No announcement yet.

How can we improve UE4 Documentation?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by master_rigel View Post

    The content on this page appears to relate specifically to source control.
    There are allot of pages or sections in pages as aprt of the documentation that relate to source control, however they are all split up according to where they occur in the editor.

    Perhaps it could be better to put all this content into one page or one section of the documentation under it's own heading in the table of contents called "Source Control" or something similar. Source control can be a pretty big deal for teams, and havng all the info in one place will make it easier to get a project started, and then they can stop worrying about packages and worry more about getting the work done.

    Once Source Control topics are consolidated, then links can be made from where those other relevant pages to point to this new content.

    Cheers, Rigel.
    Have you checked this documentation out?

    If so, in your opinion, how can we make this more complete in covering the topic of Source Control?


      As far as learning material goes, personally what I would like to see is some reverse engineering of existing demos. Sometimes is better to learn from seeing something broken down into parts.

      I think the Couch Knights demo would make a good example, because you've got several overlapping systems working together. You've got an interesting overlapping system in which your character is controlling another character while you watch, you've got a melee system with combos and blocking, IK systems, Oculus/HMD support(though it doesn't seem to fully function without an Oculus IIRC) and on top of that you have it setup for multiplayer replication.

      What I'm curious about is the thought process that went into implementation of each feature and in what order things were implemented. The melee characters first or the Oculus characters first? Was replication/multiplayer an after thought or pre-planned? It would be nice to see what the game would look like without the Oculus characters, or vice versa and then showing how they're tied together.

      Then of course there's the Kite demo, it would be nice to see some focus on the AI/Cells/Crowd systems and how they were setup for the large open world. You could think of this as in depth usage case examples rather just reading more generalized documentation.


        First of all, please link the documentation directly from the corresponding windows in the editor and the tooltips of the blueprint nodes. This alone would save ages of searching.

        Then rework the scalability reference. It's still not clear in what exact INI all those settings have to go to affect editor AND the packaged version of the game.

        Another thing would be better documentation about profiling.



          Not sure if this thread is still alive; it's pretty old...

          But I find the documentation to be non-existent almost every time I need it. Someone clearly ran an automatic documentation generator and then just stopped and said "good enough."

          The result is a thousand pages like this (I just clicked through the help randomly, nothing specific regarding these examples):

          They tell the programmer absolutely nothing. No remarks, no examples, no explanation of the function parameters, no clarification on the difference between "InitBoxExtent" and "SetBoxExtent," no "see also," no hint as to which versions this applies to, and so on.

          A very small fraction of the documented functions and variables contain anything useful. Personally, I've stopped using the documentation and just started going with trial and error. When that fails, I go to the Answerhub, which has actually become the "real" documentation of the engine.
          Level 17 The Ladon Device


            Originally posted by Pat-Level17 View Post

            ...I find the documentation to be non-existent almost every time I need it. Someone clearly ran an automatic documentation generator and then just stopped and said "good enough."
            Thank you for the feedback. Our Docs Team is aware of this issue and there are plans to improve this at some point in the future, however, because of the scale of this project, in addition to the task of keeping current documentation up to date, it is difficult to provide even a rough estimate of when this will be addressed. Until then, I'm glad to hear you are getting the help you need from the AnswerHub. The Forums are also a great place to get information as we have an active and enthusiastic community.


              To me the worst part of the documentation is that sometimes they are misleading/outdated which is far more worse than lacking. Normally when I can't find something documented (like those suggested by Pat-Level17) I would go check the source code, but if I am following the docs yet I can't get it right there goes the nightmare of trial and error (of course sometimes the problem is indeed on my side).

              Since the engine is such a large software I fully understand that it is very difficult to keep the documentation up to date with detail (even the release notes in each update is long as hell!). Still in the long run, in view of how UE4 values community contribution it make sense, in my opinion, to also let the community contribute to the documentation too and for such a wiki style doc would be the most suitable option I can think of.

              While I understand that you guys can't just magically convert the docs to a wiki, I think a "comment" feature for each doc page would be a more realistic and helpful compromise you can make in the short run. At lease when I found something in the doc to be lacking / outdated / misleading I have a way to contribute / guide / warn others about the issues that I find.



                I'd really really really like it if you didn't assume that everyone can watch your tutorial videos on YouTube/streamed in all circumstances. I'd love to use my travel time to watch all your videos, but I can't sit and rip several-hundred videos off YouTube (which I'm pretty sure is against their ToS anyway) or stream them in a WiFi/4G black spot.



                  I was wondering whether it was possible to have a documentation site where users can add to the existing pages with whatever they think is useful. All additions should not be added automatically but rather be presented to some kind of committee which takes a look and decides whether its appropriate, error-free and understandable (and maybe improve on it a little). I think this would be vey helpful for the C++ programming part - since there are already many C++ code snippets on how to use or set up various classes in the wiki page (I am especcially thinking about Rama's posts) which provide good examples imho. This functionality would provide a new - and in my opinion a better - place for such code snippets.

                  But I also think that many people would contribute to the non-C++ parts of the documentation as well, maybe going as far as showing their tricks, providing tipps etc (those should be marked as such, as they do only provide a personal point of view).

                  What might be interesting as well and could be provided alongside this functionality would be a feature to "mark" specific parts of the documentation directly - saying that something is amiss here or something might not be up to date or whatever - lets say that notes will be injected into the documentation (notes that maybe should be visible only in an "editor"-mode). This way, users who are more experienced and stumble upon minor defects could contribute very easily. I also think that there are people in this community who could qualify for such a committee (if epic does not have the manpower) but that is up to you guys to judge.

                  Additionally, I think that such a documentation site could be incorporated into the twitch streams by selecting and showing the viewers that here and there are places to improve. There always seem to be a few people who help out the other users a lot and seem to be experienced. If such users were watching the stream but not currently interested in whatever is momentarily being told, they might turn to the documentation page and add some stuff if they feel like that this is exactly what they can answer perfectly. At least: I would do so if I would have the neccessary knowledge. If we develop this thought further, twitch streaming content might actually directly land inside the documentation pages. I mean, they DO tell us useful stuff there


                    I have noticed that some of the documentation is organized into levels of beginner, intermediate, and advanced, but then other sections are not assigned a skill level. Can I get these topics assigned to skill levels? Keeping new additions assigned to skill levels, makes it easier to assess what documentation should be looked at first when trying to solve a problem.


                      Your documentation, while extensive, has a major flaw in that you only show examples, never explaining things in a general way.

                      For example, if documenting a fictious Warp Node Component, you use this style ALL the time:

                      "A Warp Node Component can be used to warp its target. To create a warp node, right click on your blueprint and select create warp node. Connect it to your Actor by clicking on the box and dragging X to Y. Select the warp type in the dropdown list. Now go to Play and click on your actor".

                      While this is nice, it doesn't tell me what a warp node is, what it is for, when I should use it, when not, and what alternative options or methods may exist.

                      Instead of documenting a warp node, you have documented how to create a warp node. And that's of little use to someone encountering the thing for the first time (the average documentation reader).
                      Last edited by Max TV 35; 09-24-2016, 06:31 AM.


                        +1 for above.... I have to say, I wish Epic did their documentation like Microsoft... Go review their .NET or C++ documentation, its OUTSTANDING. If Epic could get something like that, it would be awesome. If I was in charge (and I am not) I would simply say, get this **** up to snuff, now.... <grins>

                        "A little bit of nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men..."
                        -- Willy Wonka

                        Smooth Zoom Camera Plugin for 4.24 here.


                          This is more like a feature request:

                          I frequently use the docs to as a learning resource so it happens that I frequently bump into code that is not up-to-date, pages with outdated information, pages that are incomplete or simply pages with wrong information or w/e. I would like to be able to report these directly from the page I am viewing with a note stating whats wrong/what could be improved and maybe even giving an example. The Documentation team should be notified of those reports directly, if possible.

                          I just want to help finishing the docs as quickly as possible somehow So can we get this feature please?


                            I proposed this once in another thread, I'll write here short version:

                            Make wiki version of Documentation, just like existing Epic Wiki. Tutorials section works great and have amazing community which shares great ideas, so why not expand it to Documentation? I often find some pages without any reference - If I could, I would add some function description myself.


                              I have a good idea for you guys:

                              The way that Arma 3, which also has a huge content creation community, does its documentation is by adding an "Examples" and "Notes" sections to the bottom of its documentation pages. People leaves quick tips and demonstrations of useful stuff you can do.

                              Here's an example from their wiki:


                                I would say you should reorganize everything.

                                Currently, It isn't grouped in a fashion that is conducive to figuring anything out. You have an API class hierarchy, with nothing that intellisense can't tell us. You have a list of all component types, several "Getting started with unreal" pages that could easily be combined into their own module. Blueprints, mobile development, and C++ are in their own worlds.

                                Instead, it would be more helpful to be able to go into a pathfinding/navigation menu and step through all of the features, starting at the introduction and making your way through more complex features.

                                Actually, as an example, check out Unity's Navigation documentation vs Unreal's. First of all, you have to search "navigation" in unreal because the tree on the left doesn't give you any hints where it might be. Second... the results are not helpful.

                                And as far as C++/Blueprints are concerned, they should be together in the documentation, similar to how MSDN does it.