[raldi]

I completely disagree; it's easy to imagine someone in the first few days of the game's availability deciding for fun that instead of beating the first level, they were going to see how long they could keep it going. At that point, the natural thing to do is kill all but one enemy, and eventually it would stop shooting, which would be very attention-grabbing.

Then of course word would spread and investigations would begin as to how to reproduce and optimize the phenomenon.

[PaulHoule]

I remember books like

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4045527-the-complete-gui...

reccomending that you practice playing games dodging not shooting and seeing how long you can live to build up your skill.

[johnnymorgan]

Yup, gamers are gamers is the simplest answer.

I've said that same phrase about so many games and I'm still amazed at people's ability to track these things down.

[sumtechguy]

Like the movie ready player one. No one went backwards in that race? This was written by people who do not game but know the flash of it. Watch any of the thousands of vids on youtube of people doing crazy things in speed runs and you will see different.

[WithinReason]

Or just to see if they ever "run out of shots"

[pixl97]

This is something I like to bring up to programmers/designers in context of application security. And that is any assumptions on how the user is going to use said program you come up with will be broken. If you say "No one will do ______" you will likely be incorrect.

[lupire]

Stopping when there are 2 enemies left is a bit weird. As is picking those 2 specifically.

[raldi]

It works just fine with one; see the link from the post to the technical analysis.