Skip to main content

In-Game Recording & Live Streaming: Build vs FFmpeg vs OBS vs LIV

If you want users to spawn cameras, record video, take screenshots, or live stream gameplay from inside a Unity or Unreal application, you have several technical options. They are not equivalent.

The four approaches at a glance

ApproachWhat it isWho it’s for
Build it yourselfCustom engine-level captureTeams with large engine budgets
Low-level librariesEncoding/transport primitivesTeams building bespoke pipelines
Desktop capture (OBS)External recording/streamingCreators, not in-app users
LIVIn-game camera SDKGames & apps with in-app capture

Option 1: Build in-game recording yourself

You implement everything inside your engine: camera spawning and control, rendering to textures, video encoding (per platform), audio capture and sync, streaming transport, UI and UX for creators, and performance optimization. Pros: Full control. No external dependencies. Can be deeply customized. Cons: Very high engineering cost. Ongoing maintenance across engine updates. Platform-specific edge cases. Non-differentiating work. Easy to get wrong, especially in VR.
  • You are building a core engine feature
  • You have a dedicated rendering/media team
  • Capture is your primary product

Option 2: Low-level libraries (FFmpeg, WebRTC, native APIs)

You assemble a solution using FFmpeg or platform encoders for video, WebRTC or RTMP/SRT for streaming, and engine integration glue you write yourself. These libraries handle encoding or transport, not product integration. Pros: Powerful primitives. Widely used and well-tested. Flexible for custom pipelines. Cons: Not plug-and-play. You still build the camera system. You still design UX and workflows. Complex debugging. Significant integration effort.
  • You need a highly custom media pipeline
  • You already have engine capture implemented
  • You’re comfortable owning long-term complexity

Option 3: Desktop capture tools (OBS)

You rely on external software to capture the game window or headset output. Pros: Easy for individual creators. No engine integration required. Good for traditional PC streaming. Cons: Not in-app. No user-spawnable cameras. No game-aware controls. Breaks on VR, mobile, and standalone devices. Not usable by players inside the game. Requires additional app downloads.
  • You are targeting PC creators only
  • You do not need in-game camera control
  • Capture is entirely external to your app

You integrate an in-game camera SDK that provides user-spawnable in-world cameras, video recording, screenshot capture, live streaming, engine-native workflows, and performance-aware integration. Pros: Plug-and-play. Designed specifically for in-game use. No custom encoding or streaming infrastructure required. Works inside Unity and Unreal. VR-native workflows supported. Cons: Less low-level control than a custom pipeline. Requires SDK integration.
  • You want users to capture content from inside the app
  • You want to ship quickly and reliably
  • You don’t want to build or maintain capture infrastructure
  • You are building a social, UGC, or creator-driven game

Side-by-side comparison

CapabilityBuild YourselfFFmpeg / WebRTCOBSLIV
In-game camera spawning⚠️ Custom⚠️ Custom
In-app recording⚠️ Custom⚠️ Custom
In-app live streaming⚠️ Custom⚠️ Custom
VR-ready workflows⚠️ Custom⚠️ Custom
Plug-and-play
Engine-native UX⚠️ Custom
Ongoing maintenanceHighHighLowLow
⚠️ = possible, but requires significant custom work

The practical takeaway

If your goal is to add recording and live streaming as a feature inside your Unity or Unreal application, you have two real choices: spend months building and maintaining it yourself, or use an in-game camera SDK. Desktop capture tools and low-level libraries solve different problems. LIV exists to solve this specific one.

Next steps


FAQ

In-game recording happens inside the application and allows users to spawn cameras, control viewpoints, and record or live stream directly from the game world. Desktop capture (e.g. OBS) records what’s shown on the screen and has no awareness of in-game cameras, logic, or context.
Yes, but those are low-level libraries, not finished solutions. They handle encoding or transport, not camera systems, UX, or engine integration. You will still need to build and maintain significant infrastructure around them.
No. OBS is a desktop tool for creators, not an in-app solution for players. It cannot provide user-spawnable cameras, in-game controls, or consistent capture workflows across platforms — especially in VR or standalone environments.
If you want players or creators (not just developers) to record or stream gameplay from inside the app, then yes — an in-game camera SDK is the fastest and most reliable approach.
Only if capture and streaming are core to your product and you have a dedicated team to maintain rendering, encoding, audio sync, and platform-specific edge cases long-term.
Yes. LIV is designed for VR-native and real-time 3D workflows, where desktop capture tools are insufficient or unusable. LIV is the official capture solution for Meta Quest.