James

[color=#606060]The problem here is that you can't really talk about Wii's online features in general terms. Each game presents a different online experience, by virtue of the fact that Wii does not have a centralized Xbox Live type system. I personally think that Xbox Live has set the standard - I use it and I love it. Wii has nothing to compete, really. And that's definitely a problem, especially when you consider that other elements of the Wii interface are incredibly elegant and easy to use. As far as online play with SSBB...I personally don't favor online for this title. That has less to do with implementation and the realities of online gameplay - a game like SSBB would require a much faster/clearer connection than just about any other online game. [i]Any[/i] latency whatsoever in a game like SSBB would utterly kill the experience. And I don't think Nintendo - or anyone - can guarantee that.[/color]

[color=#606060]I don't know how anyone can suggest that Wii is a repackaged GameCube. Why? Because it's only twice as powerful? Rubbish. Hardware power has little to do with the software lineup. Xbox 360 has more in common with GameCube than Wii does, all things considered. Anyway, Super Mario Galaxy is still very much my most anticipated game. Luckily I won't have to wait until next year to play it - Nintendo Australia were on the ball with this one. Now that I have Bioshock and Halo 3, I can only think of a couple of Xbox 360 games that I'm really anticipating. I'm hoping that Orange Box comes out in Australia, for one. And I'm very much looking forward to Rez HD.[/color]

[quote]I still get the feeling that people hate Halo cause it's the best. You can blame the 'poor AI' and 'poor level design' all you want but I look at Call of Duty, Half-Life 2, and other FPS in the exact same way. Call of Duty had some of the nicest level design ever. As a matter of fact; France never looked so good but those Nazis just loved standing there and getting shot in the head. Those combine soldiers sure are smart! They strafe. Splicers? My god! Nothing has ever ran at me and tried to hit me with a pipe before! Revolutionary! [/quote] [color=#606060]I can't speak for those who "hate" Halo, because I certainly don't. But it's probably not the epitome of first person shooters either. And I should also point out that I don't think the A.I. in either Half-Life 2 or Bioshock was revolutionary. I simply mean that Halo's wasn't - not that H-L 2 or Bioshock's were. Half-Life 2 actually brought a lot of new elements to the table and implemented them well, where Halo 3 (and all Halo games, really) have a tendency of standing on the shoulders of great games and incorporating popular elements that already exist. As I said though, I think Halo 3 does this incredibly well - and there's merit in that. But when people suggest that Halo somehow redefined FPS games...I don't really see much evidence of that. In terms of A.I. and stuff...I think you illustrated my point. Most FPS games contain enemies that use pretty basic A.I. Expecting more of Halo is probably expecting too much. I suppose one of the bigger differences is that in Half-Life 2, the Combine talk to each other, they relate with NPCs and they generally seem to be more lifelike (and sinister - just remember the opening train station sequence in Half-Life 2). There are a couple of enemies who have that element of realism in Halo 3, but it isn't consistent. And there's no question that Halo (the first game) suffered from generally mediocre level design. Halo 2 improved this somewhat and I think Halo 3 has nailed most of it. Level design shouldn't really be brushed aside, either. It's a pretty fundamental aspect. I suppose my overall point is that Halo 3 is a great game - certainly the best Halo. But Halo as a franchise has always been massively overrated. Sometimes the games that Halo has borrowed ideas from are not given their own due credit, which is a shame. Overrated doesn't mean bad, it just means overrated. An overrated game can still be brilliant.[/color]

[quote]I'll fight anyone who says its overrated because, well, it deserves the hype it gets. It really does. It's so accessible and so refined and has so many things going for it. Great story, amazing multi-player options, many standards in the FPS genre taken to a new degree. [/quote] [color=#606060]If you think about how much hype this game actually got...more than Gears of War and probably more than even Half-Life 2...can you really say that it lives up to that hype 100%? If it's the most over-hyped game in history, it should also probably be far and away the best game in history too, lol. I mean, I think Halo 3 is great. It really is very refined and polished in many respects - you can see the years of evolution in the franchise all coming together in Halo 3. But it's not a revolution and it does little to dramatically advance the genre (at least in single-player; I [i]do[/i] think that the Forge concept is awesome, even though I haven't played multiplayer yet). So I'm really referring to the core gameplay in the single player mode there. The shortness is a bit of an issue too. Heroic difficulty isn't quite enough, but Legendary...I don't know. Do I want to play the game with the same exact A.I., except the enemies just take more hits to kill? That's not more "difficult" as such, it's just more annoying. To each his own, I guess. Even incorporating my experience with Halo 3, I can probably safely say that no FPS game has impressed me as much as Half-Life 2 did. At least, Half-Life 2 set a single player standard that other games haven't really matched yet. The only exception might be Bioshock, but Bioshock has a fairly different focus than either Half-Life 2 or Halo. Having said that, Halo 3 is still quite different to Half-Life 2 in some respects. The world is far more static - far less interactive. The game is more specifically focused on blowing up everything in sight, which means there is pretty much no puzzle solving whatsoever. This aspect is not necessarily a negative, it just means that Halo 3 is a very specific type of shooter. It does what it sets out to do very well, but I wouldn't say that it redefines the entire genre in any particular way - mostly it seems to borrow concepts that already exist and implement them all incredibly well. That alone is very positive and makes the game great fun, but it doesn't make the game revolutionary in the way that a great deal of media have portrayed.[/color]

[color=#606060]I bought this two days ago and I'm nearly finished (I'm playing on um...Heroic difficulty? One down from Legendary). I should preface this by saying that I was never a huge Halo fan; I often felt that the series was overrated. The first Halo bored me quite a bit, although to be fair I never finished it - I just didn't have the interest to keep going with it. What I played certainly didn't interest me though. Halo 2 was significantly better, mostly due to the fact that the level design had been improved. It certainly wasn't on the same level as various other shooters, but it was [i]better[/i] than the first game and [i]good[/i] by genre standards. Lots of things were overrated though. Multiplayer and particularly dual wielding; I never understood why the latter was such a big deal and so "genre changing". I mean, yes, there are some convenient aspects to it...it can work well. But revolutionary? I didn't think so then and I still don't now. Anyway...I liked Halo 2. I didn't think it was revolutionary or even "better than most" shooters. It was just good and sometimes it was very good. I'm nearly finished Halo 3's campaign mode so I've had enough time to experience most of it. While it's true that Halo 3 is "much the same", I think Bungie struck a good balance in general. Halo 3 is a more immersive experience in general; if I had to compare it to anything, I'd compare it to Half-Life 2. In terms of story progression and the way story is weaved into gameplay, Halo 3 seems far more capable and confident at striking the appropriate balance than previous Halo games. Part of that probably does come down to presentation, admittedly. Halo 3's visuals are a step-up from Halo 2 (obviously) and as part of that, animation related to pushing forward the story is also improved. I think the overall effect is that the world feels a bit more alive - again, I'd compare it to Half-Life 2. Halo 3 is a bit rougher and less polished than Half-Life 2 when it comes to some aspects of presentation (especially facial animation), but still, it's an improvement overall. In terms of gameplay...it's really hard to put my finger on what's better about this game. I mean, for the most part, it really is just the same as previous titles. The interface is better, the weaponry is (in places) a bit more polished...there's a bit more variety and the pace is slightly better. It almost seems like there are lots of little improvements that ultimately add up to become more than the sum of their parts. I haven't played multiplayer yet so I can't comment on that. A.I. was mentioned here too. As far as I'm concerned, the A.I. is pretty much what you'd expect in a shooter. Is it innovative? No, not really. Enemies tend to be much better at physically dodging your attacks in Halo 3...but other than that I don't see much improvement. Some enemies are made tougher with extra armor and stuff, but really, none of this is a big improvement. I read a lot about the enemies using tactics based on heirarchy. I didn't really see evidence of this at all. Enemies pretty much have set positions that they patrol and some enemies are quite good at dodging attacks (particularly grenades). But this dodging is about the only aspect that seems relatively clever. I didn't notice any real team behaviour or anything remotely like it. Does that hurt the game? I don't think so. As I said before, it's pretty standard fare. You could only be disappointed with it if you were expecting something more. And if you were expecting something more, you're probably expecting too much of Halo. As I said earlier, I don't think this franchise has ever truly lived up to the hype. Anyway, from what I've played, I definitely think it's the best Halo yet. Much nicer visuals (not quite on the Bioshock level, but probably somewhere around the Half-Life 2 level - again), better weapon balancing (for campaign at least), slightly improved enemies, improved story presentation and significantly better level design... it's all really a series of minor updates that come together to make a more engaging game. In many ways, I think Halo 3 is what the first Halo should have been. Then, perhaps, it would have been at least highly evolutionary. Still, I'm happy with it. It's the only Halo game I've bothered to buy and I'm glad I did. I've definitely been enjoying it all the way through; it hasn't bored me at all or annoyed me with pointless repetition. So I'm pretty happy with it and I'm sure Halo fans will be too.[/color]

[color=#606060]I don't really understand the controversy about Ahmadinejad visiting the United States. The fact of the matter is that he is the head of state of a country. Yes, he heads an oppressive regime and yes, you can definitely accuse Iran of multiple forms of human rights violations. But you know, again, he is a head of state and he was in the US to speak to the United Nations. Even the worst of people do have certain rights, especially as sovereign states. I don't think that allowing him to speak at Columbia University equates to support for him, either. I didn't see the logic in that argument from some American commentators. I had heard that Bollinger's comments went into quite some detail about Iran's place in the world - unfortunately we only hear the rude soundbytes that the media choose to play. I didn't quite think Bollinger should have called Ahmadinejad petty as such...but his comments about being provocative or ignorant are definitely fair. Ultimately I think it was reasonable for him to provide an alternative viewpoint. I suppose at the end of the day if I were Bollinger, I could have criticised Iran without being directly rude to its President. On the other hand, Ahmadinejad has said some outright insane and offensive things and this is what free speech unfortunately affords at times. Bollinger may have been a little harsh in some respects, but he certainly had the right to say what he did...and he certainly had the right to hold the opinion. So I suppose at the end I don't have much of an opinion about Bollinger; my annoyance is directed more toward the media, especially those who equate a public speaking engagement with support for a dictator. The two are (and should be) unrelated.[/color]

[color=#606060][b]Consoles I Own (or have owned – a few have been sold):[/b] NES SNES Nintendo 64 GameCube Game Boy Game Boy Pocket Game Boy Color Game Boy Advance (sold) Game Boy Advance SP Nintendo DS (Japanese import) Nintendo DS Lite Sega Mega Drive II (sold – regrettably) Sega Mega CD (sold – very regrettably) Sega Saturn Dreamcast PlayStation PlayStation 2 (currently on my fourth PS2 – thanks, Sony!) PlayStation 3 Xbox 360 Various Game & Watch I’m sure there’s more for that list, but I can’t really remember at the moment. That list comes off the top of my head. [b]Consoles I’d Like to Own:[/b] Virtual Boy Neo Geo CD PSP “Slim” “300 Edition” Xbox 360 Why the Virtual Boy? Well, Nintendo Australia never released it here (which was probably a smart move on their part – they probably would have had thousands of unsold systems otherwise). And although I’ve heard all the horror stories about it, I’d still very much like to own one. I could import, but I’ve never really bothered. Neo Geo CD is a similar kind of thing, although I do believe that console was released here. However, as far as I know, it’s very rare. Seemed like a mildly interesting system and I think it’d just be kind of cool to own one. As for PSP…I’ve wanted one for a while but never enough to buy the original model. I was waiting for a “lite” version to be released. Now that it has…well, we’ll see. There are a few PSP games I’d like to own. But I’m in no rush to go out and buy a PSP at this stage. And the Xbox, well, I really like the colour scheme on the 300 Edition. I’ll never bother even trying to get one of those, but still, I wouldn’t say no to one. :catgirl: [/color]

[color=#606060]At the moment I am just playing two games: Bioshock and Super Paper Mario. Bioshock continues to be amazing. And Super Paper Mario is awesome; I actually prefer it to the regular Paper Mario games. It still manages to have a story and lots of puzzles...but I prefer the platformer-style gameplay. So I'm really hoping that this becomes an ongoing series for Nintendo. It's the first Wii game I've played in ages and it's the first "full" game (other than Twilight Princess) that I'm really finding to be worth the effort. Now I just have to wait for Super Mario Galaxy...that'll be a tough wait.[/color]

[color=#606060]Sandy does make a good point with his first paragraph - "sex" and "physical contact" are two things that overlap frequently. Could you have a relationship without specific intercourse? Yes, I'm sure you could. But what if you didn't cuddle or kiss? What if you didn't hold hands? That would make it tougher I think. Sex is great and all but I know I could personally never go without that physical expression of love (in the general sense as mentioned above). To me...my relationship would almost cease to be romantic if I weren't experiencing that closeness (especially since I love all of that stuff).[/color]

[quote]Despite how "essential" sex is made out to be, it's still only sex, and I want more out of a relationship than knowing that I'm going to knock-up a girl in the name of my love for her[/quote] [color=#606060]I don't think anyone is really suggesting anything other than that. All they're saying is that sex is a fundamental part of a romantic relationship...which is true. That doesn't mean people think it's the most important thing or that it should be entered into lightly. Edit: Sorry, I thought I was on the last page...apparently not! Haha.[/color] [quote]To those who say that sex is an essential part of a romantic relationship, I have to ask: do you believe that that relationships are impossible for those who cannot have sex?[/quote] [color=#606060]No not at all. I think it depends though...if one person is physically capable and the other isn't, there might be an issue. If both people aren't? Then it ceases to matter, really. I mean there are people who have been married for years and who don't have sex anymore...but I think there is always a risk that this is damaging to the relationship on some level. Then again, sex has a different meaning for different people. I think most - who aren't virgins - would say that sex is an important part of a healthy relationship. But if both people have a lower libido or something...well, anything can work if it's mutually agreed. Different things for different people.[/color]

[quote]I think it's my job as an European to remind you guys that the whole abstinence movement is quite an American thing. [/quote] [color=#606060]Yeah, I mean, there are obviously basic "legal ages" around the world...but the massive abstinence movement in the US is definitely pretty unique to the US. In Australia, there's a basic age requirement but other than that it really comes down to individual choice. The most conservative families tend to have opinions about this (related to no sex before marriage), but generally speaking it isn't an issue. I lost my virginity at sixteen and that seemed reasonable at the time. I don't regret it...it was simply time for me. I was in the right situation with the right person and I was mature enough to deal with it. Now at 24, I have no regrets about that. I know that if I wasn't capable of handling it, I'd never have done it. It's all about knowing what you're comfortable with and not bowing to peer pressure just for the sake of it (though peer pressure has never been an issue for me, so it's hard for me to comment on facing it).[/color]

[color=#606060]Ah, the mysteries of an online community. That I don't remember the details of this "coming out" probably speaks volumes about my attitude toward it - not that it was significant/insigificant, but that I don't personally place much stock in these things. By that I mean...I tend to take it for granted that many people - especially teenagers (but sometimes older people as well) - are always, in some way, creating a "version" of themselves online. I mean with me it's pretty much a case of what you see is what you get (although I'm sure people imagine me to be very dry in real life at times, when I probably don't sound anything like the way I type in person). But I recognize - and have always accepted - that online anonymity kind of gives a person some free license to be themselves...even if that means being something they aren't "in real life". So I guess I'm used to these revelations in some way. I know it's different if it's someone who is closer to you...but in general I tend to start with the presumption that things are not necessarily always what they seem (and not necessarily in a negative sense).[/color]

[color=#606060]White has recently retired so now is probably the ideal time to be talking about this. I will speak with Desbreko about appointing a new Event Master and from there we will look at this type of thread - I really think it's a great idea and I don't think community events have much of a future without greater membership involvement (in terms of member-submitted ideas and member-created events).[/color]

[color=#606060]How is this idea going, Charles? Do you think you will launch it soon?[/color]

[color=#606060]All done. Finally had time to sit down for five seconds to edit the thing, haha. [/color]

[quote]Sit back, relax and talk about anything not covered by another forum here.[/quote] [color=#606060]This description looks as good as any to me. At this stage I don't think we should even have to say "play nice" - that should be a given.[/color]

[color=#606060]That description was really intended to have a warm/relaxed feeling to it. But don't forget that it was written years ago and has never been updated really. As far as changing and such...I actually think we are constantly [i]rejecting[/i] the status quo at OtakuBoards. I personally love to change things; I wish I could work full-time on OB, lol. Unfortunately when things do change some people tend to say "Things are changing too much, please keep some things the same like we remember them!" In any case, I'm more than happy for the forum description to change if that's what members want. It can be changed to whatever you like, so long as the word "joint" isn't included (as much as that might keep the place calm ~_^). Edit: And yes, to agree with John...I don't think there was anything uptight about this thread. Seems to me that it's intended to be funny/random more than anything, lol.[/color]

[color=#606060]I think this personality type is pretty common. I even see it on OB at times, lol. I have some people that I work with who are very much like this - everything is doom and gloom and nothing is ever positive. It can be annoying because by nature I'm a pretty calm person. I usually don't worry too much about things which are outside my control. And I'm not really interested in gossping about things. Yet I have some coworkers who are incredibly negative all the time...sometimes it can get frustrating. All you can really do is ingore that, I think. Or just tell people you aren't interested in all the bad news. The more you hear, the more you start to get dragged down by it I think.[/color]

[quote name='PWNED']I didn't even know that you could get a license to buy one in Victoria, Uh huh. [/QUOTE] [color=#606060]I never had a license for one. I bought it from a very large bird-centric pet store (I think it was called Birdland on Princes Highway) and they never said anything about a license. Having said that, it was ages ago - probably ten years or more ago, so maybe the law was different then. As for those who think my dog is scary, if you saw her in person your heart would melt - she's so affectionate! She is a bit of a sook actually. She isn't happy unless she's being cuddled (or played with). I'll have to get some more pictures of her to put in this thread. Anyway, I'm really impressed with some of the pets in this thread. Although I feel bad about the nasty kitty...nothing worse than a cat who isn't affectionate. I like cats when they are very loving, but I really can't stand cats that are nothing but nasty.[/color]

[quote]he Player and the Character are not the same person, and the Player needs to know exactly how their character would react to any situation, because chances are the reaction is going to be different...but probably not drastically so, unless the Player is just phenomenal at characterization. [/quote] [color=#606060]This is [i]so[/i] true. In some of my RPGs I'm sure that both myself and other players' characters incorproate elements of themselves to some extent...but in my experience, the most fun RPGs are the ones where people create true characters outside of themselves. There is something immensely satisfying about creating an entirely new persona, as opposed to developing a character that is merely an extension of yourself. This is more interesting (albeit more challenging) to write, but it's also infinitely more interesting to read for others I think. [/color] [quote]Knowing why they are who they are helps. I find a history is essential, especially since our experiences define our personality. So if your character is incredibly shy, ask them why. Maybe you've got a half-feline who can't stand crossing water even in human form.[/quote] [color=#606060]So true. I agree with this 100%. The key is consistency and realism. "Realism" doesn't mean absence of the supernatural, it simply refers to consistency within the chosen universe. In Kill Adam we had a really wild and crazy Tarantino-esque world, but that didn't give people license to do [i]anything[/i] - it just meant that your character had to be consistent with that environment. And because everyone stuck to that, we had something that ended up being really fun to read. I think this is true for all good RPGs.[/color] [quote]But you need to remember that it's not your story. You're just helping. It's the creator's story, and it needs to go where they want it to. They most likely don't want to spend time incessantly heading you off and pulling you back into their plot. [/quote] [color=#606060]I think this is partly true. Again in the case of Kill Adam (but really in any fun RPG I've been in), the key is that it is a collaborative story. Yes, the creator can set a general direction (as I did in KA), but I always basically implied that the story was built from everyone's contribution. In many cases, my decisions about chapters were based largely on what others had written. So I never set out with everything planned - it was an evolution. And being able to feed from what contributors have put in is a really great thing. So although I think you can either have a more tightly or loosely controlled RPG, you have to allow all players to be virtually equal members of the story - you have to give up some control and allow people to inject their own back stories and situations into the plot. If you do that, the other writers will feel that they have some ownership over the project...and it will also make for a more interesting story to read, I think.[/color]

[quote]My God, you all really need to go to Group Sounds for a while to just relax and lighten up, go look at cat captions, laugh and then come back here and hang your collective heads in shame for being so serious. [/quote] [color=#606060]It's not that they're being so serious, it's that you just need to act like your real self on OtakuBoards. That's the reason why nobody expects it of you, lol. :catgirl: As far as the responses go in this thread though...I can honestly say that some really have surprised me (although what Gavin said didn't, really).[/color]

[color=#606060]Yep, ShineGet.com was separate to the Mario Forum and neither hinged on the other's success. There were a few elements with SG that weren't quite working but I have to say, I wish more people had seen it - it had tremendous potential and there was quite a lot of content completed for it.[/color]

[quote]You got lucky because you were paying extra, I don't really want to pay that extra fee... there's got to be another way around it. I heard that (in the states at least, I don't know about Canada) that if you report your missing card on the day of, you're not allowed to be charged for more than $50 of what was spent. Some plans don't get charged at all. But I'm not sure how that all works out, disputing charges like that.[/quote] [color=#606060]Well there are two things about this. First, you have to know that your card was used inappropriately on the day it was used - it's unlikely you'll know unless you either a) retrieve a statement (which may not show the transaction on the day) or b) you go to use it and there's no money available. If someone uses your card (and it isn't you), then you should not have to pay for that transaction - it should be wiped and the person should be pursued/reported. I only pay a tiny yearly fee to have extra card protection and monitoring...and I feel it's worth it. You don't want to mess around with a credit card.[/color]

[color=#606060]I just bought my dad a PS3 for father's day and it included MotorStorm and F1. He's more interested in F1, but I've had some serious time with MotorStorm this weekend. I have to say, initially, I wasn't quite sure about it. The controls were weird and I didn't quite get it. But I realized that this was only because the PS3 controller is so awful - especially when you play a game that relies on the analog triggers! It's actually a painful experience, literally. lol Anyway, having said that, I played more and got further...and I have to say, this is a really great game. MotorStorm is probably most like an arcade rally title, except that it's almost like a combination of a rally title and something like Mario Kart; it's definitely "rallying" (in the sense that you're driving off the beaten track), but there is a combination of viscious competitors and pretty extreme track designs that makes it something else entirely. So far I'm about halfway through and I've been loving it. I think my favourite tracks at the moment are The Tenderizer and Raingod Mesa (hopefully I got those names right). The Mudpool is kind of fun as well and there's another mesa-like track that is really crazy (but I am forgetting the name at the moment). I'm not really sure what else to say about the game except that it's just a total blast. It's hectic, frantic and crazy. At all times there are car parts flying past you, vehicles are slamming each other into cliff walls and you're constantly driving through smoke or sparks as a result of some major collisions. One of the coolest things is that the A.I. is actually pretty relentless. Other drivers have no hesitation going after you. I've seen too many weird/aggressive A.I. stunts to even count - at one point a vehicle went over a jump and landed right on my roof; at another point a truck tried to t-bone me so that I'd lose grip and slam into a rock and yet another time, when I was driving a big rig, a smaller buggy tried to slip its nose underneath my rear wheel to cause me to flip on my roof. It's really a crazy game. The only thing I haven't liked so far is the controls for the bikes; they're so touchy that they are quite difficult to master. With practice it is possible to do pretty well with them, but nevertheless, they are (in my view) probably the toughest vehicle in the game to truly master. Anyway, I'd definitely recommend this game to any new PS3 owner. It's one you don't want to miss. I think it'll continue to occupy most of my gaming time over the coming weeks. ~_^[/color]

[color=#606060]Credit cards definitely have pros and cons but I think that if you handle them appropriately they are really valuable. First and foremost, there are just some situations where you'll really need one. For example, hotel bookings. Most hotels (pretty much all I've ever dealt with) require a credit card. If you don't present one they will often take more money than needed (usually they will take additional money as a deposit to protect themselves if you use mini bar items or things like that). Credit cards are also a useful form of identification in some areas - so they have uses outside simply the financial aspect. I did experience one incident of credit card fraud, whereby someone in Italy apparently tried to buy a train pass on my card. Luckily I pay extra for 24 hour transaction monitoring. The transaction was picked up and put on hold until the bank could confirm that the purchase was made by me or not. When they determined that it wasn't me, they immediately cancelled the card and sent me a new one with new numbers and such. So although credit card fraud is a problem, the truth is that fraud can occur on many levels and in many different ways; you are never invulnerable. Your best bet is, if you can, to find a company that will offer extra fraud protection. It's worth the money. In my case, I only use my credit card for particular circumstances (like booking flights, hotels and things of that nature). I also use the card for certain major purchases (i.e. computers). I always keep to two particular rules: 1) If I spend a smaller amount of money on the card (or if the card goes under its limit at all), I immediately pay back into it to bring it over its limit. 2) If I want to make a big purchase, I put extra money on my card to put it into credit. This way I'm not actually borrowing any money at all, I'm just spending my own money that I've put on top. So say you have a $2,000 limit for example. If you put another $1,000 on that, you'll have $3,000 available. But if you only spend the $1,000, you're basically spending your own money. This allows you to have a transaction history on your card without actually borrowing anything. The benefit of this is that you are constantly contributing to your credit rating without putting yourself out too much. But yeah, generally I'd agree with what others here are saying; if you're an impulse shopper or you aren't diligent with money, a credit card can be a problem. You have to be careful. But as long as you are, it shouldn't ever be a horror story - it can be a very useful part of your life if you manage it properly.[/color]