UE4 Roadmap

Karmington · April 28, 2017, 7:50am

With the new Audio Engine, Calculate Frequency Spectrum and Get Amplitude nodes ( from the Sound Visualization ) could start working in packaged builds?

anonymous_user_294c53d7 · April 28, 2017, 8:33am

[=;]
Exactly, what’s the point of bringing Marketplace to VR conversation? o.O

That really shows your level of maturity.

Where in my posts did i say that i have something against “bringing Marketplace to VR”?
I only said that i will not use it until certain tech goals are reached, but that does not mean that another dev cant use it.
We live in a free world.

Im imature because i dont want to support facebook?
Am i bound by the law to support a company,which i do not like,or what?
Has facebooks lobbying gone so far that trump has released a law that every citizen on the planet has to buy facebook products now?
Facebook showed time and time again that it does not care on privacy issues.
It just wants tu suck all the information of your private live out of you,while storing it on some server for further monetarysation and gives you nothing usefull in return.
And then it gives information to some insurance corporations which pressure you with information by giving you worst conditions,or to some spam sending telemarketer.

Beside of that it just becomes its own media empire,which decides under very intransperent conditions which news it shows you in your own timeline and which not.
So it accelerates splitting up the society into partial interests.Look for example at the hostility between democrates and republicans in the USA.If goes on like than we have,in 15-20 years from now,a civil in the USA.

Why should i support a company like ?

[=]
It is as possible as winning in lottery I guess.

What is bit sad about entire roadmap right now, that’s even CryEngine roadmap looks more exciting and informative (they have three sections, what will happen over next two releases, and future plans), which actually works pretty nice. You have clear idea what will be next release. What might be after that, and what might happen in the future.

I’m personally interested in few things:

What happened to arbitrary gravity direction ? There is pull request sitting for like year or two now…
When Landscape tools get some love (GPU painting, more advanced materials out of box).
Support for dynamic in editor level streaming (loading levels by hand is PAIN).
World composition tools improvements and origin rebasing inside editor (also without manual intervention).
What is going on with things like that:

These are really interesting things.

I don’t think those are unreasonable requests, which would benefit only small percentage of users.

Arbitrary gravity directions has almost the most votes on the roadmap for years now.
It would be one of the most important and beneficial features to implement in terms of player movement in game.
Many devs in forum argue for years now for that to happen and it even got a concret release date 2 years ago just to get pulled back into the backlock 2 month after the post of the concret release date,because VR seemed more important than a good landscape/level editor or arbitrary gravity options.

questions/314301/arbitrary-orientationgravity-direction-for-charact.html

How is behavior listening to the communitys needs ?

Maximum-Dev · April 28, 2017, 10:49am

The discussion is a bit pointless at point.

[=;700954]
Features that the community wants are of great importance to us, and we welcome any requests to be posted up one level on our Feedback for Epic forum…

We do not have a say in what’s going to be in the engine, [MENTION=14973][/MENTION] . Because most of our bug reports/ requests from last year are still backlogged, unless it’s been something that perfectly aligns with Epic’s internal needs. We were all trying to get a little more attention to backlogged items, but everything got wiped from existence. Same as when people were asking for Marketplace improvements, they got a 24 hour delay on the sales report instead, and staff left the Discord channel, cutting off the little remaining communication.

[]
If you release a game, we ask for 5% of the gross revenue from the project. Some people say ‘why does Epic want a cut of my game?’ and it’s because we’re providing you with engine and we’ve aligned our interest with yours. -, Epic Games

That simply isn’t true. I have many threads in the feedback section, most features being what comes with other engines right out of the box because they’re absolutely critical to majority of developers, but there is no instance where we asked for a similar tool and it was added.

All ignored because wasn’t needed in Epic’s closed arena shooter, which is the only type of game Epic has focused on for years since Unreal Tournament came out.
That’s examples I pulled off from my side only. Absence of those features have added tremendous amount of labor to our team.
How much hope one should have in order to stay motivated and continue giving feedback/make requests.
Maybe ask the CEO to read through such threads sometimes before talking about community.

motorsep · April 28, 2017, 2:18pm

It’s funny to see you comparing UE4 with Frostbite. Go get Frostbite and start developing with it. Oh wait, you can’t? (especially for free and then for 5% share)

Cryengine sucks. Yes, it has tools UE4 doesn’t have, but other than that support is worse, documentation is worse, community is scarce. I don’t even recall any decent games that just work out of the box made with Cryengine besides games made by Crytek themselves (and even with those there are a ton of issues).

Unity started a long, long time ago and that’s all they work on - engine that runs on virtually everything and supports anything (supports so much hated here Windows Store and supports Facebook). And if you go commercial not only you have to pay for the engine as subscription, you also pay separately for support. Unity doesn’t make games, unlike Epic, and Unity is a larger company.

Right now UE4 has everything one needs to make a good game. AAA devs can implement whatever they needs (they have money and manpower) and can make indie-level games with UE4 as-is. Look at the examples of successful indie titles. None uses real-time or massive open worlds (although No Man’s Lie … err Sky does, but they made their own engine and the game still sucked at the end).

Also, VR market is new, unsaturated. A new beginning for many of indies. Conventional market is super crowded and saturated, so it’s impossible to make living without massive PR, which is expensive or publisher that takes away almost all proceeds.

It’s just same old crowd moans and ******#s here about missing features and such instead of working on their games with what engine already offers and learning ins and out of budding new technology.

P.S. There are things I’d like to see in UE4 asap too, but I know it’s not going to happen in the nearest future. Give it a few more years for engine to mature.

teak421 · April 28, 2017, 2:25pm

If you win the lottery, hopefully you will share your winnings!

anonymous_user_294c53d7 · April 28, 2017, 2:31pm

[=;701199]
It’s funny to see you comparing UE4 with Frostbite. Go get Frostbite and start developing with it. Oh wait, you can’t? (especially for free and then for 5% share)

Cryengine sucks. Yes, it has tools UE4 doesn’t have, but other than that support is worse, documentation is worse, community is scarce. I don’t even recall any decent games that just work out of the box made with Cryengine besides games made by Crytek themselves (and even with those there are a ton of issues).

Unity started a long, long time ago and that’s all they work on - engine that runs on virtually everything and supports anything (supports so much hated here Windows Store and supports Facebook). And if you go commercial not only you have to pay for the engine as subscription, you also pay separately for support. Unity doesn’t make games, unlike Epic, and Unity is a larger company.

Right now UE4 has everything one needs to make a good game. AAA devs can implement whatever they needs (they have money and manpower) and can make indie-level games with UE4 as-is. Look at the examples of successful indie titles. None uses real-time or massive open worlds (although No Man’s Lie … err Sky does, but they made their own engine and the game still sucked at the end).

Also, VR market is new, unsaturated. A new beginning for many of indies. Conventional market is super crowded and saturated, so it’s impossible to make living without massive PR, which is expensive or publisher that takes away almost all proceeds.

It’s just same old crowd moans and ******#s here about missing features and such instead of working on their games with what engine already offers and learning ins and out of budding new technology.

P.S. There are things I’d like to see in UE4 asap too, but I know it’s not going to happen in the nearest future. Give it a few more years for engine to mature.

Dude, are you some kind of experimental social advertising bot from epic or facebook or what is happening here?
Or are you just having your fun with us by trolling us?
I have a hard time believing that post is actualy comming from a real person.

teak421 · April 28, 2017, 2:59pm

If I was king for a day at Epic I would have 4.17 be a bug fix release only… Reviewing the backlogged issues with the most votes and knocking those out. Most people would be OK with a freeze for a single release…?? I would think.

teak421 · April 28, 2017, 3:02pm

[=emeraldcoast;701209]
Dude, are you some kind of experimental social advertising bot from epic or facebook or what is happening here?
Or are you just having your fun with us by trolling us?
I have a hard time believing that post is actualy comming from a real person.

He’s a real person with over 2500 posted messages… Those are his opinions, so of course they are valid… When is expressing an opinion considered “trolling?”

Kyzaadrao · April 28, 2017, 3:28pm

I like that the new roadmap is concise and predictable, although it does hide current problems and wishlist items to some extent. I’m still a UE noob, but I have been evaluating the engines for a couple years now in terms of the company producing the engine and how they handle feedback and how they treat their customers and their pace of development.

In regard, I chose UE because it wins hands down. My only is that I’ve seen many companies with good product incur technical debt to the detriment of users over time. When technical debt is not kept under control more and more features start getting wonky or unusable. I’m not deep enough into UE yet to see that is starting to creep up in and I think it’s natural to introduce more features with bugs that are difficult to track down.

Not that technical debt has much to do with the roadmap, but it does seem to potentially mask some problems. At any rate, cleaner and more predictable is also nice when you want to be sure that X is on the table.

anonymous_user_294c53d7 · April 28, 2017, 3:35pm

[=teak421;701216]
He’s a real person with over 2500 posted messages… Those are his opinions, so of course they are valid… When is expressing an opinion considered “trolling?”

We explained him in multiple posts that not shares his passion for VR and that over 99% of us want at the moment rather continue to work on our conventional games/content.And that those 99 % have also the right to see featuredevelopment takeing place for their needs.

I personaly asked the following:

why is that what 99% of the paying customers want way less important than the rest under 1 % VR devs?

He never gives any concret answers to that or any question at all other than saying with almost religious passion meaningless catchphrases like:

“VR is the future”
“Soon you will be the 1 %”
“VR got not enough advertising and promotion and thats the reason for not beeing more used at the moment”
“Implying out of nowhere that i dont sell on the market place and have no right to complain therefore, which is wrong because i actualy do sell on the market place”
“Frostbite cant be compared with Unreal.And Unity cant also be compared with Unreal in his mind,because it is in his mind a way bigger Company and is out there way longer and can be used on any platform(is Unity realy older as Unreal Engine ,which has gotten to its 4th Iteration today And why cant i compare Unreal with Unity???)”

The list goes on and on.

He has the right to have his own opinion,but he should acept that not has the same opinion that he has.

SteveElbows · April 28, 2017, 3:52pm

[=;700954]
Lastly, let’s try and keep the harassment of each other to a minimum… We’re all developers here trying to make great things with the toolkit and many of us are passionate about different pieces of technology, features and markets, but thread should remain focused on the roadmap itself. Thanks!

Three cheers to . Shame it really isnt happening in thread at the moment. There is negativity going on that ends up being terribly unproductive and demoralising even when some important and sensible points are being made by the same people doing the ranting. The venom and histrionic language may enable some people let off stream and gadfly stuff does have a place in the world. But taken to these extremes the result has been a fair chunk of humanity becoming wary of internet forums and I dont think it really increases the chances that ‘the community’ will have greater influence over the development of UE. Lots of people making similar negative points is more likely to affect change than a few people making the same points repeatedly and insulting those who disagree.

Maximum-Dev · April 28, 2017, 4:00pm

[=;701199]
It’s funny to see you comparing UE4 with Frostbite. Go get Frostbite and start developing with it. Oh wait, you can’t? (especially for free and then for 5% share)

Cryengine sucks. Yes, it has tools UE4 doesn’t have, but other than that support is worse, documentation is worse, community is scarce. I don’t even recall any decent games that just work out of the box made with Cryengine besides games made by Crytek themselves (and even with those there are a ton of issues).

No. It’s not funny!
Cryengine support is worse, community is scarce, documentation is bad. How is that any valid reason for Epic to not listen to a single feedback from community regarding their engine tools? Whether are using cryengine for their games or not has nothing to do with Epic insisting on not go for the tools that’s been implemented in other engines since +5 years ago to ease the development. You’re derailing the discussion.

[=;701199]
Unity started a long, long time ago and that’s all they work on - engine that runs on virtually everything and supports anything (supports so much hated here Windows Store and supports Facebook). And if you go commercial not only you have to pay for the engine as subscription, you also pay separately for support. Unity doesn’t make games, unlike Epic, and Unity is a larger company.

Not sure how that’s related to anything here.

[=;701199]
Right now UE4 has everything one needs to make a good game. AAA devs can implement whatever they needs (they have money and manpower) and can make indie-level games with UE4 as-is. Look at the examples of successful indie titles. None uses real-time or massive open worlds (although No Man’s Lie … err Sky does, but they made their own engine and the game still sucked at the end).

Now that’s funny. If AAA devs should implement what they need, and should use it as is, what’s the point of the 5% royalty and claiming it’s because they care about what we need? what’s the point of “Feedback & Suggestions” forum? What’s the point of mentioning we love to hear feedback and suggestions? we’re making an open world game. World composition ever since it was introduced is swamped with bugs. Absence of virtual texturing doesn’t let us have more than 4 layers on landscape due to massive performance drop. Grass tool is bugged, landscape is bugged etc. etc. How’d you know anything about it while you’re not working on an open world project?

[=;701199]
Also, VR market is new, unsaturated. A new beginning for many of indies. Conventional market is super crowded and saturated, so it’s impossible to make living without massive PR, which is expensive or publisher that takes away almost all proceeds.

That’s great! let’s kill the current generation, slow down the development of hundreds of games so our kids can enjoy VR games. VR until the next decade will still only generate a fraction of the profit non-VR games generate. Excellent strategy.

[=;701199]
It’s just same old crowd moans and ******#s here about missing features and such instead of working on their games with what engine already offers and learning ins and out of budding new technology.

Always it has to end up with some sort of insult towards those who want some improvements… I didn’t read your post entirely at first, if I had read line I’d have refused replying and just kept what @emeraldcoast said about it. You sir, are certainly walking up the steps to success right now by attaching a “******#s” label to anyone who is criticizing the engine. You might get a promotion.

Ivey · April 28, 2017, 4:02pm

[=BlackRag666]
There are three things on the roadmap and none are the one that should actually be there. “Fix the bugs”

Bug fixing is something we continuously do release over release. We ccould add a card for it, but we’re going to be continually fixing hundreds of bugs in every release as we do now.

[=BlackRag666]
Every release since around 4.12 the engine has gotten wore and worse in terms of stability. “Blueprint Weirdness Syndrome” now strikes in nearly every project. Blueprint structs are essentially time-bombs. Steam voice chat was busted in 4.15. The nonsensical “***** has to have ‘Simulate Physics’ enabled if you’d like to AddImpulse” message still spams the logs. I still can’t spawn objects in a c++ constructor like I could in older versions. In recent months Answer Hub staff have gotten less willing to try to repro anything or even acknowledge a problem. It takes two months of people complaining to get a bug report entered.

I’d love to know more about the issues that you’ve outlined above. Can you link me to any reports in PM? I’d really appreciate it, thanks!

[=BlackRag666]
To be honest, communication with Epic staff was great during the first couple of years after UE4 released, but now meaningful responses almost never occur. Nearly every staff post starts with some kind of platitude and glosses over the real issues.

I apologize if we’ve let you down in terms of communication recently. We take sort of matter seriously and will do our best to improve an open line with the community.

[=BlackRag666]
I feel I should mention I nearly exclusively develop for VR now. At all 3 companies I do long-term work for, I am a VR dev. PLEASE STOP SHOVING VR GIMMICKS INTO THE ENGINE. VR Editor will never not be a gimmick. I don’t want to stand up and strap on the headset while I am working. Your engine is becoming nearly unusable due to major bugs that aren’t being fixed while you completely over-focus on VR.

[=]
Well… that’s entire point of the discussion. You are all in over VR. Which looks like people are tired of.

As mentioned before, VR is only one of many avenues in which we provide valuable new features to developers, and we’re doing a ton of non-VR specific work for people making non-VR specific projects. Take a look at what’s on the way with 4.16 to see what’s in store for animation, physics, platform support, rendering, asset management, audio and more.

[=BlackRag666]
If you want to put something more specific on the roadmap, then “Placeholder-class catastrophe” Error blueprint (self) is not a PLACEHOLDER-CLASS que…ment-4112.html and “All my child blueprints reset” https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...ariables-Reset are good places to start.

is an that the team is aware of and looking in to. The roadmap has always been a place for upcoming features, not necessarily for the showing the status of bugs. Bug status is currently tracked over at issues.unrealengine.com, but we’ll discuss ways to better surface information on them if is inadequate for the success of developers. Let us know!

[=Teak421]
Is it possible that some people actually use the VR Editor? Probably… Why would they make it if there was no demand for it?

[=BlackRang666]
I know not a single dev that uses it. I can’t imagine any scenario it would be useful for. The only explanation I can speculate is that a higher-up at Epic ordered it and refuses to acknowledge its a waste of resources. I would use Visual Studio: VR Edition before I would use UE in VR.

Teams are, in fact, using it! For building worlds in VR, it’s a great way to quickly get a sense of scope and scale. While it’s certainly not for (especially those not working in VR at all ), developers do see value in the tool.

[=]

Okay. What’s on the roadmap for 4.17?

The current items that we know are going to make 4.17 are listed on the board. It’s short today, but is just the beginning. Expect more to show up there are we’re confident with be in the release later in the summer / fall.

[=]
02. To start Epic needs to stop playing hide and seek with upcoming features. I know a major part of game industry is surprising the audience, but there’s a difference between the consumer buying the games and those in the development community who need years of time to actually develop their games with your engine for whom your tools are failing. The culture of secrecy needs to stop and we need to work together

[=]
How does keeping more behind scenes help anyone ?

Secrecy is absolutely not the focus of and I apologize that we allowed things to be taken that way. The older roadmap was setting developers up for failure in a number of ways.

I am sorry that our tools are not meeting your expectations. I encourage you to post your feedback about Unreal Engine 4 on the parent Feedback for Epic forum. In the meantime, I’ll investigate what we can and can’t share due to potential volatility in our development schedule.

[=]
It is as possible as winning in lottery I guess.
My answer as to why such lets be honest useless for majority of developers features are developed.
To have something to show on GDC. Remember unveiling UE4 ? Yeah me too. Remember Kite Demo, next year (that was big and really got lots of people excited).
Do you remember what was on GDC after that ? Me neither. There was something about VR, but entire GDC was about how VR is the future.
And year GDC, was pretty much the same as last year. The only thing I remember from it are physics and animation, audio stuff and thing that did (well it’s better than last year…).

Both GDC were more focused on enterprise than core game developers.

The Kite demo was an incredibly exciting project for us to work on. Unreal Engine 4 was, in many ways, in its infancy in 2014, and Kite gave us an excellent opportunity to explore our tools and build out enormous systems and features that the engine had not yet refined (or had at all!). Between Kite and Theif in the Shadows, we were able to bring forth a lot of the systems and features that developers use today in their projects every day.

GDC 2016 saw us finalize a number of rendering features put in place for Paragon such as realistic cloth, hair, skin and other character specific items, and we were also able to take Sequencer out of the oven and put it to use with a number of partners at the show, creating a path for many to build out cinematics for their games. Our work with McLaren that was revealed at GDC brought forth a number of new options for making realistic materials and allowed us to release the automotive material pack for free based on that work. For VR, we were happy to show off the VR Editor, Bullet Train and Trials on Tatooine, as well as a ton of other partner content in the VR lounge in support of the new VRDC portion of GDC.

past GDC saw the release of Robo Recall and its full source. What’s super cool to me about project is that it helped us harden a number of non-VR specific features such as Blueprint Nativization (which we recently covered on Twitch) which provides an avenue ton gain significant performance, the hardening of out-of-the-box mod support (check thread for more info) for building expandable games and provided a robust project example for developers to see our approach (grab the entire project from the launcher) to many aspects of building games. We were also extremely glad to share the animation, physics and audio work in our tech talks (those that you mentioned, a lot of which is coming in 4.16), as well as showing off platform support for the all-new Nintendo Switch.

Regarding enterprise applications, we are definitely seeing more and more uses of Unreal Engine for applications outside of games. It’s really to us all that creators of all types are able to bring ideas to life with our technology. Rest assured, we’re going to continue building out leading ***game ***technology for our licensees and our own titles. Our commitment to game developers is strong and will remain that way

[=]
But even worse, year features trailer for engine, was almost the same as last year. There was no bomb drop like Kite Demo since two years!

The features trailer speaks to all parts of the engine, whether the features are new or not. Kite was the first time we got to build out a solid features trailer, and of course we’re anxious to see it evolve over time with you all

[=]
I’m personally interested in few things:

What happened to arbitrary gravity direction ? There is pull request sitting for like year or two now…
When Landscape tools get some love (GPU painting, more advanced materials out of box).
Support for dynamic in editor level streaming (loading levels by hand is PAIN).
World composition tools improvements and origin rebasing inside editor (also without manual intervention).

Thank you providing these concrete examples. I’ll look into what I can find out here.

[=]
What is going on with things like that:
https://twitter.com/BrianKaris/statu...72258639740928
These are really interesting things.

is more technical approach than a in itself. I’ll see if Brian can write up something for the blog when it’s in a place to talk about!

[=]
I still think there should be some voting system for community request features like I mentioned previously. Gathering votes over period of few months is not representative. Giving unlimited amount of votes is also not representative.
How I would see it working:

Gather requests from forums/answer hub (which you guys know you can implement, but don’t know how many people really want them).
Create pool, and give like 5 votes.
Make pool available for two weeks. Let vote over period.
Reset pool and let vote again.

See which items received most votes every time, to see what is most trending. And then implement those features.
Repeat.
I think it would be most fair. There won’t be overblow of possible features, will clearly see what will get implemented, people get features they want, and Epic get props for listening to community. is happy

We will continue to investigate methods in which to gather collective interest in new features. The voting on Trello was failing both us and the community for a number of reasons, but we do recognize the value in mechanisms like voting.

[=Emeraldcoast]
Arbitrary gravity directions has almost the most votes on the roadmap for years now.
It would be one of the most important and beneficial features to implement in terms of player movement in game.
Many devs in forum argue for years now for that to happen and it even got a concret release date 2 years ago just to get pulled back into the backlock 2 month after the post of the concret release date,because VR seemed more important than a good landscape/level editor or arbitrary gravity options.

https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...for-Characters
que…r-charact.html

How is behavior listening to the communitys needs ?

The inability to accurately provide a timeline for features such as is was failing the development community in a number of ways and is a core reason we’ve made the change. While features like arbitrary gravity is something that we’d like to add at some point, we don’t have a clear path to get it on our roadmap and won’t until it gets slated for a release. Once a is slated for a release, then it will be added to the roadmap as opposed to everything living there for an undefined amount of time.

[=]

We do not have a say in what’s going to be in the engine, @Chance_Ivey . Because most of our bug reports/ requests from last year are still backlogged, unless it’s been something that perfectly aligns with Epic’s internal needs. We were all trying to get a little more attention to backlogged items, but everything got wiped from existence.
Same as when people were asking for Marketplace improvements, they got a 24 hour delay on the sales report instead, and staff left the Discord channel, cutting off the little remaining communication.

That simply isn’t true. I have many threads in the feedback section, most features being what comes with other engines right out of the box because they’re absolutely critical to majority of developers, but there is no instance where we asked for a similar tool and it was added.

https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...Lighting-Units Frostbite/Cryengine have it.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show…-Spline-Decals Frostbite/Cryengine have it.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...mbient-Cubemap Frostbite/Cryengine have it.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...h-pen-pressure Frostbite has it.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...scape-painting Cryengine has it.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...formance-issue Frostbite/Cryengine have virtual texturing.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...s-more-control Cryneigne/Unity3D marketplaces value sellers much more.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...rketplace-Team …
Unreal Engine Issues and Bug Tracker (UE-35097) Untouched bug for 8 months with 40 votes.
que…ouldnt-be.html was marked as solved 3 times in a row last night, while the problem is there and very obvious.
Unreal Engine Issues and Bug Tracker (UE-43093) Probably soon to be backlogged bug report.
https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...natives/page11 There are many threads regarding RT-GI. Community wants it. Frostbite has Enlighten/Unity has something/Cryengine has SVOGI, Epic removed SVOGI.
…

That’s examples I pulled off from my side only. Absence of those features have added tremendous amount of labor to our team.
How much hope one should have in order to stay motivated and continue giving feedback/make requests.
Maybe ask the CEO to read through such threads sometimes before talking about community.

Thanks for providing concrete examples of community requests. While I cannot speak directly to why some of these will or won’t make it into the engine or how some of these decisions were made, I think AlexanderP outlined how we approach implementation in one of those threads:

"1. Community interest: Threads in the Feedback for Epic section, AnswerHub reports, social media posts and votes on the issues page help determine that. Please keep giving feedback and make sure to specifically explain how you would expect the tools to work for the best results. The mesh editor is an example of a tool made from these kinds of requests.
1. Large audience need: tools that help out a large audience are prioritized highly. Sequencer, Niagara, Audio Engine and other tool overhauls fall into category. is probably the highest priority in general since it helps so many people.
1. Epic Games project need: One of Epic’s projects needed it, so it was ported over from the game into a engine tool. AnimDynamics, VR Forward Renderer and Behavior Trees were created for . These get added a lot since the tool is already done and it’s just a matter of porting and testing."

While we cannot guarantee every request that comes across makes it into the engine (as much as we, too, want all the things), I can say that your asks do help us plan and build out important pieces of / improvements to Unreal Engine.

Thanks for your comments and concerns. We’re continually looking for ways to improve our offerings with not only the engine itself but all of the supporting products alongside it, so feedback like is meaningful.

Also I’d like to ask again for debate over things outside of the Unreal Engine roadmap to continue elsewhere. Let’s also continue to keep the harassment of eachother out of these forums as well. Thanks!

anonymous_user_230c20e9 · April 28, 2017, 4:38pm

[=;701251]
The current items that we know are going to make 4.17 are listed on the board. It’s short today, but is just the beginning. Expect more to show up there are we’re confident with be in the release later in the summer / fall.

Thanks for the detailed response. Instead of waiting for features to simply “show up”, why don’t we get that conversation going now? Lets figure out what your engineers want to work on and what the community wants and find as much middle ground together. Features “showing up” on the road map plays into the whole culture of secrecy mentioned before. PLEASE let us make you money. Talk to us.

[=teak421;701215]
If I was king for a day at Epic I would have 4.17 be a bug fix release only… Reviewing the backlogged issues with the most votes and knocking those out. Most people would be OK with a freeze for a single release…?? I would think.

+1 For Freeze - Full Bug Fix Release!

Gunschlinger · April 28, 2017, 5:07pm

There is ancient bug in ue4 bp that basicly reset all variables to the default state in a child blueprint. Its been reported so many times and yet nobody seems to bother fixing it. guy even made a internet survey to gather data about the bug :https://twitter.com/joewintergreen/status/856397563108261889

SteveElbows · April 28, 2017, 5:42pm

I would support a release that had bugfixes as its focus, but I wouldnt go as far as a full freeze. Partly because I suspect that some epic teams (or however they organise) are going to have much less to contribute towards bugfixing for a multitude of reasons, and also the state of some systems that are being rewritten may make it advantageous to press on with finishing the new system that will replace the old one rather than try to fix some longstanding issues with the old one. As of right now the work on the new Audio Engine springs to mind as an obvious example of and since it is experimental in 4.16 and hoping to be ready for 4.17.

BlackFangTech · April 28, 2017, 6:10pm

[=;701251]
For building worlds in VR, it’s a great way to quickly get a sense of scope and scale.

So its specifically for level designers that don’t like play in editor?

anonymous_user_294c53d7 · April 28, 2017, 8:04pm

[=;701251]
The inability to accurately provide a timeline for features such as is was failing the development community in a number of ways and is a core reason we’ve made the change. While features like arbitrary gravity is something that we’d like to add at some point, we don’t have a clear path to get it on our roadmap and won’t until it gets slated for a release. Once a is slated for a release, then it will be added to the roadmap as opposed to everything living there for an undefined amount of time.

Especially the abitrary gravity setting request is out there for more than three years now and its one of the most requested ones also.
Two years ago it got even a concrete release date,so the ue4 devs must have acknowledged how important is for many.

But then it didn’t came out on the promised release date and got backlocked till unknown timeframe.
You had 3 years time developing it , how much longer should we wait in your opinion?
Another 3 years so that it adds up to 6 years total.Thats just not a reasonable timeframe for anyone to plan a game with x,y.
Especially when you gave it a fixed releasedate two years ago and then out of nowhere just canceled the release.
How should anyone plan a game with a communication like .

And im not only talking about the abitrary gravity .
There are also:

-a more powerful landscape/vegetation editor with a in game terrain editing toolset which does not drop down to 10 frames per second when you layer multiple materials on top of each other (You implement the in game editing for your VR costumers with the VR editor right now but for the rest of the 99% of the non VR related playerbase you refuse to implement a like that for years now)

You still haven’t answered one:"How can you justify working on the VR realtime editor when 99% of your customers who do not use or develop for VR at all don’t even have a real time terrain editing mode in the normal landscape editor?"Should it not be the other way around that you first give the 99% important and then convert it later to VR for the under 1% of your VR userbase?

-a more powerful level editor (You cant build a level editor around the premise of importing finished assets from other programs and then “blocking” a level out with those finished assets just because the geometry editing tools in the ue4 editor are so lackluster that you cant even block out a level fast with meshes in editor to test out if distances between your buildings are the way you want them to be.)

A powerful geometry editor for blocking a level out is one of the basic must have toolboxes a level editor needs to have.
That’s like selling a car without a motor like you see them rolling around in the tv show the flinstones:

https://img.clipartfest.com/466ddaf346c0d13d5c40866d33d3a193_flintstones-car-free-clipart-flintstone-car-clipart_590-287.png

How long do you expect people to sit and wait till important core features, which are implemented in other engines like unity for years now ,finally come out for unreal?
While you bring out one gimmicky after the other to satisfy your “strategic partners” like facebook and reduce your communication with your community month after month?

Maximum-Dev · April 28, 2017, 9:28pm

[=emeraldcoast;701360]
While you bring out one gimmicky after the other to satisfy your “strategic partners”…

Isn’t that what every company is doing now…
“Community” is a thing from previous couple decades, it’s not about communities anymore it’s about personal interests. Having a community is just a tradition that’s slowly going away more and more each year.
I think having a community these days plays the role of free advertising that’s all.

Edit: Yeah that was off topic sorry. Gnight.

teak421 · April 28, 2017, 10:51pm

[=emeraldcoast;701360]
Especially the abitrary gravity setting request is out there for more than three years now and its one of the most requested ones also.
Two years ago it got even a concrete release date,so the ue4 devs must have acknowledged how important is for many.

But then it didn’t came out on the promised release date and got backlocked till unknown timeframe.
You had 3 years time developing it , how much longer should we wait in your opinion?
Another 3 years so that it adds up to 6 years total.Thats just not a reasonable timeframe for anyone to plan a game with x,y.
Especially when you gave it a fixed releasedate two years ago and then out of nowhere just canceled the release.
How should anyone plan a game with a communication like .

And im not only talking about the abitrary gravity .
There are also:

-a more powerful landscape/vegetation editor with a in game terrain editing toolset which does not drop down to 10 frames when you layer multiple materials on top of each other (You implement the in game editing for your VR costumers with the VR editor right now but for the rest of the 99% of the non VR related playerbase you refuse to implement a like that for years now)

You still haven’t answered one:"How can you justify working on the VR realtime editor when 99% of your customers who do not use or develop for VR at all don’t even have a real time terrain editing mode in the normal landscape editor?"Should it not be the other way around that you first give the 99% important and then convert it later to VR for the under 1% of your VR userbase?

-a more powerful level editor (You cant build a level editor around the premise of importing finished assets from other programs and then “blocking” a level out with those finished assets just because the geometry editing tools in the ue4 editor are so lackluster that you cant even block out a level fast with meshes in editor to test out if distances between your buildings are the way you want them to be.)

A powerful geometry editor for blocking a level out is one of the basic must have toolboxes a level editor needs to have.
That’s like selling a car without a motor like you see them rolling around in the tv show the flinstones:

https://img.clipartfest.com/466ddaf346c0d13d5c40866d33d3a193_flintstones-car-free-clipart-flintstone-car-clipart_590-287.png

How long do you expect people to sit and wait till important core features, which are implemented in other engines like unity for years now ,finally come out for unreal?
While you bring out one gimmicky after the other to satisfy your “strategic partners” like facebook and reduce your communication with your community month after month?

I think there is nothing that the folks at Epic can say that would alleviate your concerns… Maybe UE4 is not the engine for you?