I agree, and overall I think this will be extremely damaging to the engine.
They still haven’t learned the basic Lesson of “You can’t out-Amazon Amazon”, they seem to think they can Out-Roblox Roblox…and are willing to burn down the ecosystem they’ve built in order to try and get there.
No programmer in this thread has disrespected people using BPs. A few have pointed out the significant problems with BP, esp in a production environment. I am the only one that has actually said blueprints are garbage. Some people take that personally. I def don’t disrespect blueprint users. I use them all day every day.
The emotional reaction to this in not surprising… a lot of it has to do with Epic’s poor communication, unfortunately. The tech they are building is honestly amazing and gets rid of a ton of headaches for networking, concurrency, saving, backwards compatibility, etc, etc, etc that simply cannot be handled by blueprints currently.
I think there would be no “trouble” if they just would say: we will replace blueprint with “verseprint”.
I dont think anyone of the BP folks is against improvements and the “one big change every decade”, its more about there being absolutely no replacement.
There are valid reasons, as you said, to throw away BP and actors - but actors get a replacement, BP doesnt.
That is kind of okay actually, at least when it comes to Actors.
A game object centered around Actor in Unreal is something I struggled with in the beginning, until I understood that gameplay entities in Unreal are basically Actors, or Actor-like objects. Characters, Pawns, etc. are all specialized Actors. That is completely fine in my opinion. Many engines generalize this as GameObjects, Objects, or Gameplay Entities. Ubisoft engines also use similar entity-style concepts, so that part makes sense to me.
When it comes to getting rid of Blueprint, that does not really resonate unless they put something much more efficient in place, whatever it is called, Blueprint 2.0 or something similar, so the general ecosystem can continue. That seems to be Scene Graph, so probably we can still write custom nodes, expose logic, or even mold code into the full Scene Graph workflow.
But I think this move by Epic will create more friction than expected, especially with developers and studios. Maybe not at the high-level decision-making layer, but definitely at the developer level. UE6 will be promoted as the next thing everyone should use, and of course we want to use it, but only if it is actually a better experience and not a regression.
It’s important that BP is designer facing production layer of the Engine, and it makes UE so flexible compared to many engines architecture wise. Also as mentioned I worry more about the BP’s and graphs native integration with other things like Chaos, UMG, BTT etc.
I was expecting Physics changes upcoming, UMG improvements or some more nicer/crazy stuff but we’ll live and see I guess.
@Countsie Yeah , it has it’s problems, I use everyday too , I like hybrid usage and neatly designed blueprint graphs where my data flows like river 
hope new changes enable me to do that.
As long as there is a forum and people that offer help you’ll have resources to learn. There’s already repos for learning verse. There’s going to be tutorials galore in the coming months and a massive wave once early access releases.
And a lot of devs from other engines will jump to UE6. The Game Thread finally becoming multithreaded. Verse auto threading, meaning you do not have to manually thread your code. These alone are going to bring in a lot of devs. Multithreading + Nanite, Lumen, PCG, Metahuman, Mover, Chaos physics, megalights, Terrain mesh, WPO etc. Lots of reasons to make that jump.
@Rev0verDrive The Game Thread finally becoming multithreaded
do we have confirmation on that?
Yeah, there’s quite a few sources you can dig up just with a google search.
One of the main reasons BP can’t live in a mature UE6 ECS setup. BP is thread unsafe. You cannot multi-thread BP.
I dont think anyone is reasonably arguing that we “shouldnt make the jump” to verse - just: there should be a replacement for Blueprint. (using verse)
All thats missing, is a visual representation for the verse functions etc.
A loop is a loop, its not suddenly going to become magic.
And if “Blueprint 2” is just verse anyway, it should work fine with everything verse would do.
The issue as I see it is having another API that has to convert to verse in real-time. Whatever the replacement is it cannot work like BP works. It has to be its own separated thing that floats in the ether. Completely separated.
Community is already working on visual convertors.
Let’s not forget that it’s a single player game. You’re not building a performant, CoD, BF, Marathon, Wardogs etc in BP only. BP is single threaded, much like the majority of the engines API’s. They all have to run in the Game Thread. It’s a CPU bottleneck.
but those are also not indie games, or A/AA - they can just go C++
My point is BP is massively limited. It chokes the simulation thread. For anybody wanting to do anything beyond expedition 33 you’re forced into C++. If already forced, Verse is by far better.
Thats not relevant, you can still make amazing games that have literally won GOTY.
It’s highly relevant because it’s why BP and Actors are getting dropped.
Epic’s priority is to make the new engine’s game simulation be multicore and multithreaded. You cannot do that with Actors and BP. Most of UE5 is thread unsafe. VERSE fixes this.
Just let the community cook. They are working on custom visualizers. Epic has already said they aren’t keeping BP and they are not going to do a verse visualizer.
So I checked briefly a bit more, and to be honest changes are not bad at all actually. It is some nice news even. I can say it is a risky move for Epic, but a nice move, so actually /clap for that.
We don’t have to worry even for visual scripting, there will be some stuff possibly, if not even can be done. Entity mindset is the right mindset, that would be a nice change.
Multi-threading is actually something I desire, so I am willing to learn something new for that trade off. Anyway, there is always something new to learn after 10+ years.
For the last comments, I think Rev is right about it. Generally you can make unlimited things with already existing tools, but when it comes to something unconventional designs, every engine has its limits and you have to work around them. What amazing means depends on the person, and I think it’s not the point. For some it can be graphics, for some gameplay, music, mix of many things, story etc.
However, the point is: Engine is evolving and in a good direction. Risky, I want to be a bit skeptical, but good. Multi-threading will unlock many things, like better AI logic, better physics or calculations etc. and it’s on CPU, not GPU, so we don’t have to write compute shader for basic things just to be performant. That would also probably unlock a lot of physics simulation core changes also on Chaos to be much better, so it’s good move in that terms.
I understand the nice part about Visual Scripting, but code is code and I am pretty sure there will be some visual scripting that nobody has to worry. If not, probably there will be paid / free plugins.
BP is a great tool. It’s almost perfect for teaching new devs the basics of programming and the engines architecture. How things work in games. How to move things in 3D space, interact etc. Really great tool.
I’ve been working with UE on/off for the better part of 25 years. From the 2.0 & 3.0 days of UnrealScript, to 4/5 BP. If you learn anything in game dev it’s that nothing last forever. Eventually you have to learn something new. For better or for worse.
UE6 changes are absolutely for the better. More crap to learn, but the gains are absolutely worth to me as a dev.
just glad I could learn “how to deal with the engine” with Blueprint, so that I can “just verse it together” somehow.
For me, the worst thing is: currently we only have UEFN to “learn verse”, which si quite a bit different from Unreal Engine 5 and cut down.
So a lot of time is getting “wasted” until we get usable UE6 and scenegraph to figure out whats going on, and how.
This is genuinely gutting news. Blueprints aren’t just a feature, they are Unreal’s identity for a huge portion of its community. They are the bread and butter of what made Unreal what it is today. Going back to Kismet in the UDK days, that node-based visual scripting was revolutionary. Blueprints refined that into something even more powerful.
And I get why people defend text-based scripting, but visual scripting hits differently for a huge portion of developers. It’s not just about avoiding syntax, it’s about seeing the logic. Nodes and connections make the flow of a system immediately readable in a way that scanning through lines of text never quite does. You can trace what triggers what, follow the execution path visually, and understand a system at a glance. It’s like a mind map that actually executes. That’s genuinely powerful, especially for designers and artists who think spatially.
Yes, Blueprint graphs can turn into spaghetti, but so can code. That’s not a Blueprint problem, that’s a discipline problem. Comments, functions, separate BPs, interfaces, the same good practices that keep C++ maintainable apply here too. The tools were there. The answer was always better workflow habits, not scrapping visual scripting entirely.
I’m totally open to a new visual scripting system replacing Blueprints. If Verse gets a proper node-based interface, great, let’s talk. But removing visual scripting altogether with nothing concrete to replace it? That’s what stings. That’s the part that feels like a step backward.
So hey Epic, if you’re reading this, please, please, please don’t replace visual scripting with vibe coding. We want to see our logic, not just prompt it into existence. Don’t take this away from us. It needs the human touch especially with its imperfections. That’s what makes this an art even if its in code/BPs.
Not every project requires that tho, why not just keep the option or hand it to the community to improve? The communication is horrible