Check out our Monthly Survey Page to see what our users are running.

Bum Simulator will simulate life as a homeless person

By - | Views: 21,641

Yup, this seems to be a very real game. Bum Simulator [Steam] is a game that's going to turn a few heads, with it show off life as a homeless person. It could end up being a little controversial too, I'm sure a few people will have some interesting opinions on this one.

I'm not sure what to make of it, as it looks mildly amusing, but it makes me feel a little weird. Can't be much worse than the thousands of other violent games we have I suppose and highlights the issues some people have to go through. A modern-life survival sim? Could be interesting.

Anyway…here's the trailer:

YouTube Thumbnail
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Accept Cookies & Show   Direct Link

I have to admit, the bit with the pigeons gave me a chuckle.

The feature list is a little amusing, here's what they say it has:

  • Discover your inner bum powers
  • Tame the infamous city pigeons
  • Solve the mystery of sewer rat people
  • Learn the secrets of Alcohol Alchemy
  • ...and much more!

Bum Simulator is due out in October and it seems it will include Linux support, as they've actually filled out the Linux system requirements. Find it on Steam.

Thanks for the tip, NeoTheFox.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Tags: Simulation, Steam
8 Likes, Who?
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG, Humble Store and Paradox Interactive. See more here.
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
65 comments
Page: «7/7
  Go to:

TheSHEEEP 14 May, 2018
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
tuubiA bit more seriously: I guess there's just no way for an organization you don't agree with (or any independent researcher) to publish statistics or research that supports their cause without you calling it out on an agenda. You know that's the kind of mindset that keeps the intelligent design kooks, the climate change deniers and flat earthers of the world in the dark. Of course everyone has an agenda, but both (proper) journalism and science have guidelines and a peer-review process to combat this.
There are still flat earthers?
Anyway, the problem many of those groups have is that their logic is fundamentally flawed and can easily be disproven by applying simple logic, you don't even need facts (though they help). They will still not believe you, of course, because in the end fools will believe whatever the hell they want. Reality itself cannot harm them.
Climate change deniers are often misrepresented, though. Many just claim that it isn't clear that mankind caused the change (which I agree with, there's just no clear proof that couldn't just be coincidence, we might never know). However, it doesn't matter who or what caused it, it only matters how we deal with the consequences.

tuubiThe right way to control the growth of populations is through education, access to contraceptives and better standards of living. You might not believe it but these have actually proven to be the most effective ways to do it.
I do believe it.
But how is it helping to just cure people of ailments and give them food and clothing and send them to their daily lives again, which will just end up increasing the overpopulation, ending up with MORE people that then cannot all help any more?
At the same time, I doubt these organizations have the means to operate on a country-wide scale, also giving out education, contraceptives, etc. By that point, they'd BE the government. See my point below...

TheSHEEEP"How could saving people ever have negative consequences?" is something I rarely see them ask themselves. It would not be a "good" thought.
Or maybe they're not idiots and they do understand this. Have you considered that? I'm sure you've never bothered checking, but they do include risks and negative effects in their public research (if not in their marketing materials, understandably) and they couldn't hide their failures even if they wanted to. These are openly discussed in their conferences and strategy papers, at least for the mentioned organizations. They're big, but they're not corporations. Their organization models make it very hard to keep any hidden agendas.

tuubi
TheSHEEEPNow, the number of children receiving basic education and health care is exactly what I was talking about earlier. It makes the situation of those people "barely tolerable", instead of "intolerable" which would eventually lead to a change from within.
No. Education is the basic necessity for a community to start on the road to self-sufficiency in today's global society. You might swallow the idiocy even our own government is spouting currently, but inhospitable living conditions do not inspire people to fix things. They just force them to exhaust all their mental and physical energy on the struggle to survive. Pushes them deeper down the rabbit hole so to speak.
That is an absurd theory.
If reality was anything like that, events like the French Revolution or the American War of Indipendence or the Uprising of the former British Indian colonies or other similar events would have never happened.
If the majority of a people's situation becomes dire enough, they revolt in one way or another. Change under such circumstances is inevitable - if no "third party" intervenes.

Now, I might agree with the education part. Education is the surest way to enable someone to find ways out of their misery on their own.
But if you counteract at the same time by providing what the government should provide (health care), you only become part of the government, if you want it or not. And you only slow down the change that you want to bring - it is simply inefficient. I don't disagree with the goals, I disagree with the methods, if you want.
Too much helping, too little "help yourselves, here's how to".
At that point, why not go all the way and become the government? But that would be called colonialism or imperialism and isn't really to en vogue right now.
"What have the Romans ever done for us?!" ;)

Maybe the next 30 years will prove me wrong. The last 30 certainly didn't.
Of all the 3rd world countries, only few managed to truly improve their situation. Like India, or China. China even to a point where they will (in due time) likely become the primary world power - if nothing unforeseen happens and their upwards trend continues just as the US' downwards trend does.
And lo and behold - they did it all without interference from any western organisation (other than trading with them).
It is almost as if interference of those companies did not help African countries at all, maybe even the opposite...

tuubiYou can call your arguments logical, but that doesn't necessarily make them so. We're not discussing basic arithmetic here but complex issues. Facts are necessary to make proper judgments.
Everything is based on logic. Except love, hate and morals, maybe ;)
Facts are results, they are not required to predict results, or to discuss theories.
If it was any different, there would never be any theories.


Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 14 May 2018 at 10:30 am UTC
tuubi 14 May, 2018
TheSHEEEP
tuubiThe right way to control the growth of populations is through education, access to contraceptives and better standards of living. You might not believe it but these have actually proven to be the most effective ways to do it.
I do believe it.
But how is it helping to just cure people of ailments and give them food and clothing and send them to their daily lives again, which will just end up increasing the overpopulation?
That's not the big picture though. None of the organizations I just mentioned do that and call it a day.

TheSHEEEP
tuubi
TheSHEEEPNow, the number of children receiving basic education and health care is exactly what I was talking about earlier. It makes the situation of those people "barely tolerable", instead of "intolerable" which would eventually lead to a change from within.
No. Education is the basic necessity for a community to start on the road to self-sufficiency in today's global society. You might swallow the idiocy even our own government is spouting currently, but inhospitable living conditions do not inspire people to fix things. They just force them to exhaust all their mental and physical energy on the struggle to survive. Pushes them deeper down the rabbit hole so to speak.
That is an absurd theory.
If reality was anything like that, events like the French Revolution or the American War of Indipendence or the Uprising of the former British Indian colonies or other similar events would have never happened.
If the majority of a people's situation becomes dire enough, they revolt in one way or another. Change under such circumstances is inevitable - if no "third party" intervenes.
Just take a closer look at all these incidents and notice the fact that all of these uprisings and revolts have actually been pushed on by people who have had the resources and means to do it. Slaves pretty much never led the efforts to overthrow their slavemasters, and the oppressed poor almost never took control without some symphatetic (or simply power-grabbing) party leading them. The underdog stories are mostly just stories, and the realities behind them are very different.

TheSHEEEPNow, I might agree with the education part. Education is the surest way to enable someone to find ways out of their misery on their own.
But if you counteract at the same time by providing what the government should provide (health care), you only become part of the government, if you want it or not. And you only slow down the change that you want to bring - it is simply inefficient. I don't disagree with the goals, I disagree with the methods, if you want.
Too much helping, too little "help yourselves, here's how to".
At that point, why not go all the way and become the government? But that would be called colonialism or imperialism and isn't really to en vogue right now.
"What have the Romans ever done for us?!" ;)
Your thinking is still too black-and-white, all-or-nothing to my taste, but hey, at least we're starting to find some common ground. :P

TheSHEEEPMaybe the next 30 years will prove me wrong. The last 30 certainly didn't.
Of all the 3rd world countries, only few managed to truly improve their situation. Like India, or China. China even to a point where they will (in due time) likely become the primary world power - if nothing unforeseen happens and their upwards trend continues just as the US' downwards trend does.
And lo and behold - they did it all without interference from any western organisation (other than trading with them).
It is almost as if interference of those companies did not help African countries at all, maybe even the opposite...
I don't see how this shows that relief organizations do more harm than good. All I see is "maybe".

TheSHEEEP
tuubiYou can call your arguments logical, but that doesn't necessarily make them so. We're not discussing basic arithmetic here but complex issues. Facts are necessary to make proper judgments.
Everything is based on logic. Except love, hate and morals, maybe ;)
Facts are results, they are not required to predict results, or to discuss theories.
If it was any different, there would never be any theories.
That's not how science works. You make a hypothesis, you test it, then you refine your theory based on the results. And if you're researching something extremely complicated like the issues we're discussing here, you'll do it again, and again, and again... That's because you might not see results until a couple of generations later.

Of course, politicians won't talk about anything that doesn't produce results during their time in office, which makes modern politics inherently short-sighted.
BOYSSSSS 5 years 14 May, 2018
Akon Has Done More for Africans in One Year Than Most Charities Have Done in Decades
https://thefreethoughtproject.com/akon-africans-year-charities-decades/
tuubi 14 May, 2018
BOYSSSSSAkon Has Done More for Africans in One Year Than Most Charities Have Done in Decades
https://thefreethoughtproject.com/akon-africans-year-charities-decades/
As reported by Akon's charity group. :)

Seems like a successful charity project, but the article reads more like marketing than journalism.
oldrocker99 17 May, 2018
As someone who has helped the homeless, I find the concept to be disgusting.

The homeless, to contradict "Saint" Ronald Reagan, do not "choose to be homeless." A very large number of Americans are one paycheck away from insolvency. A medical bill can leave a whole family insolvent. And the Republicans persist in taking health care away from the poorest, so they can give big tax breaks to the rich. Of course, the rich STILL don't have enough money.

It's pretty easy to ridicule the "least of these" (read Matthew 25) from a warm, comfortable house or apartment. Grow a heart, and do not buy this game.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on Patreon, Liberapay or Paypal. We have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed exclusive articles. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!