Hi Guys,
I recently submitted my asset “Sci-fi Arsenal Vol 3.1” to the marketplace for review and it was flagged for “changes Needed” I have done everything they have requested but they still want me to remove an asset in the pack that they feel is unusable which I verified it was not true.
Just because I exempted the bow from having a blueprint class does not mean it is entirely useless I did that because it was having programming bugs as he/she Indicated. so to avoid further complexity I decided to remove the blueprint class for the bow since I don’t really know the intent of use by the customer. This same bow still has an Animation blueprint, SFX, Textures, Material, Skeletal Mesh, and Control rig which the customer can still use for the development of their games.
Please This is not fair at all, The Reviewer wrote I should completely remove the bow and everything related to the bow. I have done every correction he/she said I should do now he/she is saying I should remove an asset completely. Why?
This is a deliberate attempt to devalue my pack. whereas it has so many features in it. Am I being targeted or what is the reason for such frustration?
Please guys can you look at this issue and please help me with a way out. Thanks a lot
I am trying to see how can escalate this to a higher authority in the Unreal Marketplace Team.
I’m guessing the reviewer wants to avoid a situation where someone buys the pack expecting the bow to have complete functionality, and is disappointed when it doesn’t.
So, in my mind, as long as it’s communicated clearly that the bow is ‘Assets Only’ it should be permissible. (From the reviewers perspective, they might take issue with the bow being included in the same screenshots as the other weapons, for ultimate clarity I imagine a screenshot with just the bow and description of bow assets)
I’d classify this more as a failure of judgement on the part of the reviewer than an attempt to devalue your pack. (Or maybe they are operating under some wrong assumptions)
I’m not sure the best way to escalate this. I’d try at least one attempt at reasoning with the reviewer, explaining the value, I think you should have the right to request a second opinion. (If the reviewer is unable to resolve things consider posting in the ‘Marketplace’ section of the forums)
I do wonder what sort of ‘programming bugs’ in the bow started this whole thing. (Something trivial, or something really broken/janky?) Post about it - maybe the solution to everything is a functional bow.
I should Fix what?. the blueprint class has been removed, all descriptions related to Blueprint class for the bow has been removed is no longer there. So other stuff included Materials, Skeletal Mesh, Animations, SFX, Particles and the Arrows for the Bow are useless and are not Useful. I don’t get it.
maybe I didn’t understood this correctly but this famous bow and all the materials particles are in the asset? Like a left over? Or they are not there anymore?
Nope. I agree with the marketplace auditor. If you couldn’t get this buggy bow to work what do you expect some random person to do with the assets? Also, if there is no functionality to the bow there is no way to test whether the assets related to it are bugged as well.
The market place team audits products on the daily and they have far more information then we do about the product you submitted, people on this forum can’t help you bypass the market teams judgement. They may be able to help fix your buggy bow though, and that would be the ideal solution.
If it makes you feel any better, my marketplace asset got denied like 5 times and it was annoying, they are just doing their job though.
Yes, The material, animations, particles, UE Control Rig, Textures, and Skeletal Mesh, are all in the pack. That is why I am asking why will he/she define the bow asset as Unusable Asset, because of a blueprint class that was removed. In the description I have removed everything related to the blueprint not to mislead the customer. To me I take it as an intentional frustration been imposed on me for no reason.
