The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
On the first of July, I posted my best topic to date entitled "Macots: Past, present and future". I felt this had a really good chance of winning. Normally I don't post to win but I really want GT3 and I can't afford it.
However, this topic was beaten by a topic entitled "SEGA and Nintendo Killed Originality in Video Games". I don't think this topic deserved to win and I thought mine was far better. All I want to know is why didn't I win? Is there a specific reason? Could someone from SR tell me so I can improve next time.
I would appreciate it if someone from SR could reply to this so I know they've at least read it.
My topic is this:
http://ukdiscussions.reserve.co.uk/ display_messages.php?threadid=14662 &forumid=185
The winner is this:
http://ukdiscussions.reserve.co.uk/ display_messages.php?threadid=14643 &forumid=416
However, this topic was beaten by a topic entitled "SEGA and Nintendo Killed Originality in Video Games". I don't think this topic deserved to win and I thought mine was far better. All I want to know is why didn't I win? Is there a specific reason? Could someone from SR tell me so I can improve next time.
I would appreciate it if someone from SR could reply to this so I know they've at least read it.
My topic is this:
http://ukdiscussions.reserve.co.uk/ display_messages.php?threadid=14662 &forumid=185
The winner is this:
http://ukdiscussions.reserve.co.uk/ display_messages.php?threadid=14643 &forumid=416
Page:
hmmm hasn't he claimed yet.
Very unlikely and somewhat disgusting that you're trying to shift the blame.
Yeah I do feel bad about making him leave but I'm sure he'll come back.
Maybe he was only in it for the games? Now he's got his games he's off and he's using me as an excuse/
Possible.
But highly unlikely.
Maybe he was only in it for the games? Now he's got his games he's off and he's using me as an excuse/
Possible.
But highly unlikely.
I'm sure he will be back. Someone must have his email to let him know.
Or something......
Or something......
Hmmmm now GAD and armitage.
I still hope Armitage returns, if not, you're the blame.
(That was the point, you see.)
(That was the point, you see.)
GAD complaints -> A-level chemistry
Hmmmm... The FOG's a funny place!
Hmmmm... The FOG's a funny place!
turbonutter wrote:
A catalyst id defined as
> something which speeds up a reaction but is not used up during the
> reaction.
Wrongish. A catalyst is something that speeds up a reaction without itself changing. The amount of catalyst can reduce slightly, buts whats left is the same as before the reaction, ie not changed molecularly (sp?)
A catalyst id defined as
> something which speeds up a reaction but is not used up during the
> reaction.
Wrongish. A catalyst is something that speeds up a reaction without itself changing. The amount of catalyst can reduce slightly, buts whats left is the same as before the reaction, ie not changed molecularly (sp?)
Grix Thraves wrote:
> A catalyst is described as something that speeds up a process.
It is also not used up during the reaction. That is the definition of a catalyst.
Grix, we did this not days ago, just before the exam. A catalyst id defined as something which speeds up a reaction but is not used up during the reaction.
> A catalyst is described as something that speeds up a process.
It is also not used up during the reaction. That is the definition of a catalyst.
Grix, we did this not days ago, just before the exam. A catalyst id defined as something which speeds up a reaction but is not used up during the reaction.
(2.)
2.
2.
Page: