Enough of this slow-mo bullshit

[DeathCobra]

TorqueV confirmed?

Need to find a capture card that will work with my Mac before I can commit to that

[Simon]

If it's only used on stunts that are impossible without I don't mind. But if you use it on every fucking stunt, then I will mind. And the reason I would mind more than if you modded your bike used your character skills or whatever you tried to argue, it ruins the flow of any stunt. "Oh shit here he comes I wonder what he is going to.. oh, just drive over that and land there, got it." and without it's like "WOAH what just happened?"

And not to mention that it makes a stunt 10x as easy. Sure modding your bike makes it easier too, but only on the fact that you can take a smaller run up. You still have to get the bump, you still have to do everything you would without it.

Slow mo is fine, if used in moderation.

[VaNilla]

I know that everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but this whole argument is absolutely redundant. Use the ability as you personally see fit, and trust your own vision over other people. And don't pay attention to anyone who hasn't actually played the game, and seen what the ability does. For the millionth time, it's not just slow motion.

[Turtle Boy]

Stunting is serious business. 

[Madmax]

Used one in a video for a big stunt or even a sick finisher? Sure.

Used for every other stunt? I ain't watching it.

[DeathCobra]

Stunting is serious business. 

This thread was made to point out the exact opposite lmao

[Noah]

Comparing V's slowitdown with RADs and BSMs lol, stopped reading right there.

Fragmovies don't have slow-motion gameplay to make it 'easier' and neither should stunt videos.

[MxZz.]

Comparing V's slowitdown with RADs and BSMs lol, stopped reading right there.

Fragmovies don't have slow-motion gameplay to make it 'easier' and neither should stunt videos.

This.

+ The fact I hate when I loose a spot to someone who just slowmo the entire bump.

[Asaaj]

How does one determine when it's necessary and when it's not?

[Rainbow]

How does one determine when it's necessary and when it's not?

By trying the stunt. Obviously 

[Trialz]

I have been watching a few videos, realHEDGEHOG's to be exact. To me, it seems like hitting curb bumps with it gives a lot more air, giving way to better double bumps. Or even hitting tall bumps or little poles that would normally fatally screw up your run.

Franklins perk is in the same suit as the taxi boost, riding up walls of a building to get on top of a building or your designated place of landing. Sure as hell we don't need to use it on EVERY stunt we do, especially if it would lower the viewer approval. (were in it to entice the viewer right)

Now thats coming from someone who hasn't even had a debut into captured stunting yet (me =[ )

Keep it for the impossible stuff, not the easy shit

[VaNilla]

There's some serious misinformation being spread here, so let me clear some things up.

1. Slow motion doesn't make you lose acceleration in the air with a motorbike. This only applies to cars. The same applies to the speed boosting method.
2. 99% of the time, the slow motion ability is not being used for slow motion. As I've mentioned in many other threads, there are countless other reasons to be using it. Unless you've played the game, or have serious experience with stunting, please don't go on about how bad it is, because you probably don't have a clue about why it's been used.
3. Slow motion is totally comparable to the RAD method. Once again, it's not about the slow motion. It's about improving traction, speed, and much more.

All you do by banging on about the slow motion ability is make yourself look fucking ignorant. Many of the stunts you see with slow motion are possible without it, but the majority of them will not be as people learn more about the game. By respecting that the game is still just two months old, you can open your mind new ways of thinking.

Just to add to that, come on, we're stunting on consoles. Unless you want people to sit in front of loading screens for 50 seconds at a time, and do that over the course of 10 hours for every mega hard stunt (and I've done this many times), you have to accept that people will try to reduce the difficulty of stunting on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3.

Do what you think is right. Within reason, be mindful that people are trying to land stunts without the ability when it's possible. But don't stop yourself from using it on every stunt, just because someone told you they don't like it. If that's whats necessary, then that's what you've got to do. If you're going to land anything with true wow factor in GTA V, you can't be taking a 10 year old approach to stunting. Now is the time to innovate.

[Daffy]

The same applies to the speed boosting method.

In my experience this is wrong, further down you also say that it improves traction which also improves speed, especially for very short run-ups.

Slow motion is totally comparable to the RAD method. Once again, it's not about the slow motion. It's about improving traction, speed, and much more.

If it's used to improve speed or traction sure and this contradicts the statement above, but if it's used to make something hard easier, it's used to make something hard easier... for fucks sake lets call a shovel a shovel.

All you do by banging on about the slow motion ability is make yourself look fucking ignorant. Many of the stunts you see with slow motion are possible without it, but the majority of them will not be as people learn more about the game.

Making predictions? Put the crystal ball away son, most of the stunts done today with the slow-motion ability are possible without the slow-motion ability.

Just to add to that, come on, we're stunting on consoles. Unless you want people to sit in front of loading screens for 50 seconds at a time, and do that over the course of 10 hours for every mega hard stunt (and I've done this many times), you have to accept that people will try to reduce the difficulty of stunting on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3.

Of course as this is not a dictatorship, but you and the others who use it during the executions of their stunts has to accept that I have a different perspective on it which I have the right to express too.

Do what you think is right. Within reason, be mindful that people are trying to land stunts without the ability when it's possible. But don't stop yourself from using it on every stunt, just because someone told you they don't like it. If that's whats necessary, then that's what you've got to do. If you're going to land anything with true wow factor in GTA V, you can't be taking a 10 year old approach to stunting. Now is the time to innovate.

I couldn't agree more, as long as it's used to innovate and not as the crutch-like use you just defended.

[VaNilla]

In my experience this is wrong, further down you also say that it improves traction which also improves speed, especially for very short run-ups.

Although traction does allow you to take different runups, or hug the road more closely down a drop, it doesn't inherently boost your speed on motorbikes as it does with cars.

If it's used to improve speed or traction sure and this contradicts the statement above, but if it's used to make something hard easier, it's used to make something hard easier... for fucks sake lets call a shovel a shovel.

Well, there's a difference. Sure, leaving slow motion on for the duration of a stunt is bad, but using it to say, avoid traffic, that's something else. Using it to gain more height off a bump for a nicer looking execution? Sure it's easier, but it looks a lot better at the end of the day. There's situations where it looks lame, and situations where it doesn't, but it's all highly subjective.

Making predictions? Put the crystal ball away son, most of the stunts done today with the slow-motion ability are possible without the slow-motion ability.

They are right now. But I don't think that will be the case in the coming months, not with high level stunting. As stunters begin to land better stunts, the competition must try to do better. When Unorthodox came out in Vice City, everyone took their game up to a whole other level. Would they have done that without Barney blowing them away?

When Beat started blowing people away with this editing, what did you see? People started to copy him. When AOA was released, SA stunting dramatically changed. When Grescha landed his opener to Arcane, what did I do? I tried to take his method and do something even better with it. By the nature of stunting, people blow the competition away, and it's a self repeating cycle.

Of course as this is not a dictatorship, but you and the others who use it during the executions of their stunts has to accept that I have a different perspective on it which I have the right to express too.

Right, but I don't see anyone disrespecting the lack of slow motion in people's stunts. The intentions of avoiding the method are worthy of admiration, but what you'll find is that most of the hardest stunts in this game are possible  impossible without it (corrected). And that's not because of the "slow motion", it's because of everything else.

I couldn't agree more, as long as it's used to innovate and not as the crutch-like use you just defended.

And so we agree

[Daffy]

Although traction does allow you to take different runups, or hug the road more closely down a drop, it doesn't inherently boost your speed on motorbikes as it does with cars.

Indeed, and though we have no scientific way of measuring if a speed-boost really occurs, there is a place where I'm able to complete a tiny gap from a tiny run-up with the slow-motion on where I'm not able to without to cut down the distance I have to drive back to the beginning of my run-up.
This could be attributed to the fact that the slow-mo ability gives me more time to react, but until we can know for sure I think it we should refrain from making matter-of-fact statements like that.

Well, there's a difference. Sure, leaving slow motion on for the duration of a stunt is bad, but using it to say, avoid traffic, that's something else. Using it to gain more height off a bump for a nicer looking execution? Sure it's easier, but it looks a lot better at the end of the day. There's situations where it looks lame, and situations where it doesn't, but it's all highly subjective.

And therein lies my point, that we shouldn't make matter-of-fact statements like that because it is like you said, all highly subjective.

They are right now. But I don't think that will be the case in the coming months, not with high level stunting. As stunters begin to land better stunts, the competition must try to do better. When Unorthodox came out in Vice City, everyone took their game up to a whole other level. Would they have done that without Barney blowing them away?

When Beat started blowing people away with this editing, what did you see? People started to copy him. When AOA was released, SA stunting dramatically changed. When Grescha landed his opener to Arcane, what did I do? I tried to take his method and do something even better with it. By the nature of stunting, people blow the competition away, and it's a self repeating cycle.

Of course stunting progresses, it (hopefully) always will, but your examples are all from the highest level of it and of those who raise the bar, not the average regular stunter.
We sometimes need people like that who pushes the limits and shows us what's possible (which is why you need to release your fucking IV solo because it's some godly shit), but without that people are usually lazy and look for the path of least resistance.
The problem is we don't remember them, because they're not memorable and all we remember are the highlights so why not all try to aspire to something worthwhile then?

Right, but I don't see anyone disrespecting the lack of slow motion in people's stunts. The intentions of avoiding the method are worthy of admiration, but what you'll find is that most of the hardest stunts in this game are possible without it. And that's not because of the "slow motion", it's because of everything else.

I'm not saying anyone is disrespecting the lack, because there is no lack of slow-motion, it's considered an improvement which is why nobody complains.
The complaints comes in form of people having a problem with people who have a problem with the excessive use of the slow-motion ability and how criticizing someone taken the path of least resistance is seen as a harsh and cruel thing to do, when it's just someone expressing an opinion that promotes more effort for what they consider to be better executions.

And so we agree