This old chestnut again! It's been a while! 8)
So yea, we all know now that there's two versions of Double Dragon I.
The 64k version that definitely on tape and budget re-release. But also a 128k version (by Richard Aplin) on disk.
A good article here - Double Dragon Dojo: The Amstrad Mystery (http://doubledragon.kontek.net/features/amstradmystery.html)
The reason I bring this up again is knowing from the box which version is which. To confuse and make matters worse I've been told that the crappy 64k version was ALSO released on disk!
Now from what I can make out and guessing...
If the disk box has just the Melbourne House logo on it like this - it's the crappy 64k version. ->
(http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
If it has Virgin above the Melbourne House logo like the below - it's the good Richard Aplin 128k version! ->
(http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=750&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
Can anyone who physically owns the game confirm this?
I had the supposedly 'crappy' version as part of The Biz compiltation (with Batman The Caped Crusader, Operation Wolf and R-Type and it was the most played tape out of them) and I played it loads especially with my sister in 2 player and we completed it about 20 times or so I reckon. Really liked the nicely defined colourful graphics. Some of the heads could have used more work to make them more distinctive but it all looks clean and readable. I still play it on WinApe from time to time and speed it up using the emulator's options. Not saying it's a classic but I've always been really confused by how it seems to get almost Count Duckula 2 level of hatred thrown at it.
I don't really find the 'good' version that much better when played on emulators. It's faster but it seems to lack as much of an impact when fighting and the graphics are a total eyesore. Even when trying to fix the colours (and they REALLY do need fixing) I find the sprites are often crude and sloppy looking with very little shading or care for the Mode 0 resolution. They're clearly just ported from the 16 bit version with barely any attempts to clean them up. Even some background imagery such as the VW Beetle billboard on the first level are so much better drawn and shaded on the supposed bad version than on this one. It seems to be missing the ending from what I remember too where Marian gets lowered down onto the ground and walks over and kisses the winning brother (I was always a little confused by just how my much sister hated losing at that part with our version of the game).
I also enjoyed playing the 'crappy' version as a kid back in the day. Used to play it a lot two player when friends came over. I do seem to remember it being excruciatingly slow though. I recently purchased a copy of it so look forward to giving it a try as soon as I can track down another 464 plus. Got to be well over 20 years now since I've played that game.
Quote from: Carnivac on 09:41, 03 November 15
I had the supposedly 'crappy' version as part of The Biz compiltation (with Batman The Caped Crusader, Operation Wolf and R-Type and it was the most played tape out of them) and I played it loads especially with my sister in 2 player and we completed it about 20 times or so I reckon. Really liked the nicely defined colourful graphics. Some of the heads could have used more work to make them more distinctive but it all looks clean and readable. I still play it on WinApe from time to time and speed it up using the emulator's options. Not saying it's a classic but I've always been really confused by how it seems to get almost Count Duckula 2 level of hatred thrown at it.
I don't really find the 'good' version that much better when played on emulators. It's faster but it seems to lack as much of an impact when fighting and the graphics are a total eyesore. Even when trying to fix the colours (and they REALLY do need fixing) I find the sprites are often crude and sloppy looking with very little shading or care for the Mode 0 resolution. They're clearly just ported from the 16 bit version with barely any attempts to clean them up. Even some background imagery such as the VW Beetle billboard on the first level are so much better drawn and shaded on the supposed bad version than on this one. It seems to be missing the ending from what I remember too where Marian gets lowered down onto the ground and walks over and kisses the winning brother (I was always a little confused by just how my much sister hated losing at that part with our version of the game).
Heh, I don't mean to upset anyone by saying the David Leitch / 64k version is crappy, because well it is :P In all seriousness - compared to Renegade / Target Renegade / etc it is a crappy beat-em-up, doesn't mean you can't get enjoyment from it. eg for me I enjoy playing ESWAT despite it being one of the lowest reviewed games in Amstrad history! Yea you can speed it up, but so you can with Outrun and it becomes a better conversion, but I don't like doing that - I play games as they were meant to be.
But yea the Richard Aplin 128k version graphics were ripped from the arcade machine to the Atari ST, which was then ripped to the Amstrad version. I suppose it's kind of like a photocopy of a photocopy. Given there were two versions and this was going to be a very low selling disk version I bet there was very little time given to Aplin to do this version. The same process was done on Double Dragon II but the graphics have obviously been re-edited and touched up and are definitely much better. But in this case with Double Dragon, the playability is most important I feel rather than the graphics - it plays a really good beat-em-up and is well matched as an 8-bit version to the coinop it's coming over from. Real Double Dragon die-hards (thinking of a couple of close personal friends here) rate it very highly.
Lastly yes the Aplin version is missing the ending with the girlfriend hugging you. :(
Quote from: Xyphoe on 21:42, 03 November 15
Real Double Dragon die-hards (thinking of a couple of close personal friends here) rate it very highly.
Ah right. So their word must be the law then if they're 'die-hard'. Forget my opinion even though it's a game in one of my fave game genres (yet to be honest I didn't really care for any version of Renegade, it's a pretty dull arcade game to begin with). And comparing it with the Outrun port which showed absolutely zero amount of effort? Oh come on. The Aplin Double Dragon might be a bit faster but it still feels off compared to better versions and it's still got among the worst graphics ever seen on the CPC which reeks of 'just didn't give a crap' and for me that really knocks it down a lot. But hey whatever. We get told all the time what games we should like and shouldn't like. If I gotta see one more 'best games ever' chart that lists the godawful, painfully tedious, blurry mess that is Zelda - Ocarina of Time as number one I'll have to torch some place. All I know is that the slowed but much prettier DD gave me a lot of happy hours of an otherwise pretty bad childhood and is one of the few times my sister and I actually got along (well..except for the last bit with the brothers fighting each other obviously). Yes it is slow but it's still nowhere near as bad a game as people seem so desperately to make out. And if I gotta put up with folks here heapring praise on games I couldn't bloody stand then it feels like crap when they start insulting the games that actually entertained me but we're stuck with what the majority say is fact, so to hell with everything else...
I'm really tiring of this forum again. This bit annoys me, sure but there's just been a bad atmosphere lately in certain other threads too and it's making me feel and react in a way that I really don't want to nor need to when going through a rough time myself. Think it's time for another break from here and probably other sites too. Take care.
I quite liked both of them, but I suspect the CPC could've done better in both cases. I mostly played the Speccy version as a kid, which is even more derided, but I enjoyed it immensely. :)
sensitive soul , good job its only a game .
Plus the fact we wouldn't be Amstrad Die Hards if we didn't have a high level tolerance to crap games. As Xyphoe says crappy games are still crappy games but we can still enjoy them , if that's what we did or do. Double Dragon is an appalling game and I am sure any 8 bit gamer who doesn't have nostalgia to support his view would look at both of the versions in question and would say that the one is clearly better than the other . The graphics are better in the one but the gameplay surpasses in the other . And always gameplay is the most important factor . Unless you are obsessed with graphics over substance .
Come back! We like Double Dragon 64K, but just prefer the Aplin efforts ;D I played both as a kid and completed 'em.
I think the problem with the first Double Dragon game is that most probably experienced the arcade version before hand, and although the graphics looked really colourful, the pace just completely put most people off. I played Double Dragon 3 right through until the end, sluggish as hell, but there's actually a challenge in there.
Each to their own and for punishment, everyone should list their top ten CPC games :P [size=78%] [/size]
I can honestly say that I have *never* seen the full priced 64k version in any stores.
The tape release was always bundled with compilations from around 89. Even AA didn't review it until the comps came out.
Also, I actually can't believe that someone is offended about a comment about 64K that MacDeath isn't responsible for!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Quote from: Xyphoe on 09:16, 03 November 15
This old chestnut again! It's been a while! 8)
So yea, we all know now that there's two versions of Double Dragon I.
The 64k version that definitely on tape and budget re-release. But also a 128k version (by Richard Aplin) on disk.
A good article here - Double Dragon Dojo: The Amstrad Mystery (http://doubledragon.kontek.net/features/amstradmystery.html)
The reason I bring this up again is knowing from the box which version is which. To confuse and make matters worse I've been told that the crappy 64k version was ALSO released on disk!
Now from what I can make out and guessing...
If the disk box has just the Melbourne House logo on it like this - it's the crappy 64k version. ->
If it has Virgin above the Melbourne House logo like the below - it's the good Richard Aplin 128k version! ->
Can anyone who physically owns the game confirm this?
I have a physical copy from the Edition One compilation that I had purchased many months ago. I need to dig it out again although I no longer have a CRT TV to try it on, but I'm sure that it is the 128kb Virgin version.
I never liked the 64kb version and was thoroughly disappointed with it as it was far too slow, but I found the Aplin version a great achievement in regards to converting it from the 16 bit versions.
Quote from: sigh on 02:05, 04 November 15
I have a physical copy from the Edition One compilation that I had purchased many months ago. I need to dig it out again although I no longer have a CRT TV to try it on, but I'm sure that it is the 128kb Virgin version.
I never liked the 64kb version and was thoroughly disappointed with it as it was far too slow, but I found the Aplin version a great achievement in regards to converting it from the 16 bit versions.
Disk or cassette version?
I'd be surprised they'd try to put the game that big on cassette for a compilation that was designed for 64k tape users.
Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 02:48, 04 November 15
Disk or cassette version?
I'd be surprised they'd try to put the game that big on cassette for a compilation that was designed for 64k tape users.
It's on disk.
Quote from: sigh on 03:20, 04 November 15
It's on disk.
There's your answer. DD1 owners tended to be in the minority for 464 owners. So when publishers reissued games for compilations, they wanted to squeeze as much cash out as they can.
So disk owners would have gotten the Aplin version on the comps, while the tape guys got the Leitch version.
Likewise when Double Dragon came out on the Tronix budget label, again, tape version was the Leitch version.
Quote from: Carnivac on 22:13, 03 November 15
If I gotta see one more 'best games ever' chart that lists the godawful, painfully tedious, blurry mess that is Zelda - Ocarina of Time as number one I'll have to torch some place.
I've always been a "Link to the Past" man myself :)
I loved the Aplin version of the game. I received that one for Christmas 1989 & for ages I thought that was the only version of the game. My friend had Double Dragon 2, so we would get together & play them one after the other. I did encounter the other one when I owned my original Amstrad & I remember thinking "this is just diabolical". I was intrigued as to why there were 2 versions of the game & it puzzled me from years until a couple of years ago when I did a bit of research.
Years later the Attic Bug had the Aplin version for order on their website & I bought another copy, replacing the one that went with my original CPC all those years ago.
So yeah, the non-Aplin version isn't my cup of tea. However, if it works for you then that's all that matters :)
I've never played it, and just wondered if was anything like Street Fighter? I remember competing that game fairly quickly.
I remember Double Dragon 3 being an AA Rave, and it still played slow! I've played Xenon and noticed AA bagged that one for being too slow, hate to think what it was like at the Arcades, though I had to agree with AA on that one (even if the Graphics looked good).
Quote from: Carnivac on 22:13, 03 November 15
Ah right. So their word must be the law then if they're 'die-hard'. Forget my opinion even though it's a game in one of my fave game genres (yet to be honest I didn't really care for any version of Renegade, it's a pretty dull arcade game to begin with). And comparing it with the Outrun port which showed absolutely zero amount of effort? Oh come on. The Aplin Double Dragon might be a bit faster but it still feels off compared to better versions and it's still got among the worst graphics ever seen on the CPC which reeks of 'just didn't give a crap' and for me that really knocks it down a lot. But hey whatever. We get told all the time what games we should like and shouldn't like. If I gotta see one more 'best games ever' chart that lists the godawful, painfully tedious, blurry mess that is Zelda - Ocarina of Time as number one I'll have to torch some place. All I know is that the slowed but much prettier DD gave me a lot of happy hours of an otherwise pretty bad childhood and is one of the few times my sister and I actually got along (well..except for the last bit with the brothers fighting each other obviously). Yes it is slow but it's still nowhere near as bad a game as people seem so desperately to make out. And if I gotta put up with folks here heapring praise on games I couldn't bloody stand then it feels like crap when they start insulting the games that actually entertained me but we're stuck with what the majority say is fact, so to hell with everything else...
I'm really tiring of this forum again. This bit annoys me, sure but there's just been a bad atmosphere lately in certain other threads too and it's making me feel and react in a way that I really don't want to nor need to when going through a rough time myself. Think it's time for another break from here and probably other sites too. Take care.
I certainly didn't mean to offend and upset there, I'm really not taking it seriously - I just don't with retro games in general. It's all a bit of lighthearted fun to me. Hence the " :P " smiley in my last post. So if I did upset you then I apologise and I hope things in the 'real world' get better and work out for you.
ps I had the David Leitch version on Tronix budget release. I did play it all the way to the end and gleaned some enjoyment from it, or obviously I would have switched it off after the 1st level probably.
Quote from: sigh on 02:05, 04 November 15
I have a physical copy from the Edition One compilation that I had purchased many months ago. I need to dig it out again although I no longer have a CRT TV to try it on, but I'm sure that it is the 128kb Virgin version.
I never liked the 64kb version and was thoroughly disappointed with it as it was far too slow, but I found the Aplin version a great achievement in regards to converting it from the 16 bit versions.
Thanks, that's helps confirm things somewhat - I now just need someone to come forward who owns the actual original game, hopefully both versions!
Quote from: Xyphoe on 09:16, 03 November 15
This old chestnut again! It's been a while! 8)
So yea, we all know now that there's two versions of Double Dragon I.
The 64k version that definitely on tape and budget re-release. But also a 128k version (by Richard Aplin) on disk.
A good article here - Double Dragon Dojo: The Amstrad Mystery (http://doubledragon.kontek.net/features/amstradmystery.html)
The reason I bring this up again is knowing from the box which version is which. To confuse and make matters worse I've been told that the crappy 64k version was ALSO released on disk!
Now from what I can make out and guessing...
If the disk box has just the Melbourne House logo on it like this - it's the crappy 64k version. ->
(http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
If it has Virgin above the Melbourne House logo like the below - it's the good Richard Aplin 128k version! ->
(http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=750&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
Can anyone who physically owns the game confirm this?
I have physical copy of the second (Virgin/Melbourne House logo) in disk format. The game is the 128k version.
Quote from: AMSDOS on 06:57, 04 November 15
I've never played it, and just wondered if was anything like Street Fighter? I remember competing that game fairly quickly.
I remember Double Dragon 3 being an AA Rave, and it still played slow! I've played Xenon and noticed AA bagged that one for being too slow, hate to think what it was like at the Arcades, though I had to agree with AA on that one (even if the Graphics looked good).
Double Dragon 3 was an AA Rave!? Wow , they must have had the girls(Software companies) take em out (And probably the rest) for that award!?
Quote from: AMSDOS on 06:57, 04 November 15
I remember Double Dragon 3 being an AA Rave, and it still played slow! I've played Xenon and noticed AA bagged that one for being too slow
Funnily enough, the CPC versions of
Xenon and
Double Dragon (the 64K version) were both developed by the same team - Animagic.
Quote from: 6128 on 14:32, 04 November 15
I have physical copy of the second (Virgin/Melbourne House logo) in disk format. The game is the 128k version.
FANTASTIC!
Cheers for that!!!
So now all we need to establish whether the disk box with JUST the Melbourne House logo is the 64k or 128k version.
ie this one -
http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg (http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
I owned the Aplin version when I was younger & that had the Virgin logo, & so does the copy I own now that I purchased from the Attic Bug. I'd never seen the Melbourne House version of the box before this post.
Admittedly the 64k version of the game I was playing was from a copied disc back in the day, so I've never seen its box.
I do like how they both claim to be "the ONLY authorized version of the No.1 arcade smash for the home computer!" :)
Quote from: Puresox on 15:55, 04 November 15
Double Dragon 3 was an AA Rave!? Wow , they must have had the girls(Software companies) take em out (And probably the rest) for that award!?
Was reviewed in Issue 78 and scored 81%
Appears AA never reviewed Double Dragon, even though I recall The Biz Compilation Games getting the AA treatment in Issue 54 & also scoring 81%, though it was back when they simply had not reviewed.
Xenon was reviewed in AA49 and scored 57%
Quote from: AMSDOS on 10:28, 05 November 15
Was reviewed in Issue 78 and scored 81%
Appears AA never reviewed Double Dragon, even though I recall The Biz Compilation Games getting the AA treatment in Issue 54 & also scoring 81%, though it was back when they simply had not reviewed.
Xenon was reviewed in AA49 and scored 57%
AA just never reviewed Double Dragon on it's own.
In issue 67, they reviewed the Edition One compilation which featured Double Dragon and I noted at the time it wasn't the same looking graphics as my copied tape.. My one had blue text at the bottom of the screen saying CREDIT XX.. I've not played it since the early 1990s but I do remember completing it..
Well as a kid I only ever played this game on my mates speccy, so have never checked out the Amstrad version. Guess after all the fuss this thread has made of it I best check it out!!
Just checked out Double Dragon 3 Rosetta Stone , just to refresh my memory in case I was being unfair in judgement , but no this game is utter shit , the claim from Amstrad Action that it was worth an AA Rave is just downright bullshit. Deceptive bastards. Must read the review now
The same for the french press : a 84% in Amstrad 100% when it was a quite hard mark to obtain :doh:
Quote from: Puresox on 15:57, 05 November 15
... but no this game is utter shit ...
Quite hard words from you and not the first time. Well, maybe you can show us how to perform better. ;) :)
I have the Melbourne 128K too!
Quote from: TFM on 20:44, 06 November 15
Quite hard words from you and not the first time. Well, maybe you can show us how to perform better. ;) :)
Show us how to perform better? What does that mean? If I was a programmer then yes I would produce something that was better than that. And as for having an opinion on what a game is like then I will not refrain from giving an opinion on it , As you will find majority of people in the world have an opinion on things.
In my trade people have an opinion on the work that I produce,I have to accept that people are paying there money for it and they can rate it however they want . What right do I have to restrict there opinion or insist they lie in order to keep people from being upset about it ?
It's fine to have an opinion, but there's a polite way of expressing a dislike over a rude way of disliking something.
I might of helped some guy out yesterday if he was polite, instead I got some bad tempered man talking in profanity, so decided not to help. Begin polite goes a long way, unfortunately if people think they can still get what they want, by being rude about it, you soon find people adopt it. :(
Quote from: AMSDOS on 03:41, 07 November 15
It's fine to have an opinion, but there's a polite way of expressing a dislike over a rude way of disliking something.
I might of helped some guy out yesterday if he was polite, instead I got some bad tempered man talking in profanity, so decided not to help. Begin polite goes a long way, unfortunately if people think they can still get what they want, by being rude about it, you soon find people adopt it. :(
I'm not asking for anything ,and I have no problems with the karma in my everyday life. Thanks for your insights though
Quote from: Xyphoe on 22:11, 04 November 15
So now all we need to establish whether the disk box with JUST the Melbourne House logo is the 64k or 128k version.
ie this one -
http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg (http://cpc-power.com/extra_lire_fichier.php?extra=package&fiche=1150&slot=1&part=A&type=.jpg)
There's a copy for sale on eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-Melbourne-House-Amstrad-CPC-DISK-Large-Clamshell-GC-BB-207-/131624861172?hash=item1ea573fdf4:g:Rf0AAOSwKIpWB1mF) for £17.99 + postage if you really want to find out - although I'm not going to buy it at that price.
Quote from: Nich on 22:40, 07 November 15
There's a copy for sale on eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-Melbourne-House-Amstrad-CPC-DISK-Large-Clamshell-GC-BB-207-/131624861172?hash=item1ea573fdf4:g:Rf0AAOSwKIpWB1mF) for £17.99 + postage if you really want to find out - although I'm not going to buy it at that price.
Is that a legit disk? It looks like a copy with a label stuck on top. Doesn't show a manual either.....
Quote from: sigh on 01:32, 08 November 15
Is that a legit disk? It looks like a copy with a label stuck on top. Doesn't show a manual either.....
Both of my copies of the Aplin release were Amsoft discs with a printed sticker label over the top, so I assume this is a common thing. This one looks exactly like the 2 copies of the game I've owned over the years.
The disk of this bid is legit. Not a copy or fake.
My physical copy disk is like that.
Quote from: sigh on 01:32, 08 November 15
Is that a legit disk? It looks like a copy with a label stuck on top.
Lot of retail games are like that...
Quote from: AMSDOS on 03:41, 07 November 15
It's fine to have an opinion, but there's a polite way of expressing a dislike over a rude way of disliking something.
I might of helped some guy out yesterday if he was polite, instead I got some bad tempered man talking in profanity, so decided not to help. Begin polite goes a long way, unfortunately if people think they can still get what they want, by being rude about it, you soon find people adopt it. :(
So true. Everything runs better with a smile. :)
I've no problem with people having Manners, totally all for that. But I am not going to censor opinion for the sake of pleasantry, The use of profanity was in reaction to the review which was a downright lie imo, how a game of that quality can be rated by AA (In the way that it was )is far more offensive and disingenuous.
Quote from: Puresox on 22:35, 08 November 15
I've no problem with people having Manners, totally all for that. But I am not going to censor opinion for the sake of pleasantry, The use of profanity was in reaction to the review which was a downright lie imo, how a game of that quality can be rated by AA (In the way that it was )is far more offensive and disingenuous.
What's worse in AA77 WWF Wrestlemania was awarded Mastergame 90%. I haven't played that game myself, though others have expressed how Bad it was. It seems to have mixed opinions cause Javier Sáez reviewed it on Nich's site and gave it 8 out of 10.
Quote from: AMSDOS on 22:57, 08 November 15
What's worse in AA77 WWF Wrestlemania was awarded Mastergame 90%. I haven't played that game myself, though others have expressed how Bad it was. It seems to have mixed opinions cause Javier Sáez reviewed it on Nich's site and gave it 8 out of 10.
I feel with WWF game it is not my type of game personally , but it has enough about it, to warrant that sort of award from one persons pov.
I would say it deserves an AA Rave at best. But I can understand it getting higher or even lower .
Definitely don't find it as contentious an issue as DD 3. It is a playable game that any 8-bit gamer could respect. If you were to show a C64 owner DD3 along with its review they would find it humorous to say the least!
DD3 , is beyond acceptable in its sluggishness , for anyone to consider that saleable is unbelievable! Can you honestly tell me that 81% is justifiable for that game?
Quote from: Puresox on 23:26, 08 November 15
DD3 , is beyond acceptable in its sluggishness , for anyone to consider that saleable is unbelievable! Can you honestly tell me that 81% is justifiable for that game?
Honestly I don't know cause I haven't played it, but that is what AA scored it as when it originally came out. Though there were certainly plenty of cases where a game was rereleased on a budget label and AA generally reviewed it again and in some cases they had some games with a very low score.
Am I the only person that like WWF Wrestlemania?
Definitely better made than a lot of games. Nice smooth animation and responsive controls
Quote from: Xyphoe on 21:42, 03 November 15
Heh, I don't mean to upset anyone by saying the David Leitch / 64k version is crappy, because well it is :P In all seriousness - compared to Renegade / Target Renegade / etc it is a crappy beat-em-up, doesn't mean you can't get enjoyment from it. eg for me I enjoy playing ESWAT despite it being one of the lowest reviewed games in Amstrad history! Yea you can speed it up, but so you can with Outrun and it becomes a better conversion, but I don't like doing that - I play games as they were meant to be.
But yea the Richard Aplin 128k version graphics were ripped from the arcade machine to the Atari ST, which was then ripped to the Amstrad version. I suppose it's kind of like a photocopy of a photocopy. Given there were two versions and this was going to be a very low selling disk version I bet there was very little time given to Aplin to do this version. The same process was done on Double Dragon II but the graphics have obviously been re-edited and touched up and are definitely much better. But in this case with Double Dragon, the playability is most important I feel rather than the graphics - it plays a really good beat-em-up and is well matched as an 8-bit version to the coinop it's coming over from. Real Double Dragon die-hards (thinking of a couple of close personal friends here) rate it very highly.
Lastly yes the Aplin version is missing the ending with the girlfriend hugging you. :(
The CPC 128k is straight ported from the Amiga version. The ST version was back ported from the Amiga version.
Quote from: seanb on 14:30, 09 November 15
Am I the only person that like WWF Wrestlemania?
Definitely better made than a lot of games. Nice smooth animation and responsive controls
Well I do have tendencies to have weird Dreams about that kind of stuff, and since nobody has stepped up to the plate to support that, then perhaps it was only in my Dreams. Personally I don't have any connection with the game, so to have dreamt it sounds pretty odd though.
What the hell has happened to this forum? Think we need a few chill pills handed out! :doh:
I still genuinely don't believe Double Dragon ever saw a standalone full priced release on tape. I remember looking everywhere for it for nearly two years in 88 and 89, furious because C64 versions of it did exist.
Regarding WWF Wrestlemania. Being a big fan (still am of the older stuff to this day), I was bitterly disappointed with it. This would have been acceptable in 88, but in 91, this was inexcusable. The colour choices were an eyesore, a severe limitation of moves, and don't get me started on it's status of joystick destroyer.
On tape, it was even more painful because if you wanted to change your character, you needed to reload the game from scratch.
Quote from: dlfrsilver on 16:26, 09 November 15
The CPC 128k is straight ported from the Amiga version. The ST version was back ported from the Amiga version.
What is the difference between "straight ported" and "back ported"?
Quote from: steve on 15:52, 19 December 15
What is the difference between "straight ported" and "back ported"?
I understand it so that a straight port is a port from the original machine and a back port is a "port of a port" :-[
Quote from: remax on 20:18, 06 November 15
The same for the french press : a 84% in Amstrad 100% when it was a quite hard mark to obtain :doh:
I remember the French Press always being very generous with Amstrad review scores :)
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
QuoteQuite hard words from you and not the first time. Well, maybe you can show us how to perform better. ;) :)
About Double Dragon III, he is unfortunately right. DDIII is another we grant CPC users for "Speccy-diots".You want to know why this game is so slow ? Answer : it's in a fact a spectrum emulator running the Spectrum version, doing realtime 1bpp to 2bpp conversion ! It can't work :(
Sorry to necro a topic :P
But both versions appeared on eBay with clear photos...
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-Amstrad-CPC-464-664-6128-Disk-tested/391829581324?hash=item5b3adcee0c:g:BEQAAOSwCkZZV1ew
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-For-Amstrad-CPC-6128-Disk-Disc-Game-By-Virgin/323118296861?hash=item4b3b59ef1d:g:WXoAAOSwE8dahC2M
Earlier someone confirmed that the 'Virgin/Melbourne House logo' version, is the Aplin version. We didn't have confirmation of what the 'Melbourne House logo' version has on the disk.
I think all we need clarification on is if the 1st one there (with just the Melbourne House logo, no Virgin on it) is the Aplin or the 64k version. The disk pics are interesting, the first one is a properly printed disk, where as the 2nd auction (Virgin/Melbourne House) looks like an off the shelf disk with a crappy printed label glued over the top.
@Xyphoe (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=109) - I think your best bet is too find the 6128 version on one of the compilations that was released on disk.
Unfortnately, I can't remember the name of it (I have it - somewhere!)*
*It's called "Edition One".
I need to be more active on the forum. Life has just been getting in the way.
Quote from: sigh on 19:42, 10 April 18
@Xyphoe (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=109) - I think your best bet is too find the 6128 version on one of the compilations that was released on disk.
Unfortnately, I can't remember the name of it (I have it - somewhere.
Edition One.
Quote from: Xyphoe on 08:28, 09 April 18
Sorry to necro a topic :P
But both versions appeared on eBay with clear photos...
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-Amstrad-CPC-464-664-6128-Disk-tested/391829581324?hash=item5b3adcee0c:g:BEQAAOSwCkZZV1ew (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-Amstrad-CPC-464-664-6128-Disk-tested/391829581324?hash=item5b3adcee0c:g:BEQAAOSwCkZZV1ew)
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-For-Amstrad-CPC-6128-Disk-Disc-Game-By-Virgin/323118296861?hash=item4b3b59ef1d:g:WXoAAOSwE8dahC2M (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Dragon-For-Amstrad-CPC-6128-Disk-Disc-Game-By-Virgin/323118296861?hash=item4b3b59ef1d:g:WXoAAOSwE8dahC2M)
Earlier someone confirmed that the 'Virgin/Melbourne House logo' version, is the Aplin version. We didn't have confirmation of what the 'Melbourne House logo' version has on the disk.
I think all we need clarification on is if the 1st one there (with just the Melbourne House logo, no Virgin on it) is the Aplin or the 64k version. The disk pics are interesting, the first one is a properly printed disk, where as the 2nd auction (Virgin/Melbourne House) looks like an off the shelf disk with a crappy printed label glued over the top.
I bet the first (Melbourne House logo) is the 64k version of the game. Double Dragon by Animagic/Melbourne House.
I have the second (Virgin/Melbourne House logo) and it's the 128k version. Richard Aplin version. Yes, the label of the disc is crappy.
there something not mentioned in the topic: the UK release was in a plastic box but the french release (amstrad/st/amiga...) was a cardboard box. i'm not sure the sticker is the only thing to consider.
On the french compilation "Les maîtres ninja" (last ninja 2 + double dragon) and "double action" (double dragon + real ghostbusters + wec le mans + daley thompson olympic challenge) there was on the floppy-release front a sticker in french "double dragon can only be played on a cpc 6128" which was a stupid way to explain it was a 128ko game only, the Aplin one. To my opinion all french floppy releases were the Aplin one. In Spain where the 464 was the master it would have been different.
In Spain Double Dragon release was the 64k version (in disk and cassette) in cardboard box. Distributed by Dro Soft.
The 128k/Aplin version (in disk) only was released in the Ninja Collection compilation in cardboard box. Distributed by Erbe Software.
That Dro Soft release ended up on the Mastertonic Plus budget label, as well as on various tape only compilations such as The Biz and 100% Dynamite. I'm not even sure the Aplin version was finished by the time those compilations were released, as Aplin was interviewed by AA after finishing Shinobi, which was late 89. In the interview he stated he was finishing DD1 and was starting on DD2.
No way the Aplin version was gonna make it straight to compilation after it was just finished development.
Quote from: sigh on 19:42, 10 April 18
@Xyphoe (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=109) - I think your best bet is too find the 6128 version on one of the compilations that was released on disk.
Unfortnately, I can't remember the name of it (I have it - somewhere!)*
*It's called "Edition One".
I need to be more active on the forum. Life has just been getting in the way.
Thanks dude! I'm not actually after the game itself, I just want to know to clarify which release was the Aplin version and how we can tell it is. :)