Today Epic released another UE5 demo, on the marketplace with supported engine platform “5.0 EA”.
So this is possible?
EVERY SINGLE DAY a client is asking to release my assets on UE5. It’s ok to answer clients but everyday the same question is a bit boring, especially when the admin at Epic can release stuff on UE5 while we can’t!
Seems logical that if a developer wants to support 5.0 EA then 5.0EA should support them. I don’t see any downsides to letting developers release assets for 5.0EA, but perhaps Epic does. Maybe Epic can elaborate.
We’ve released some content on Marketplace that is officially compatible with Early Access, but that’s all free content. Due to the nature of Early Access and Previews, we know that things can change and break, and we don’t want to sell products that might break, which would lead to frustration, refunds, and negative reviews. So we’ll continue to work with some of our sellers who have content that is part of the permanently free collection in order to test our pipeline and get feedback, but that’s the exception.
First of all, sorry for the tone of my initial message. I was angry for other reasons at the time.
I really appreciate that you share your point of view on this. I did not expect an answer from Epic ^^
I did not explain the issue adequately. Clients are angry at me, as a marketplace creator, because I don’t put my asset on UE5. They are not aware that I (we) can’t.
Releasing a lot of stuff on UE5 conveys that the engine is ready. People don’t care about the “EA” behind “UE5”. And I’m afraid that if they see a giant banner with a cool asset for UE5, they will be angrier at me because I’m lazy, and I don’t put my asset on UE5.
Anyway, now if I have to take your shoes and choose between “free” frustration (where clients are frustrated but don’t spend money) and “give me back my money” frustration (where clients are asking for refunds and leave bad reviews), I would definitely do the same as you guys.
That would make sense in the case where someone buys a UE5-only asset, but I’m not sure it really justify not being able to mark existing assets as compatible (or upload UE5 EA builds where appropriate). For me it’s a blocker to fully and realistically evaluate the UE5 experience, when I don’t have tools that I’ve come to rely on like Asset Cleaner, Property Transfer, EMS. And for content-only assets it’s unnecessarily convoluted to have to add them to an UE4 project and manually bring them over…
I definitely feel that. A lot of people ask for access to the UE5 EA versions of my plugins and right now my only option aside from denial is uploading it offsite. I’m not a fan of that approach but it keeps the people happy for now.
UE5 is wrapping up development and it will have a full release very soon, I can say that much. Before long we won’t have to worry about this, but for now we just have to grin and bear it
That’s my point!
A lot of people are doing like you because there is tons of tuto and content to catch the hype around UE5.
Releasing official stuff on it implies that you should use it daily for your project, which is just wrong, Epic can break your project anytime because you are not supposed to work on it, just test stuff!
There are significant changes to the engine from UE5_EarlyAccess and the latest source.
First of all UE5_EA is a successor to UE4.26, so if you try to migrate UE4.27 content into it, it won’t work, while the latest UE5 source is a successor to 4.27.
Stuff made for UE5_EA won’t work out of the box in the release version, so this would create more problems than it would solve
If existing stuff is compatible with UE5 all they have to do is create a 4.26 project, put the stuff in and migrate it to UE5.
This is a development software, some work needs to be put in by the customers, how lazy are these people if they can’t even put in 20 seconds to migrate stuff over?
This is exactly why I don’t sell anything on the marketplace, seems like people want to buy assets and expect to have a full working game without putting the minimum amount of work into it