TOPIC: [PERP] Automatic Recording

Server Name:
PERP

Suggestion Title:
Automatic Recording

How would it benefit the server:
See 'Additional notes'.

Potential Issues/Exploits:
There is the possibility that someone's demos legitimately do not record sometimes.

Additional notes:
It is important on a PERP server that when someone disputes an action of a player, that we can see a non-manipulated version of the exact event.

This can easily be achieved by forcing the client to record timestamped demos. In a demo, you can see everything that the original player saw and heard in the situation, and 'drive' to areas and other perspectives within the render distance. This is an excellent administration tool as it can not be manipulated in any way, and can be analysed very precisely; not to mention how they would record automatically so that there's no excuses, and the fact that nothing is missed from where, for example, a player not using a demo would have started recording after.

Unfortunately, there's the issue of disk-space. However, I have found .dem files that cover an hour of gameplay to be in the range of 30mb-90mb; this clearly sets this method out from the idea of larger, uncompressed video recordings that would be impossible to achieve this system under for the reasons that not everyone could run it efficiently (lag), and it would take up a lot more space for the recordings.

Then there's the argument of 'those who do want to report rulebreakers can use FRAPS or ShadowPlay', but unfortunately that means that without the automatic demo functionality we can not see the perspective of the accused and check for correlation between the way they justify their actions against the actuality of what they did. (also, the people who say that would probably be trying to conceal their own cheeky violations.)

I hope that this system can be strongly considered, and before its feasibility is questioned: it is very possible and currently used on other servers.

So many suggestions, could try to put them all in 1 thread and make like spoilers for each suggestion, would prevent spam.

tomvtv wrote:
No, they are too in-depth and it would cause confusion.



It hardly can be considered as spam.

Chris wrote:
Please... You know what I mean......

tomvtv wrote:
No, but thanks for the proposition.

Chris wrote:


#NoRespect

Hi Chris,

As I won't reply to all your suggestions until we have discussed them in the next meeting, I will just leave a reply here.

Thank you for your suggestions and we will take a serious look at them all.

-- on the other note --

If you have multiple suggestions, please make 1 topic and cut it up in sections. This is easier for all of us.

- sorry for any mistakes as this is written on my phone