It most definitely takes a lot longer than one minute to check asset files for changes. That’s like saying you can just pop open 200 revisions of a 300MiB PSD file in notepad and see what change it happened in quickly. I don’t imagine somebody will write in their changelist description “submitting Nazi flag, lol” either.

Definitely a long arduous process to determine it.

[+] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world -6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I mean 1 minute as in "start the level tools, select the content, note the name, find it in the revision tracking software, have a talk with the person that submitted it"

It does not take a lot of time.

[–] Saganaki@lemmy.one 7 points 7 months ago

It’s not that simple. Let’s say you have 100 revisions of an asset and the change happens on revision 42. Multiple people work on the same assets. If the engine in question (I admittedly don’t know what they use) stores each asset on a per-file basis, it’s a little easier. If not and the environment itself is stored in a monolithic file, it’s far worse.

You’ll need to (at best) binary search for the asset. You pull latest, see the bad content is there, try again with revision 50. See it’s there, try again with 25. It’s not there, okay, 37. Etc etc.

Not only that, it’s very often not as simple as just pulling that revision. “Oh. The asset format changed slightly on revision 40?” Time to pull the entire codebase down. “Asset A is referenced by this asset and won’t work because it differs?” Time to sync the entire codebase & assets back.

Etc, etc.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Yea I agree there must have been at least some interference because this verification process should not take long and I imagine they use some sort of asset tracking system that tells you who works on what.