Top 3 most-submitted asset types, and top 3 opportunities

Hi all! I’m going through the Marketplace catalog and our past submissions and noticed some patterns I thought people might find interesting. In no particular order, these are the top three things we get the most submissions of:

  1. Blueprint Inventory Systems
  2. Crates\Barrels
  3. Stone\Rock material packs

We get dozens and dozens of each, and not all of them are high enough quality to make it past the Epic quality bar. In general, it’s better to try to find something unique or different about what you’re creating that sets it apart from others than it is trying to compete in a crowded area. One way to differentiate is by adding more functionality and being easier to use rather than simply adding more content and trying to compete only on quality.

On the subject of how to stand out in the Marketplace, I had a few thoughts on that. An important lesson in product design and marketing for Unreal Engine Marketplace sellers: A pack of 15 hammers is less useful than a pack of hammers, wrenches, pliers, screwdrivers, and a toolbox to put them in.

First think about usage cases in a video game: How many games have 15 different hammers? How many people are likely to buy that many hammers for their project? You may be limiting your market by being too specific. You want your appeal to be broad enough to generate sales for a variety of game types, while being specific enough to think “Hey, I could use that! I’m going to buy it!”

Next, think about what a buyer is likely to do a Google search for when they want something: If someone searches for “hammer,” are they likely to want 15 different hammers? Or are they more likely to want an assortment of tools they could use throughout their game in a variety of different usage cases?

The purchase impulse and thought process are going to be “I need a specific thing,” and then “okay, what else do I get for the price?” If it’s a pack of 15 hammers and they only need one, that’s not going to be a lot of value, and they probably won’t buy it. But if they only need one hammer, and they get a variety of other tools and props as well, that’s more likely to lead to a purchase.

Hammers were a random example, but I see this with packs of 50 variations on a single type of stone, or a Blueprint that can only assemble a single type of thing. Finding the right balance between filling a specific need and doing it in a general way that will be useful to a large ‘market’ of game types (action, horror, RTS, racing, etc) is the tricky part. Fortunately, I’m here to observe what everyone does, examine the data, find the best way to do it, and then to help teach the community to market and design products for the Marketplace. Epic wants you to do well and succeed. :slight_smile:

Now, with all that being said, here are the top 3 types of content we’d like to see more of:

  1. 2D content
  2. User Interface content
  3. Characters (rigged!)

I see a lot of opportunities there to create great content and dominate those entire categories. Right now they’re a little bit light, but I know the talent is out here in the community to do terrific work and help fill them out.

Also, if any of you found this writeup interesting, let me know and I could write like this more often. Thanks, and good luck! :slight_smile:

Useless without any Corefeatures like Attributes/Abilities…
:c Will there be a god who creates a fully rpg sample?
I ask for this.

No. Unless Materials were ment… but until No.

Not worth a buy, but maybe as free Content! Can agree with Quality bar, everything i used from Epic was actually high standart!

This is all my opinion ^.^

I like this post, it could be very interesting for people who want to put stuff on the marketplace.

And of course I like that you said you get too few User Interface submissions :cool:

Is it still mandatory to use the epic skeleton setup? Maybe I’m mixing up some old memories… If it still is, then I’m not even going to consider it.

Thanks Jon for the information. It’s great advice!

I would like to see more modular/customizable/procedural 3D characters, creatures, vehicles, weapons, etc.

What is considered ‘user interface content’?

Any special reason for that? I mean, for the customers its much easier to integrate if the Epic Skeleton is used, than any custom skel (except of course for non-bipeds). Also, all the animations can be reused without any problem or need to retarget, which is always a cumbersome task.

But maybe i’m just missing something :slight_smile:


Dammit, I’m working on a carpenter simulator! I was hoping for a hammer pack, which aint gonna happen now :frowning:

My problems being my problems… on the subject: How does the top three submissions compare to the top three sellings?

Because while it is a good idea to try to standardize a biped, their rig is not a one solution that fits all. I just think it hinders development and competition to stop other alternatives.

I’m fine with having a standard solution, but not ok with stopping other alternatives. Let’s take a devil/critter humanoid as an example, for example a minotaur, a creature that is walking on its toes (relatively speaking). In which greyzone does such a character fall into? By all means, encourage people to do products for the standard biped… But don’t put a halt on other solutions. There are so many games out there that centers around non-humans.

What if we start introducing equine (horses), canines or felines to the market place? Should Epic not then standardize quadruped rigs? Should they then go as far as trying to make a rig allow retargeting from a horse to a cat? (think human to minotaur) How would a tail then be standardized? Hoves? Ears? You see, while the quadruped example may seem extreme to some of you, I’m seeing very similar problems for humanoid characters.

Not true. Even with the Epic skeleton there will be problems with characters having different proportions. As an example, if they are holding items, then it is likely inverse kinematics will have to be used to counter drifting of the hands. (see the Fortnite streams, a standard problem with animation) At that point we’re reaching a technical level where the customer most likely knows how to implement their own rigs anyway. So I still don’t see the point in enforcing a standard instead of encouraging it.

But then, why do I bother. I’m not likely to submit to the marketplace anyway. I’m just having a serious pet peeve with Epic trying to enforce their default rig. :slight_smile:

I totally concur with the standardization of Skeletal Rigs. If its not enforced, its not a standard. In my opinion, there also needs to be guidelines for altering or extending on the default rig to ensure compatibility, ease-of-integration,etc. The concept of a Master Skeleton existed with UE3. I personally would like to see an extensible baserig for all types of entities: non-bipeds, facial, weapons, vehicles/crafts. These base rigs and their derivatives should be cataloged for easy reference. I propose this a couple of years back in UDK.

Can someone please clarify what User Interface content is? Fonts? Icons sets?

I believe there are 2 or 3 in development. What do you mean by “fully RPG” though?

Thank you, I’m glad you think so! And as of right now we don’t accept free content on the Marketplace, but content creators are welcome to distribute free content here on the forums.

The T-Pose guys have actually been working with increasingly modular characters, and have one up on the Trello board now that’s more modular than anything they’ve attempted before. It’s pretty rad! Go check out Robo: Trello

It’s never been mandatory to use the skeleton, actually. If it’s a realistic human character that’s been the preference, but if it’s cartoony or outside of the typical skeleton, it’s a free-for-all. The basic skeleton is just a starting point to make things easier for people and to simplify animation sharing. We’re also releasing a new one to the public that has more realistic proportions that’ll be going out very soon. We’re converting our existing animation content over to that now, and working with sellers to do so as well.

I hope you’ll reconsider whether or not to submit content to the Marketplace. I think having characters outside of the typical base skeleton proportions and style would be awesome!

Menus, buttons, heads-up display, crosshairs, hotbars, stuff like that.

Oh no! I’ve taken a hammer to your dreams! :frowning:

Funny you should ask… I’m actually working with that data right now. :slight_smile: I’ll be releasing information on that as soon as I’m able to come to conclusions on it. It’s a LOT of data and I’m working with several other people on it to make sure we’re coming to the correct conclusions. More on that soon.

Like, 4.8 soon? I’m about to start retargeting mocap on a very large scale and would be interested to know how long I should wait for the “new standard” of human.

Thanks Jon. I actually voted for Robo and purchased the Zombie 2 from T-Pose from the Marketplace which comes with animated jaw, modular cloth & hair pieces and customizable material. They are setting the standard high! I encourage others asset creators to follow T-Pose’s lead.

Super insightful post! Thank you very much Jones!
I’ll stick to my guns and keep working on 2D projects!

Ah, I see. I always considered stuff like that VERY game specific.

^ I think a lot of people do, same with characters. I asked about this a while ago as I was going to include characters/armor as part of my modular series but the general consensus was seemed to suggest developers want more unique assets when it comes to those things. Seeing many comments and feedback regarding a lack of interest/usability for those assets is most likely what is causing low submission rates. Epic could probably do a general poll to test a larger crowd, but on the forums that seems to be the conclusion. I would love to add the characters to my modular scifi series, but it takes time to create high quality characters and if the sales aren’t there to compensate for the work put in it doesn’t become worth it. Characters like the scifi mannequins serve a different purpose as they can be used for prototyping. But once you have one set of those, there really isn’t much demand or need for another. That’s just my take on it though. =)

If you made characters for your sci fi series I would buy them they day they became available. Your work is of exceptional quality, and AAA characters cost thousands (even without animations), so I’d be willing to buy even if it is at a premium price.

If I’m going for a AAA game then I’d much rather have the prototype look spectacular since that’s what I’m gonna need to recruit people. It tells them that you’re invested in the project and doing everything you can to make it great. Obviously you need to have implemented a lot of your own design and logic whether it be C++ or BP so that you’re not just copy pasting stuff others have made. Just my thoughts behind it, it won’t make the pack any more profitable, but i figured that it would be a different perspective.

What I would like to see are more kits than complete to finished products. A weapons kit for example with different barrels, sights, lasers, scopes, stocks, grips, receivers, that can be used to make twenty different weapons is more of interest than a completed set of ready made guns.

Added value would be if the scopes worked as a working scope and not something to hot glue to a receiver.

Think of it this way.

If I was baker what would be of more value? Selling me a ready made cake or the ingredients that I can make any cake I want…even if it is a lie. :wink:


For ready made weapons the rule should be one weapon per submit. Most of the complete packages has something that I like but don’t want to spend 75 bucks for a package that includes ready made guns that I don’t need.

A grenades package would be cool to hit the five items requirement and if they go boom, or flash, or frag or bang. Take a sphere and toss on a material = low cost bargain basement product. Make it work and not just a paperweight = top dollar.

Thanks MuchToLearn, that’s kind of you to say. =) I may still look into the possibility of doing it. The way I was going to approach it was selling armor packs with male and female versions. They would feature default heads (that were meant to be placeholder, but still high quality) and customizable armor colors, detail norms, pbr, etc. I would provide the OBJs so consumers can tweak as they need, and modify the untriangulated model. But as I alluded to above, it takes time. I actually have some armors that I haven’t put on my portfolio yet, which are probably the best ones I’ve done yet. Haven’t gotten around to texturing/retopologizing all of them yet. Too busy with the environment series at the moment. And then there’s the part where when it comes to characters, I’m just an artist not a rigger. =P