Because of the amount of cheaters and toxicity in matches, players with a good amount of time in game should be given a tool to look at reports of cheating and toxicity with a match replay/ spectator for these reports. It will allow more reports to be checked (and actually acted upon) by the community.
It’s a good idea in theory, to give tools to players, many of whom believe they know what cheating looks like or consider themselves experienced but often aren’t, tools to deal with issues sounds efficient. But while letting players handle them and might sound like a faster fix, it’s not realistic or reliable. The system would be biased, privacy-invasive, and technically unworkable. Replays aren’t full recordings and if matches were recorded live to make them accurate, storing every match would demand massive data infrastructure far beyond what any studio would maintain. In the end it would create inconsistency, privacy risks and more drama not better moderation.
This kind of system has already been tried in multiple games before and it’s failed every time for the same reasons bias, abuse and unreliable data.
if they can record all our personal data they can sure as hell store a match.
if they can record all our personal data they can sure as hell store a match.
That’s not really comparable. Personal data is mostly text files and small database entries. A full match replay isn’t just a log; it’s every player’s camera, position, input, and environment recorded in sync for the entire match.
At 1080p60, that’s about 1.8–4.5 GB per player per 30 min, 2K is 3.6–6.8 GB, and 4K is 7.9–13.5 GB. For a 64-player Battlefield 6 match (32 vs 32) that’s roughly:
• 1080p: 115–288 GB
• 2K: 230–435 GB
• 4K: 505–864 GB
Multiply that by thousands of matches per day across PC, PlayStation, and Xbox, and you’re talking tens to hundreds of terabytes daily, petabytes monthly, just to store review footage.
And that’s only counting the big 32 vs 32 matches, not all the smaller or special modes that run constantly in parallel. The scale, cost, and bandwidth are insane.
It’s not that they probably don’t want to do it, it’s that they can’t a match replay isn’t one neat video clip it’s a massive bundle of live data from every player. Scale that up to thousands of matches and the infrastructure cost becomes impossible to sustain the system would collapse under its own bandwidth and storage demands.
No all it is data points it would not be all the graphicly data just position and location of all the player and what action is being taking by players.
Soft cheater yes it would be hard but things like wall hacks and radar will be easy to identify by most competent players. Tracking players with no information is a dead giveaway.
it doesnt need to be 4k footage.
SkeeterMH The numbers were just an example of what it might look like if the game recorded actual video.
Some games do record a flagged player, but they’re much smaller and far simpler compared to the destruction, vehicles and physics Battlefield has.
I do agree with the general idea, but it’s just not realistic to do right now for many reasons but even using state-based data points would still add up quickly in a Battlefield-scale match. You’d need a very carefully designed system to avoid generating large files for every report across every match and platform. It would need more thought to make it work properly without turning into a data hog.
– As a rough example: in a 64-player match, if 10 players were flagged whether the reports are real or false, you could be looking at around 40–100MB per report of extra logging just for that one game, even when it’s only using data-point style state logging and anywhere from 40 to 250MB isn’t unrealistic depending on what’s happening around the flagged players. Not sure how many reports get sent each day, but with the current player numbers it could easily add up to 500GB to 1.5TB a day and in heavier reporting spikes possibly even 3–5TB. I really can’t see any studio being okay with that.
