What was the point of the bank heist in this game if there's nothing to spend the money on?

what was the point of the bank heist in this game if there's nothing to spend the money on?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/GWVtZJo-HqI
gta.wikia.com/wiki/Air_Emu
youtu.be/qFbkXffa85E
youtube.com/watch?v=Q76UngzHX5Y
gta4.net/random-characters/
gta.wikia.com/wiki/Random_characters/GTA_V
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

At least it was actually fun unlike every single heist in GTA V

most of the gta v heists were better and had more depth than three leaf clover. the merryweather heist was the only objectively boring heist.

dull and lifeless = fun

>Planning to rob a bank
>Don't even have your own car

Just my opinion, but gta 4 was the worst one

The experience itself is reward enough, user

what was the point of all the heists in V if you never get to keep the money and doing the assassination missions with the stock market tip-offs is the only way to really make a lot of money?

IV>VC=SA>III=2>VCS>=LCS>1>V

it was better than the merryweather heist for sure but otherwise i agree. the fact that you can actually spend the money on stuff ingame made the heists so much better as opposed to doing three leaf clover and just sitting on the $250,000.

>you never get to keep the money
that's not true. the first heist alone gives franklin more money than what niko gets from three leaf clover

the stock market is only useful if you invest money earned from heists. that's how you accumulate billions and are able to afford the super expensive properties. plus they're fun.

I've beaten IV about 9 times and V 6 times. All of V's heists and most of the other missions in the game are linear garbage that takes control away from the player every chance it gets for a "crazy set-piece".

The game lacks any replayability that the old ones had which is hilarious considering it gives you multiple options for each heist. It's a shame that they change almost nothing depending on what you picked and the mission is still gonna be cinematic bullshit on both the loud or quiet options.

SAINT FUCKING MICHAEL!

V has the shittiest story and missions out of any GTA and that's a plain fact

woke

>makes you race him to let you hire him to be the driver(because that makes sense)
>you have to drive to the heist
>dies as soon as he becomes needed
this mission is pretty bad but at least you get the hockey mask outfit

You would steal within’ the hour to prevent any stolen checks.

That's your fault for showing up to the mission without a car

>The game lacks any replayability that the old ones had
This literally the most retarded argument ever.

>"it's less replayable because i said so. the other games are more replayable because i said so"
If you can't actually explain why the other games are more replayable then your argument is not valid. 99% of non-heist missions in GTA are linear. GTA IV had linear missions, so did SA. The only time IV branched away from linearity was the odd mission where you could snipe someone from afar which barely counts as non-linear anyway. V was the only game that introduced multiple paths for missions with heists. You're not looking at things objectively, you're likely just blinded by your nostalgia.

>that's a plain fact
No it's not, that's your own opinion.

Not him but if I remember correctly the game despawns any car you drive into the mission marker with. I always had to walk around and steal a four door car when the mission started.

They are video games OP, there is no point. They don’t really have lives.

Kill yourself V apologist

This is what I'm talking about. Every single GTA thread without fail all the IVfags are unable to defend their position, instead resorting to non-arguments and "IV is better because reasons".

I already explained the main reason for other GTA's being replayable, they don't take control away from you every 5 seconds. There is not a single mission in GTA V that plays like a classic GTA mission. They are designed around almost QTE like events and the character switching feature is mostly responsible for this. That is the most immersion-breaking bullshit I've ever seen

For example, the sniping sections in GTA IV you can still move around, they don't take any control away from you. Any time you're sniping in V, the game locks you into position (sometimes even locking it into the scope) making you unable to move, won't even let you switch weapons. And anytime there is multiple objectives to complete you just fucking teleport to the other character. Every single mission includes hand-holding bullshit like this making it almost impossible to even fail the mission. Even if you are about to die you can just switch characters real quick and switch back.

Also a ton of missions in IV and even SA had multiple ways to accomplish if you explore/experiment a bit, just because it's not shoved right in your face like in V doesn't mean it's not there. You're idea of "player choice" in a game must be choosing options A, B, or C in a menu before the mission even starts because that is the only choices you ever get in V.

The fact that you think that other GTA's are just as linear as V makes me think you've never played them.

>You're not looking at things objectively, you're likely just blinded by your nostalgia.

Nostalgia has nothing to do with it, I think you're just impressed by shiny graphics and an illusion of content in V.

I'm not even going to get into how gimped the driving/euphoria physics are compared to IV

>Not him but if I remember correctly the game despawns any car you drive into the mission marker with

Yeah you definitely didn't play the game faggot

>they don't take control away from you every 5 seconds
This isn't the case in GTA V at all.

>Any time you're sniping in V, the game locks you into position
This isn't the case in GTA V at all. There are a handful of times throughout the game where this happens like when you snipe at the IAA building.

Not to mention none of these have any effect on replayability.

>Nostalgia has nothing to do with it, I think you're just impressed by shiny graphics and an illusion of content in V.
No, I'm impressed by the massive increase in customization options, the fact that it plays more like SA where you can buy properties and increase your characters stats and change how they look, the fact that you can buy cars and other stuff rather than making money through missions and sitting on it for the entire game because the only things in the game you can spend money on are weapon stores and clothing stores. The fact that Los Santos in V can be interacted with much more than Liberty City in IV (ie, manipulating and making money off the stock market by blowing up planes so the airline's rival gets a bump is stock price, blowing up shit and making money off insurance company stocks, the fact that there are random events that occur as well as the random characters) Liberty City is dead by comparison, the interaction pales in comparison.

The only thing IV has going for it objectively is the gunplay physics and collision physics.

GTA VI should allow you to >buy music in-game and play it through your phone just so there's shit to use your money on beyond properties. I don't know, I just feel these games need more freedom of choice rather than only being able to purchase shit that makes you feel like you're going down a checklist for 100% completion. Car mods aren't enough either.

>III=2
r u furreal niqqa?

The story was perfect but the city felt empty

>IV better than SA and VC
Jesus Christ IV fanboys need to be gassed. Some of the most delusional people on Sup Forums.

Like I said, you're blinded by the ILLUSION of content in V

>The fact that Los Santos in V can be interacted with much more than Liberty City in IV (ie, manipulating and making money off the stock market by blowing up planes so the airline's rival gets a bump is stock price, blowing up shit and making money off insurance company stocks, the fact that there are random events that occur as well as the random characters) Liberty City is dead by comparison, the interaction pales in comparison.

This is just an outright lie, that stock crap was proven false the first week the game was out. The only stock manipulation you can do is through the assassination missions, which were surprisingly the closest to classic GTA missions that the game has to offer. And as for random events or characters, IV had these, they just weren't marked on the map. You had to find them by actually exploring. It really sounds like you didn't play a lot of IV or if you did you definitely didn't explore much.

>The only thing IV has going for it objectively is the gunplay physics and collision physics

Oh, so the 2 main things that make GTA fun?

Anyone who still thinks GTA V is better after watching this needs to off themselves, immediately

youtu.be/GWVtZJo-HqI

It's like Payday 2.

There's like 2 banks and 2 stores. Then all bulshit.

>The game lacks any replayability that the old ones had
Then why did you play it six times?

Because GTA is my favorite series and it's still better than most games. It just sucks compared to the others in the series

>Like I said, you're blinded by the ILLUSION of content in V
There is flat out more content. There's no illusion at all.

>This is just an outright lie, that stock crap was proven false the first week the game was out
No it isn't you complete retard. Are you the same guy who tried to make this claim last time I got into this debate? I literally used the stock market trick on my last playthrough after hearing about it from a YouTube video. I invested all my money in AirEmu, then went to the airport and blew up a bunch of planes with FlyUS liveries and I made a ~18% return on investment after a day or so. If you don't believe me check the FlyUS wiki page, its at the bottom.
gta.wikia.com/wiki/Air_Emu

>The only stock manipulation you can do is through the assassination missions
Again, not true. See above and also there are encounters that let you earn money off the stock market as well as manipulate it. You don't know what you are talking about.

>And as for random events or characters, IV had these, they just weren't marked on the map. You had to find them by actually exploring.
And what are these encounters? I looked on YouTube for GTA IV random events and the only videos I see are fro random character missions. I don't see anything on the wiki, either. Are you talking about the Sultan RS at the Westdyke mansion?

There's a counter video to this video. Basically they both just showcase/cherrypick things that are different between the games.

Counterpoint:
youtu.be/qFbkXffa85E

Also you had those little missions to do and the option to hang out with friends if you wanted to. That made the city live up a little.
And the random events like the crack junkie broker.
In V I did the story and it felt like third person CoD a bit, not too challenging kinda cinematic. It was ok but I didn't really enjoy it like IV or SA

Everything you mentioned is also in V so I don't see what the point of this post is if we are comparing games.

When did you first play the game? Because back in 2013 when the game first released there was a huge back-lash because the stock shit just didn't work. I remember trying for hours and it never worked. They could've patched it for later versions though, either way stocks is only 1 aspect of the game. And in a game about being a criminal it makes no sense to me why they would focus on stocks and buying stuff online anyway.

And yes I am talking about the random characters, which were also handled way better than they were in V.

As for random events, IV didn't have these. Red Dead was the first R* game to introduce them and they were still done 100x better than in V

The counter-video is nothing but pointing out shiny graphics. Crowb-cats shows stuff that actually adds to the gameplay

There's a video for it on YouTube from 2014 so it's not something that the devs snuck into the game recently. I's been public knowledge for over 3 years at this point.

>And yes I am talking about the random characters, which were also handled way better than they were in V.
Again, you're just making a claim. Explain how GTA IV did it better. They are essentially identical. They unlock after a certain mission is completed, there are multiple encounters for some characters and they are fun little side things you can do while taking a break from the story. You're just posting an opinion and framing it is an objective fact when it's not.

>Red Dead
Okay well I think RDR is better than both IV and V so okay.

SOUL MAKING, SOUND SHAKIN, EARTH QUAKEN

>Addition of planes isn't gameplay

youtube.com/watch?v=Q76UngzHX5Y

Wrong again, both videos showcase gameplay mechanics like sliding over a car to take cover from gunfire. Neither video is a graphical comparison.

>the "IV is better than V" video showcases helicopters moving dust around while hovering over water
>this is proof that IV is better
>the "V is better than IV" video showcases better cover mechanics and the fact that your clothes only get wet up to a certain point
>lol that doesn't mean shit it's just graphics

You're about as delusional as the asshurt IV fanboys that spammed the video with dislikes.

>Moving dust
>While hovering above water

gta4.net/random-characters/
gta.wikia.com/wiki/Random_characters/GTA_V

Scroll through and look for yourself. IV's random characters actually made sense whereas in V they were just shoe-horned in as shitty extra missions and to emphasize how "whacky" everyone is in Los Santos. In IV they actually had a connection story-wise to Niko and were encountered randomly on your journey through Liberty City rather than a marker just appearing on your map and Michael just somehow knowing that he has to drive across town to go foot-race Mary-Ann for some retarded ass reason

>gameplay mechanics like sliding over a car to take cover from gunfire

Oh wow what a technological advancement!

These are the delusions of the V kiddies people. They brag about being able to slide over the hood of a car, meanwhile they don't give a shit that the driving and ragdoll physics were completely gimped

I miss Niko.