Delivered FiveM Recording Rule Change

[3dsam1]

As of right now, in FiveM for the whitelist server, the current rule regarding using any kind of recording is

The only footage that can be used in character is anything that was recording while visibly displaying an animation with a camera. (/phoneR, /cam, /e phone, /e filmshock, /e camera)

Unfortunately, the majority of the people who this rule affects is Law Enforcement Officers. As a video is a surefire way of saying someone did something, they then don't have to argue saying "oh yeah he shot 15 people, I saw it but thats all" and try to get a conviction based on that. However, the cops are not able to record active scenes at all, as doing so would take them out of the scene. I understand that the rule is to prevent people from recording people secretly, however, I think that this could still be achieved, while not completely prevent videos.

I suggest that the rule allow any visible camera, meaning things such as Dash cams (pd cars) or body cameras would still be able to be used in character.

This would hopefully still accomplish the same thing as the previous rule, but also not completely remove videos as potential evidence. Now, this could also be used by the criminals, as there is no reason they cant also have a body camera, as I think it is a separate item than the bullet proof vest.

 

[dank]

+1 In real life Im pretty sure LEOs are required to have their bodycam on at all times.

 

[juice]

I have elevated this to the Grand Theft Auto Leadership Section, we will be reviewing this and coordinating on it as a team. Be on the lookout for more information or a solution to this coming down the line.

 

[LeviTheDegu]

+1 In real life Im pretty sure LEOs are required to have their bodycam on at all times.

This actually varies heavily by jurisdiction

 

[dank]

This actually varies heavily by jurisdiction

Oh yeah of course

 

[Meyers]

yeah I just saw this, good suggestion

 

[Cryptic Strolski]

I mean I had understood that the removal of cameras also meant that an officer's testimony could be used as factual evidence unless their credibility was disproved. However I don't see a downside to officers being able to use bodycam footage. Honestly though, it's been a godsend not having to rely on camera footage for anything. I legit take photos of situations ingame with my camera.

However, I do feel ONE downside of the infinite bodycam is that a body cam realistically would only show what's in front of the car or what's in front of the officer, so most of the evidence gathered by this footage would be used unrealistically and it also cuts out the ability to argue an officers credibility in a court case when they can just show their 360 go pro footage showing all sides of all the things at all times during the incident.

So maybe body cams could do more damage than good.

Personally I think that keeping it as is opens up more opportunity for roleplay. No body cams, but officer statements are taken as factual evidence unless the officer's credibility is disproved in court.

 

[Meyers]

I mean I had understood that the removal of cameras also meant that an officer's testimony could be used as factual evidence unless their credibility was disproved. However I don't see a downside to officers being able to use bodycam footage. Honestly though, it's been a godsend not having to rely on camera footage for anything. I legit take photos of situations ingame with my camera.

However, I do feel ONE downside of the infinite bodycam is that a body cam realistically would only show what's in front of the car or what's in front of the officer, so most of the evidence gathered by this footage would be used unrealistically and it also cuts out the ability to argue an officers credibility in a court case when they can just show their 360 go pro footage showing all sides of all the things at all times during the incident.

So maybe body cams could do more damage than good.

Personally I think that keeping it as is opens up more opportunity for roleplay. No body cams, but officer statements are taken as factual evidence unless the officer's credibility is disproved in court.

what's the point of having body cams in game and in cars then? lol

 

[Cryptic Strolski]

what's the point of having body cams in game and in cars then? lol

Honestly, we don't anymore I'm pretty sure. and as for the cars, it's just a model graphic. Doesn't mean we HAVE to particularly use them. Can just say the budget for the software to operate them went under.

 

[Cryptic Strolski]

The goal here is expansion of roleplay. Arguable evidence leads to court cases. Video evidence leads to one and done experiences in my personal opinion.

 

[LeviTheDegu]

juice not sure if this calls for a separate thread but a couple of common sense exceptions may be nice:

• Officers cannot take photos of evidence and hold a flash light at the same time
• Officers cannot take a photo of locked speed radar using camera
• 911 calls (these can be re-written in RP since they should all be "recorded" but screen capping them is so much easier
• Evidence collected from an individual/car cannot be taken with a camera

 

[Halu]

+1

 

[3dsam1]

bump?

 

[AndrewW]

I 1000% agree with this suggestion.

The goal here is expansion of roleplay. Arguable evidence leads to court cases. Video evidence leads to one and done experiences in my personal opinion.

I think there's a very fine line that we need to draw between how far we are going to push roleplay versus realism. In this case I really do not think we should sacrifice realism for roleplay, in the end I only see this doing harm and causing bad situations with LEOs. I know personally, if I was told my bodycam was invalid or that the footage couldn't be used for a court case, I would be furious, in fact, when I was told that I couldn't use it I was.

This needs to be changed.

 

[Inkery]

I 1000% agree with this suggestion.


I think there's a very fine line that we need to draw between how far we are going to push roleplay versus realism. In this case I really do not think we should sacrifice realism for roleplay, in the end I only see this doing harm and causing bad situations with LEOs. I know personally, if I was told my bodycam was invalid or that the footage couldn't be used for a court case, I would be furious, in fact, when I was told that I couldn't use it I was.

This needs to be changed.

We are not a realism server we are a roleplay server, So we will always promote roleplay over realism where we can. When we made this rule we had noted we will be looking for a better alternative for recording as the alternative to what we had at the time was nothing. We are still looking into a better form of recording.

 

[Meyers]

We are not a realism server we are a roleplay server, So we will always promote roleplay over realism where we can. When we made this rule we had noted we will be looking for a better alternative for recording as the alternative to what we had at the time was nothing. We are still looking into a better form of recording.

I was under the impression that this rule was completely the same before it was changed, except physical cameras on peds and outfits counted as well.

It just seems that this was changed mostly to impact police, since they are almost always present as the prosecution or defense party, from using bodycams and dismisses most evidence and without really any other methods to collect evidence it's down to a he said she said argument in court.

 

[Inkery]

It just seems that this was changed mostly to impact police

This is false, As many of you only see the cop side I will explain the civilian side. Prior to this rule you only needed to have a go pro in your inventory to classify you evidence as valid or to be able to record something. This allowed criminals or undercovers or snitches to recording anything they wanted at a whim with no sort of repercussions or risk. At any point any civilian could in a sense "clip that" show their inventory to the recording showing that they had a go pro on them and the evidence would be admissible to court. Essentially it got to the point where you never know if anyone is recording you at all times which is completely wack in the sense of roleplay. This rule was put in place to have equal opportunity on all sides but in no way is going to stay how it is. As stated previously we are still looking at better mechanics and things we can implement to make this a better experience for all.

 

[AndrewW]

This is false, As many of you only see the cop side I will explain the civilian side. Prior to this rule you only needed to have a go pro in your inventory to classify you evidence as valid or to be able to record something. This allowed criminals or undercovers or snitches to recording anything they wanted at a whim with no sort of repercussions or risk. At any point any civilian could in a sense "clip that" show their inventory to the recording showing that they had a go pro on them and the evidence would be admissible to court. Essentially it got to the point where you never know if anyone is recording you at all times which is completely wack in the sense of roleplay. This rule was put in place to have equal opportunity on all sides but in no way is going to stay how it is. As stated previously we are still looking at better mechanics and things we can implement to make this a better experience for all.

So why was it implemented this way, if you knew that it would be unfair until a better solution was found?

 

[Meyers]

This is false, As many of you only see the cop side I will explain the civilian side. Prior to this rule you only needed to have a go pro in your inventory to classify you evidence as valid or to be able to record something. This allowed criminals or undercovers or snitches to recording anything they wanted at a whim with no sort of repercussions or risk. At any point any civilian could in a sense "clip that" show their inventory to the recording showing that they had a go pro on them and the evidence would be admissible to court. Essentially it got to the point where you never know if anyone is recording you at all times which is completely wack in the sense of roleplay. This rule was put in place to have equal opportunity on all sides but in no way is going to stay how it is. As stated previously we are still looking at better mechanics and things we can implement to make this a better experience for all.

So why not keep the actual cameras that are on police outfits and the cameras in the cars that we have? That way you can just look to see if someone has a camera on them or not for your evidence, combine that with people actually holding cameras and phones and you will have a surefire way of knowing. Maybe add another hat thats like a gopro strapped to someones forehead to for the civ side

 

[Inkery]

So why not keep the actual cameras that are on police outfits and the cameras in the cars that we have? That way you can just look to see if someone has a camera on them or not for your evidence, combine that with people actually holding cameras and phones and you will have a surefire way of knowing. Maybe add another hat thats like a gopro strapped to someones forehead to for the civ side

Ya we are looking into more clothing additions to keep it equal across the board because there are no real camera gopro clothings for civilians.