on “worst case scenarios” ? Like large terrains wtih a lot of things on it ? Of couse optimization will needed to be done by the designer (culling/LOD’ing depending on distance etc) of that specific game/level. But let’s say after all the necesary efforts are done by the designers you think AHR can handle an open and large terrain like 4 km^2 ?
My dream is to bring your AHR to sandbox/ open world where it would truly shine (sorry for the pun 
). So what do you say ?
You could make a 100sqm volume attached to the player position. Haven’t tested it though.
The best option would be if added cascades to gradually reveal/hide regions.
No problem, I was with stuff too. Been out of the loop for a few days.
Tracing is scene-independent, so we are looking at voxelization performance. On the memory size, something like 512512512 voxels is about the for a 2 GB card. Not saying you can’t push it higher, actually with that it’s just 16 + 64 mb of memory used for the voxels, but it starts to go down after that, and 512^3 it’s quite a lot in practice. Let’s do some math ( and assume you are centering the grid on the player and making it move with him). Also, do correct me if I make some screw-up.
You have 512512512 = 134217728 voxels. Let’s take a height of 25 m, and a desired voxel size of 0.5 m. With that, we have 134217728/50 = 2684354 voxels per height plane. We then do the square root of 2684354 and get 1638 voxels per side. Multiplying by the voxel size, we get 820 m.
So you could cover a 0.8 - 1.5 km^2 area with a 25 mt height without much problem. Consider that it’s quite unlikely for the character to see 800 at the same time.
After , it depends on the scene complexity. I use the last LOD for voxelization, so if you have some aggressive lod for the last one it should help. Not really sure how will run, but it should be doable.
I do think it will (or at least should) be faster to use HFGI ( no DFGI ) for the terrains instead of AHR, and use AHR for all the others. I mean, not voxelizing the terrain. Haven’t tried . Also, I think that currently terrains aren’t working, like, they don’t get voxelized, should look into it, but like I said, HFGI is probably better for that.