ack, I never saw this topic! :o
But yeah, Phil's DD time attacks sure make mine look pretty dull. I might try working on Double Dragon 3, since it should be possible to improve.
Sorry I'm improving it.My 1st goal when doing DD 3 was to do a cool timeattack not the fastest but well I guess I have no choice to do the fastest.
Btw I estimated it to be around 11 minutes.
sorry, i was actually replying to abd of wood, cause he made a wrong explanation of how each spread shot comes in less amount. he said it's because it hits a target, i said it's because you are firing too much.
the spread gun works like this: you can only have 10 shots on screen at once. so if you shoot too fast it releases less bullets per shot.
i think he could not waste bullets and still be fast. would be much more interesting and what, 1 second slower?
You really don't know how it works
plz read upper
There's 5 bullets at the same place for 5x damage.People who complain of this is because they don't know that game very much.
[quote="Michael Fried" Maybe it's a little different from that. Anyway, despite its shots "missing" things, I do suppose the spread gun would save time in the game by hitting multiple targets with a single shot, or hitting a single target multiple times with one shot.
You are the 1st person who understand Y Genisto is firing a lot and that's really the case.
any chance this is still gonna be made? it would be perfect if u shot as soon as possible (just at the moment the enemy enters the screen he finds ur bullet) and without missing any shot. but i know that is kind of hard for 2 players ehehe
I prefer SNES than Genesis since there's more interesting titles on that one and the SNes controller is a lot lot lot lot better than Sega Genesis one.
In my opinion adding a overly lengthy explanation at the beginning of each video is needless and in fact annoying. What I mostly feel when I would see that would be "yeah, yeah, I already know that, I don't need to be reminded every time, don't insult my intelligence".
After all, the suggestion of adding lengthy explanations to the videos is caused by stupid people out there. Are we going to add an annoying disclaimer just because all the stupidity?
A short disclaimer is ok, like "This is a tool-assisted run; for more details see http://..." (similar to the current one, but shorter). If this is not enough for the stupid people, then that's their problem, not ours. We gave them enough info for any person with a minimum of intelligence to handle. That's enough.
You are under arrest.