cool motorbike on clock tower

[The Big V]

^ for V stunting no doubt, I bet he knows more than me. Im not a V stunter and I havent even touched this game. My judgments and conclusions are done solely on watching V stunting videos and comparing it to the old stunting engines.

What do you mean he knows more than me in stunting, though? You mean VC???  How did you come up with this conclusion? Please link me to a VC stunt where he owns all of my stuntography and Ill buy a ticket to UK and suck his dick.
 He knows how to mouse rads? Or he can come up with a theory about gaining better speed? If he knows more then he should prove it by releasing VC/SA stunts and videos, not just theoritically speaking . Im not involving V here, since as I mentioned he clearly knows better in V stunting than me and probably you.

[VaNilla]

I wouldn't claim to be among the greatest VC stunters or anything, but I do know a lot about it and I have landed some great VC stunts in my time. It is laughable how you paint my SA stunting history though, to the point that I'm not sure if you've watched many SA videos in the last 8 years or so, or if you're purposely mischaracterising me to strengthen your arguments. Either way, my post was about the community's approach to GTA V, not about me. So let's leave it at that.

[The Big V]

Ye the point was about V's community vs. VC/SA community, which from your 1st post sounded a bit harsh and untruthful. You acted like GTAStunting generates a huge ammount of hatred towards the V community, which partly is true but not towards the community itself but maybe a bit of jealosy that the previous stunting engines werent made so stunting friendly, as I mentioned in my early post.

Im pretty sure if we get some more activity of the GTA V guys here, we can become friends with them, and who knows, maybe do a VC/SA/V collaboration video 

[VaNilla]

You acted like GTAStunting generates a huge ammount of hatred towards the V community, which partly is true but not towards the community itself but maybe a bit of jealosy that the previous stunting engines werent made so stunting friendly, as I mentioned in my early post.

Ah but you see, this is where I take issue with the GTAStunting community. Claims are made about how stunting friendly GTA V is, but most of the people who make these claims haven't taken the time to understanding GTA V stunting, so they don't genuinely know the amount of skill and knowledge that is required to be a good GTA V stunter. They are blinded by the fact that a 200ft building is nowhere near as difficult, but fail to realise that buildings magnitudes higher than that are insanely hard. Judging how difficult GTA V is by what's possible in VC/SA is like judging pilots by astronauts; it's a completely different skillset, it doesn't matter how high you can go. I am speaking as someone who played the shit out of VC/SA/IV/V, and I can say that anyone in Nomad Union would tell you the same thing.

[The Big V]

Flies more = stunting is easier

This is my understanding of easier.

Im not saying it takes less skills, as I said I compare stunting to the old stunting engines. And in the old stunting engines if you have the ability to fly more this means a stunt becomes easier. Thus modders are so hated. Thus GTA V is disregarded.

[VaNilla]

By that logic, I guess VC stunting is easier than SA, because you can CSM up to 273ft . No it's not, that's a complete misrepresentation of skill and difficulty. A car that can drive up to 100mph in rally conditions does not necessarily take less skill than a car that can drive up to 20*mph on an airport runway, but that is analogous to your position. UPDATE: Fixed typo*.

[The Big V]

SA has less methods that include a second vehicle which ultimately decreases the ability to gain extra air. SA and VC stunting are balanced - in VC you gain more air but you bail easier. In SA you bail harder but you cant reach VC's heights. When it comes to technical combos SA beats VC. That makes sense?

Apart from the flying more = stunting easier which is just a short example, what about bailing harder in V? Or wallriding easier? Im curious, can you tell me couple of disadvantages that GTA V stunting has? Except that you have to control the gliding part, where is the downhill and the hard part of the V stunting? Explain me, as I have never played V.

[VaNilla]

I don't agree that skill should determined by how one game "balances out" another game, but here's something. The balance of GTA V is that runups tend to take a lot more skill in the most difficult of spots, which means that even though it is possible to reach huge buildings, it's is very hard to reach the max speed on any given runup. SA and IV have the lowest skill ceilings in this regard, VC and V have the highest.

In SA you mainly have to contend with road bumps, but RADs are pretty easy to manage otherwise; the main runup variables in SA are dips/hills and curbs, which you have to know how manoeuvre while RADing to get the optimal speed.

In IV, runup speeds are very consistent because you don't have to worry about road bumps or anything like that, you just have to dip as much as possible, and time your dips so that your front wheel taps the peak of any dips/hills on the road. The main difficulty otherwise comes from maintaining wheelies as close to a RAD as possible, so that you can achieve super speed with bikes such as the Vader.

In VC, you have to contend with all of SA's issues (with road bumps being less of an issue), but it also way more difficult to maintain RADs (especially facing north), and pulling your wheelie back up after dropping it accidentally results in a massive reduction in speed, so the aspect of runups and bumping has a much higher skill ceiling in VC than it does in SA.

In GTA V, you don't have the frustration of RAD road bumps or difficult wheelies, but it is extremely difficult to maintain max speed; every road has a series of "sweet spots", that if you miss, results in a much lower top speed by the time you reach the bump. You also cannot turn very much while doing a wheelie, so you have to course correct perfectly towards each sweet spot while keeping up the wheelie as long as possible; this necessitates that each course correction must happen as quickly as possible. If you mess up and have to drop your wheelie and steer again to correct for the sweet spots, you're losing a ton of speed. This doesn't matter too much on easy spots, but when you get to the hardest spots in the game, so much is determined by your top speed. The act of driving during these stunts is not as frustrating as VC, but the skill required to reach the top speed of any given runup is miles harder than any other GTA game, no doubt. Combine that with also having to get a perfect bump, and then maintain a perfect glide, and you have a recipe for extremely difficult big-air stunts.

Something like this is invisible to someone who doesn't understand GTA V stunting, much like RAD road bumps and difficult wheelies are to someone who doesn't understand VC. But the essential balance of runup technique (highest skill ceiling of all GTA games), proper bump technique (easier than VC/SA, harder than IV), and gliding (highest skill ceiling of all GTA games for mid-air control), is what makes the hardest big-air stunts so difficult in GTA V.

[The Big V]

Thanks for clearing this out, it makes sense now.

Still, you said that this affects only the hardest of the spots in V. Obviously, this leads me to belive that the average good looking stunts for V seem a lot easier than the average good looking stunt in VC/SA.

Also, by watching V videos is seems like you have much more control over your bike in air, while in VC if you fly with high speed backwards towards the roof you want to land and you cant krail correctly you are basically fucked 

[VaNilla]

Harder spots are affected more by the disadvantages I suggested, that doesn't mean easier spots aren't affected by these things. The same can be said of VC/SA stunting; a road bump in SA isn't going to matter much if you're just trying to land the lower part of the LS crane. The average good looking stunt is going to be different based on your understanding of GTA V stunting. What looks average to me in GTA V stunting is just as visually impressive and difficult as it would be in VC stunting, adjusting for the power of gliding. Crucially though, I fully understand everything about the game, so I understand how to adjust for the power of gliding; if you don't stunt in GTA V, you can't make accurate comparisons. What you said about being able to turn glide is true, but that is another thing that is a blessing and a curse. For a straight-facing bump to building, it is helpful but obviously makes very little difference. For a precision with a slight angle, it can be very helpful to make slight adjustments, and this is one thing that is easier than VC/SA/IV. However, when you try stunts that require massive turn glides, it is very challenging for someone who hasn't mastered it; you have to know exactly how to go where you want to go, while also maintaining the best possible height/distance with your gliding technique. Turn gliding helps you in certain situations, but when it is required to land a spot, it can be challenging in a way that you don't really have to worry about in VC/SA/IV.

GTA V is just a different beast to these games, and that is what I am proposing. GTA V is a different game to VC/SA/IV, and it should be treated as such. But like I said, your spots ultimately determine how difficult your stunts are, and GTA V has a lot of potential for stunts that are just as hard if not harder than anything in VC/SA. The issue is that if you don't understand GTA V, you cannot possibly understand the barometer for what makes a stunt easy or difficult. However, the same can be said of a GTA V stunter looking at VC/SA. The difference is that you don't see anyone from GTA V shitting on VC/SA stunts. They have the self awareness to know what they don't understand.

[The Big V]

True to some point. By average good looking stunt i meant something like a bump2land which also occures in V's stunting videos.

What about holy spots that everyone wants to land, everyone has tried and failed in V? Are there such or usually everything is landed within 1-2 months?

Because another comparison that I can bring to our discussion is this. There are many well known possible but UNLANDED spots in VC/SA. Can you say the same for V?

[VaNilla]

Absolutely, there are a ton of insanely difficult spots that are known but nobody has landed. We have some in NU you may see soon .

[The Big V]

Ontopic: Nice!

[J.Mario]

Because another comparison that I can bring to our discussion is this. There are many well known possible but UNLANDED spots in VC/SA. Can you say the same for V?

That! I haven't seen anybody landed the trefoil FIB building straightly from the parterre, it's probably the possible but unlanded spot of V if im right

[Rainbow]

Because another comparison that I can bring to our discussion is this. There are many well known possible but UNLANDED spots in VC/SA. Can you say the same for V?

That! I haven't seen anybody landed the trefoil FIB building straightly from the parterre, it's probably the possible but unlanded spot of V if im right

Not really sure what you mean by parterre, but the FIB building has been landed from a natural (super)bump a few months ago.