It would be more thrilling if your roadmap was more about getting read of the bugs you have made instead of making more bugs and making them more difficult to diagnose. I spend more time on trying to make the engine work instead of actually building games.
And you should definitely make an easy option to completely reset the engine, as it seems like it gets more buggy with use.
[=IhorM;44318]
It would be more thrilling if your roadmap was more about getting read of the bugs you have made instead of making more bugs and making them more difficult to diagnose. I spend more time on trying to make the engine work instead of actually building games.
And you should definitely make an easy option to completely reset the engine, as it seems like it gets more buggy with use.
What bugs ?
[=IhorM;44318]
It would be more thrilling if your roadmap was more about getting read of the bugs you have made instead of making more bugs and making them more difficult to diagnose. I spend more time on trying to make the engine work instead of actually building games.
And you should definitely make an easy option to completely reset the engine, as it seems like it gets more buggy with use.
I would be interested in hearing about these bugs that make the engine stop working too? I have not had any major issues with the engine stopping working. Maybe you should post some of the issues your having in the forum and see if maybe its just a misunderstanding on what your doing or is it a true problem.
[=IhorM;44318]
It would be more thrilling if your roadmap was more about getting read of the bugs you have made instead of making more bugs and making them more difficult to diagnose. I spend more time on trying to make the engine work instead of actually building games.
And you should definitely make an easy option to completely reset the engine, as it seems like it gets more buggy with use.
Bug fixing is not on the roadmap, because a roadmap is not a todo list. The roadmap lists future plans and features. Bug fixing is a continuous effort, happening all the time.
My feedback is that from what I can tell, isn’t really a roadmap because it doesn’t associate features with a version, a date or AFAIK even commit to delivering them at all.
Its more of a floating cloud of possible features. However, we need one of two of these features for UE4 to be viable for our project. If the features we need appear on a real roadmap of the form of a commitment that X is going to be delivered in version Y expected on Z then we can begin investing porting effort but without that we can’t. I know we all hate committing to dates but its really important when people depend on you.
[=duncanawoods;44839]
My feedback is that from what I can tell, isn’t really a roadmap because it doesn’t associate features with a version, a date or AFAIK even commit to delivering them at all.
Epic is already labeling the features with months. They tell you what months they expect to work on a specific item. While isn’t a guarantee, it’s probably as good as it will ever get. What’s the point of an arbitrary deadline? That wouldn’t give any more guarantee that what we have now.
[=;44880]
Epic is already labeling the features with months. They tell you what months they expect to work on a specific item. While isn’t a guarantee, it’s probably as good as it will ever get. What’s the point of an arbitrary deadline? That wouldn’t give any more guarantee that what we have now.
Ah ha - great! Thanks for pointing that out.
[=h2o;38555]
- dynamic navmesh obstacles - questions/11899/question-navmesh-dynamic-obstacles-and-skeletal-ac.html
will be helpful for RTS like games.
We already support recomputing regions of the navmesh on the fly! We are working on docs to explain how to enable it. We also have ‘per poly collision with skel meshes’ on the roadmap.
[=h2o;38555]
2. Collision shapes for characters - questions/1354/requestcollision-shapes-for-capsulecomponent-in-ac.html
Is it still planned to add to roadmap later?
We would like to support spheres and (axis-aligned) boxes for character collision. Handling a character that would collide as it rotates is not something we plan to address though. You may be better off using the vehicle physics code for that, coming in 4.2.
[=;44252]
What branch did you clone? And did you download the required dependencies?
4.1.1 branch. I have the required dependencies for the 4.1.1 release version. Are there separate dependencies for branch?
[=h2o;38555]
For EPICs:
I was in hope that roadmap have features i have requested and support stuff added it to future features list, but there are still no there 
I was asking for:
- dynamic navmesh obstacles - questions/11899/question-navmesh-dynamic-obstacles-and-skeletal-ac.html
will be helpful for RTS like games. - Collision shapes for characters - questions/1354/requestcollision-shapes-for-capsulecomponent-in-ac.html
Is it still planned to add to roadmap later?
I’ll ping the folks working on nav mesh and see what the feedback is. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
EDIT: Doh just saw already responded, that’s what I get for not reading the entire thread first! 
[=IhorM;44318]
It would be more thrilling if your roadmap was more about getting read of the bugs you have made instead of making more bugs and making them more difficult to diagnose. I spend more time on trying to make the engine work instead of actually building games.
And you should definitely make an easy option to completely reset the engine, as it seems like it gets more buggy with use.
Our roadmap is in addition to the normal bug fixes and misc improvements that happen as part of every day development. We take the stability of the engine very seriously and the last thing we want to do is ship broken code in favor of rushing out something new and shiny! Take a look at the 4.1 release notes for example and you can see the large number of fixes and misc improvements we made in addition to the new features.
In regards to your other comment, I’m not aware of issues with the engine becoming less stable with use but if you could send me some more info I’d love to have our QA guys try to troubleshoot/reproduce the issues so that we can get to the bottom of it.
[=duncanawoods;44965]
Ah ha - great! Thanks for pointing that out.
Yes to clarify, sometimes things take longer than we expect, or we realize we need to do some other critical work before we’re able to finish a , or we find out that things just didn’t work out the way we planned so we need to scrap the work entirely. It’s a natural part of software development more or less, and we wanted to find a way to give you insight into what we’re planning while still being upfront about the fact that the future is still to some degree uncertain. Over time as we go through the release cycle you’ll hopefully be able to get a better feel for how the roadmap materializes and evolves to match the process of UE4’s development.
Once again: A roads editor tool inside the engine. The moderator, closed my thread about . It had 86 votes on a later added poll and more than 4000 views. He said: “Thank you all for your feedback on topic, it is being taken into consideration.”
Now Epic will release a vehicle sample and a template… But where are the roads that you guys said that would be so easy to make with the spline tool? kkkkk
[=;51952]
closed my thread about . It had 86 votes on a later added poll and more than 4000 views. He said: “Thank you all for your feedback on topic, it is being taken into consideration.”
Let me dig into our thread closing policy as we might have wrong guidelines for moderators.
[]
Now Epic will release a vehicle sample and a template… But where are the roads that you guys said that would be so easy to make with the spline tool? kkkkk
We hear you loud and clear with regard to having a great road tool and the spline tool has a long journey ahead to become a great road tool. I’m afraid I don’t have an ETA on improvements in area as it’s not on our roadmap yet.
[=;52365]
Let me dig into our thread closing policy as we might have wrong guidelines for moderators.
I am not complaining about that thread being closed. I was making a point about a that, just looking at the views it had, that a lot of people have some interess on it. And it doesn’t even appear on the roadmap. Come on! A thread with more than 4000 views should at least give you guys some hint. You could add inside the road map, and see how people would vote there. 
That is all I ask!
Also, a road editor, is a tool that you may say at first: “Nah, we don’t need !” But after implemented, you would use it all the time.
[=;52449]
I am not complaining about that thread being closed. I was making a point about a that, just looking at the views it had, that a lot of people have some interess on it. And it doesn’t even appear on the roadmap. Come on! A thread with more than 4000 views should at least give you guys some hint. You could add inside the road map, and see how people would vote there. That is all I ask!
Also, a road editor, is a tool that you may say at first: “Nah, we don’t need !” But after implemented, you would use it all the time.
FYI, we re-opened the thread
[]
You could add inside the road map, and see how people would vote there.
You mean as a backlog task? We can probably do that – let me check.
Hey Epic, any we can get some info on the (potentially) up-and-coming forward renderer? I’ve seen it on the Roadmap, and it has some hella-strict looking deadlines by the look of it 
Maybe a twitch stream about it? We’re still struggling with some shader implementations Foliage is the worst offender right now!
[=;28955]
Great to have the roadmap open to all but I’m disappointed there is no mention of the Windows 8 Phone, not even in the wishlist.
Definitely. is the Achilles heal for UE4 as far as mobile is concerned right now. They are supporting plenty of backward looking OS (old PCs) and niche stuff but leave out something that’s actually going to grow and would pay as a developer to get software out for now while the App store is relatively clutter free (vs apple/google).
Windows Phone 8 rocks, 8.1 is even better - it’s sad if UE4 doesn’t make it, and preferably year.
[=Sharpfish;60035]
Definitely. is the Achilles heal for UE4 as far as mobile is concerned right now. They are supporting plenty of backward looking OS (old PCs) and niche stuff but leave out something that’s actually going to grow and would pay as a developer to get software out for now while the App store is relatively clutter free (vs apple/google).
Windows Phone 8 rocks, 8.1 is even better - it’s sad if UE4 doesn’t make it, and preferably year.
+1 Windows Phone has great potential and is severely underestimated.
The project I’ve got on my plate involves all AI movement, no player controlled character just camera following and reacting to events on screen. More or less moving on to think about non AI parts of the project right now, but the proposed AI items on the roadmap are making me drool. Restraining myself from begging on putting those on the “officially planned” tags (But I suppose I just did, didn’t I?)
So, any we might add some documentation on movement in general to the list? See that AI/Navmesh is on the Documentation list, but would also be interested in pawn movement in general. Say along a custom path not navmesh based. Such as in an array of points, or curves/splines to follow. (Perhaps it’s there but my terminology doesn’t match up)