Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2019-07-18, 03:32
Sign in to follow this  
Roland

Require recording during hostile situations

Require recording  

195 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Although it benifit of this system is welcoming, I have to say no.

I have a decent enough rig to play DayZ in all its beautiful glory and record, but I have a worst then patatoe internet. Hell it took me 2 days to download Battlefield V.

So uploading is out of the question for me.

True the rule would be that only one needs to do it, but no. It unnecessary punish people for something they don't have control of.

Share this post


Link to post

I would say no because, in my opinion, the risk of making the computer crash is too high. Also, I feel that it is the complainant who should provide the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post

The game is to bad atm

You crash all the time

People play to have fun

No one wanna sitt there and be like

I NEED TO RECORD BECOSE SOMEONE MIGHT REPORT ME 

Nah a pointless rule 

You could say "to report someone you need to have video"

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/4/2018 at 7:52 PM, GenericName said:

With the amount of 30 secs recording we've seen in reports, I'm 100% sure that many player record but either say the don't/can't or just submit the parts that don't incriminate them or contradict their PoV. There's no reason whatsoever a honest player wouldn't want hostile actions recorded to cover his ass in case of a report. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Idk if you ever recorded something but

No one records all the time takes space and so on . 

People either start it right before or 

Insta record as most people use and 30 seconds is what people often use 

Share this post


Link to post

I see the intent behind this and I think that while it appears to be coming from a good place and may seem like a good idea in theory, in practice it is going to be a nightmare.

There have been reports in the past where people have taken a gamble and lied, then video has turned up showing that they have clearly lied, but this has come from both people making the report and also from people who are reported, but I would think that this is a very small minority of reports.  Are there times when someone makes a report and the person responding who always has video of every little thing is suddenly without any video?  YEP, and its highly suspicious, but better to not assume because you could be wrong, hence why there is already a "we won't find a rulebreak if its only word for word" practice.

Adding this is only going to overburden and add something unnecessary to hostile RPers, who arguably have to be far more familiar with the rules and, the good ones at least, know how to straddle the rule line and make someone think they might cross it without actually crossing it.

Admittedly, there are bugs that come into play for initiations at the moment (e.g. the voip bug) and people who are probably taking advantage of that, but at the same time there isn't really much difference to when there are only word for word reports.  I mean if someone initiates and the other person doesn't hear and the person initiated on has video, it falls back on the initiator to front up with evidence anyway to prove their claim of "voip bug" doesn't it?

And then what happens if theres a word vs word situation where a person claims to have been initiated on then the other person denies it and says the person who made the report was the one that initiated?  How are you really going to know who is telling the truth here if both parties don't have video?  Would you just word vs word the report anyway, or issue points and some time off to both parties even though one of them is clearly lying but you don't know who?

Also, what happens if your recording craps out or your software doesn't work.  People keep mentioning shadowplay, but there have been times when this simply hasn't worked for me, and it would seem a bit stupid to suddenly find myself in a position where through no fault of my own, I can't produce a recording, especially in light of the fact I have never been reported but have taken many hostages and robbed many people (although admittedly, not for a while).

Reports at times have been, or at least appear to have been used as "weapons" to try and get people banned (not just against hostile rpers and not just by non-hostile rpers) when the salt levels inevitably reach their peaks from time to time, and I think you could possible be adding another weapon to the arsenal of salty players and/or players that want to get others banned and out of the community for whatever reason.  I also don't see the logic in denying people a whole branch/style of RP to those without adequate recording software and/or hardware and limit them to only non-hostile (at least from an initiating point of view) RP, as that is what you will be doing, giving priviges to people based on their hardware, software and/or internet connection.

I am sure with more tools (if you don't already have them) it will make it easaier for staff to monitor people and/or groups who keep getting reports made against them and keep using the same excuse, and if you don't have the numbers why not recruit more staff?  If worst comes to worst (although even then I don't think it's the greatest idea) if the same person or group were constantly getting reported (and a few guilty verdicts in reports) for the same or similar things and there was a staff decision that the group was pushing their luck, then maybe you could implement this for a set period of time against that group/person, but even then I think my above comments still stand, especially with regards to reports being used as weapons.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's a good idea. If anything report-worthy happens then all you have is people's word. Of course the offenders might not tell the whole truth to cover themselves. And same goes for the other party.
I believe that a simple recording is the best way to solve these reports. And really improves the chances of a fair verdict.

Share this post


Link to post

I would honestly say come back to this idea when the game is in more stable a state. It's not a bad suggestion in theory, but currently isn't feasible for many.

Share this post


Link to post

HELL no. So what, If no one in your group is able to record you can never do anything hostile? That is just silly. People shouldnt be forced to record to make the staff teams job easier.

Share this post


Link to post

Using shadow-play you can stream strait to any multi-media you want and make it private. Only making it unlisted or public when needed. I find the argument hard that not everyone can record. That is true a SINGLE player can have the inability to record for system stability reasons. On the other side, All characters in the initiating party can't record? Now to the comment of privacy? What will forcing someone to record their game-play invade their privacy? They are just showing their game screen. Now if your talking about there character information and who there character is, any other player acting on that information in-game is rule breaking themselves. If they have a whole archive of OOC items that will invade their privacy, that person shouldn't be chosen out of the group to record. On that note, there could be rules on reports that can be set like only staff will be given the link to see the evidence and can either rule on that or give the approval that it can be posted to the report for privacy reason. 

Shouldn't reports be that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty? I see this debate from on top of the fence. In my opinion I side on Yes, the attackers/initiating party should be recording prior to initiation. This is because the hostile party has prior knowledge about the ambush. My main reason is that most players can't stream or record the whole game like I do. Being the defensive party in an encounter, trying to start your recording right after a surprise initiation is impossible due to multiple commands given in a short time. Defensive character should dedicate their attention to the event at hand rather than "Damn I need to record if  they are breaking rules". 

Pros:

Forcing a rule where the initiating party has to have at least one person recording will encourage characters to avoid rule breaking role-play.

Help staff members reviewing and ruling on reports.

Hostile party has prior knowledge and can start recording/streaming before encounter. Defensive party can't.

Cons:

Forcing one person to sacrifice stability of game on low end computers to record hostile events.

Invasion of OOC privacy if handled improperly. (TABing out of game during encounter revealing OOC information then being forced to post in report)

Might make the initiating party focus on rules rather than RPing.

Please let me know if my opinion is off base. 

Share this post


Link to post

+1, When you initiate, you actively decided to initiate a hostile situation. People know that reports are usually about initiations, therefore, you have the burden of proof to prove that your initiation was fair. Like @Roland said, Even if you die immediately after the initiation. At least we have something. 

Even just an initiation can prove a lot of things: 

  • Did the victim have enough time to respond?
  • Was the initiation made clear?
  • Did the victim act aggressively, thus ending in their death?
  • etc...

Share this post


Link to post

 I got on to play yesterday, and went to meet up with some friends in a city. Upon approaching the city, my game froze up from lagging out to the point that it was a still image. This happened at least 5 times, without me recording. Later on that day, I wanted to record something, and my recording software decided to act up. It wouldn't initiate recording when I wanted, and then after the fact began to spaz out causing me to not be able to record everything I wanted. These situations, have nothing to do with any hostilities, so I can only wonder how it would behave during a hostile situation. 

 

 Coming from someone who's played both hostile, and non-hostile characters. And is currently playing a non-hostile character, I'm gonna nope. -1.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/4/2018 at 3:45 PM, Roman said:

Isn't it the accuser who needs to have evidence supporting his claims?

This absolutely.

Also, what if I am on my own and rob someone for food or something and they get salty I busted their safe space bubble and make a report. Literally everyone knows my PC is a living meme, so they know If I try to even press record on any software, it'll most likely go up in flames. So what do I do then? Get punished because someone got salty I took their food?

If it ain't broken, don't fix it. We don't need more rules that overcomplicate things.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, honestly the whole 'guilty till proven innocent' vibe with even recommending this kinda hurts.

there's honestly already too much headache and hate when it comes to hostile RP. why add more to it?

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...