I’m Pissed Off …
by Jessica Carr on October 4, 2007 at 1:06 am
“Do you mind if I take a leak before I kill you?”
I am a sporadic gamer, and when I do play games, I play random ones. I’m not devoted to one game in particular; however, I do enjoy Madden NFL…a lot. Recently while playing, True Crime: Streets of LA, I noticed an interesting cut scene. There was a Russian Mafia goon urinating, and the lead character “Nick Kang” simultaneously kicked him is his back. Once kicked, Kang says “You have the right to soak in your own urine”.
I now understand why in June 2007, the American Medical Association considered a proposal to designate video game addiction as a mental disorder on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. And it comes as no surprise to me that in Argentina, a federal legislation states that Manufacturers and/or importers of video games are required to display the warning “Overexposure is harmful to health” on the packaging.
So we now understand, especially after certain awful and highly publicized tragedies, that excessive and obsessive gaming can lead to poor overall health, or even worse, death. However, even after reading about the 28-year-old South Korean man that died after playing Starcraft for 50 hours straight, I am still not convinced that mental or physical health should top the list of concerns. No, because you see when it comes to “gaming” and “hygiene”, we have a larger and more imperative issue.
After my mini session of playing True Crime: Streets of LA, I decided to do some homework on the subject of video games that portray or reference urination. I got in contact with an old friend from school who is now heavily involved in game development. I asked him if he could provide me with a list of games that have involved or encouraged urination. He came back with a list of “note-worthy” games, some of which included the following:
• In Redneck Rampage the players can urinate or defecate in toilets for health benefits, or “take a quick pee” anywhere for a smaller health boost at any time, once a level.
• In Overlord, one can send ones minions over beer mugs, thereafter the minion becomes intoxicated, turns away from the camera, and urinates.
• In Dead Rising, players can save your game by urinating in a urinal.
• In Postal, the player is able to urinate on anything in the game.
• In Hitman 2: Silent Assassin cut scene showing a postman urinating in the bushes, you sneak up behind him while he is urinating and take his clothes.
• Resident Evil 4: In the intro of the game one of the European Police Officers stops the SUV and gets out to urinate.
Obviously, the sole reason these games or (developers!) depict urination is because they are trying to get across the underlying message: “Dear Fanboy, you don’t need to pause the game. It’s okay, just piss all over yourself and keep playing. However, if you’re going to partake in autoeroticism, you will need to take your hands off the controller. Unless, of course, you’re playing with your Wii.”’
 |
Tags: urination, video-games |
|
|
Related Posts:
- Is Metallica the Winner or the Loser of the Week?
- Bully Returns, So Does Controversy
- The Watercooler – 30 October 2008
- Fable II Co-op Available on Day 1; New Trailer
- Media Molecule Miffed By David Reeves “Itunes Meets Ebay” LBP Comment
- This is the second largest set of Monkey Island Special Edition comparison shots I’ve ever seen!
- N4G Being Bombarded with Gears 2 Spoiler Articles Posing as News
- Guitar Hero for the Fat Man…
41 Comments » |
on October 4, 2007 4:31 pm
Hmmm. I think you kind of went a little too far with the comparison/analogy. I don’t really think that gaming companies are condoning the “play until you die” mentality.
And to be fair, most deaths as a result of gaming addiction are MMO related. Games with endings tend NOT to kill people.
Still, good work.
on October 4, 2007 7:03 pm
Agreeing with the above stated.
And, playing any game for 50 hours straight can kill you.
Also
Why did you suddenly link peeing with overall health in games?
Intense.
on October 5, 2007 4:09 am
This is a poor piece of writing at best. I fail to see the link between urination and gaming addiction.
I can barely find the words to describe what is wrong with your assumption that urinating is somehow wrong or sinful.
Gaming companies do not want gamers to game until they die. This is BAD PRESS for them. Urination is depicted as a plot device, as a required function or as humour. There is no conspiracy amongst game publishers to kill their clients off.
If you are struggling to find something to write about so much that you have to resort to this kind of scaremongering, I suggest you find a new job.
on October 5, 2007 4:39 am
you know she might look for other work but the way I hear it, she just got canned from being a recruiter for Nintendo.
on October 5, 2007 8:30 am
Tongue? Cheek? Maybe?
b
on October 5, 2007 10:02 am
I personally think this article would be better if it had the words “urinate” or “urination” in it more frequently. And am I the only one who wants to play Redneck Rampage now?
on October 5, 2007 10:10 am
I don’t know that there is a common thread in the some of examples above, but I play a lot of stealth games, and every now and then the player is presented with the option to take out a guard while nature calls. I think the underlying effect comes from the mammal instinct that we are vulnerable and exposed when we do this, hence the desire for privacy.
Luckily, gaming has eroded my attention span to the point that I can’t help but be distracted by the need to take a bathroom break. :)
on October 5, 2007 11:03 am
“Obviously, the sole reason these games or (developers!) depict urination is because they are trying to get across the underlying message: “Dear Fanboy, you don’t need to pause the game. It’s okay, just piss all over yourself and keep playing.”
Theres no way that they could have added the various urination aspects for in-game humor….nah…that’d be a stupid, irrational, and far-fetched conclusion.
Honestly, why would videogame companies design their videogames with the express purpose to make the consumer play their game until they died? If the consumer is dead….who the hell is going to buy their games?
on October 5, 2007 11:25 am
@Anon and everyone else who thinks I’m serious….
Get a sense of humor, and lighten up a bit. There was only one reader that could tell this was tongue in cheek. Maybe you should start reading Vonnegut. Then maybe you can have an appreciation for writers who act obscure to point out absurdity. I was just trying to be ridiculous, but I think it’s funny you all though I was serious.
-Jess
on October 5, 2007 2:17 pm
Guys, lay off a bit, she’s joking. Attractive & joking.
on October 5, 2007 2:51 pm
I think the main problem is that some people really DO think like that, how can we tell the difference? You should have added a drum role before the punch line so that people knew you were joking around…you might have added a punch line as well. *ba dum bum psch*
on October 5, 2007 4:19 pm
I get where this was supposed to be cheeky. I think though, instead of saying the industry wants us to keep playing and piss on ourselves, you should have gone the opposite route. The industry is using these images as subliminals to tell us to get off our asses, get rid of the raid bucket and venture forth to the strange new land of “Bathroomtopia”, maybe engage in this new game called “Quest to shower”.
on October 5, 2007 5:20 pm
As far as “tongue in cheek” gos, that was weak at best. It truely is a sad state of affairs when you beleive that giving the appearnce of blatent stupidity and misinformation is satire. To top it off you compare yourself to Vonnegut? You did not act obscure, you merely acted ignorant, and while ignorance does give one quite an obscuring veil, it is not humor.
on October 5, 2007 6:29 pm
@Jessica: It’s unfortunate that you are a sporadic gamer, otherwise you’d understand what you have gotten yourself into by agreeing to post gaming related articles. You will definitely find that the Internet has more than it’s fair share of whiners, pseudo-intellectuals, and your common @$%hole who feel like they have the right, nay the obligation, to attack your posts whenever they feel like it.
I wouldn’t pay too much attention to the fools attacking you.
on October 5, 2007 7:15 pm
I like absurdity, keep it coming!
on October 5, 2007 10:42 pm
Huh? Being tongue-in-cheek is to point out a strong sentiment. You don’t really have one, and the one I can see you were aiming for made a weak correlation at best. Truly, attractiveness and cohesiveness are mutually exclusive.
on October 6, 2007 2:27 am
This is not absurd. Only terrible.
-K
on October 6, 2007 3:30 am
I think people worked out you weren’t being serious, it….just wasn’t very funny. >_>
Usually I wouldn’t bother with a reply like this, but after the whole “LIGTHEN UP GUYS” thing I felt I ought to.
on October 6, 2007 4:06 am
piss in the fanboys cheerios and they don’t think its funny anymore…I don’t like you but your sense of humor is amusing.
on October 6, 2007 4:37 am
I think I agree with MoJo over anyone else here. It’s only text, so it’s hard to convey sarcasm, but I don’t even think you tried. Perhaps you were only telling to joke to appeal to the people who know you (which is fine, too) but I am guessing there are a number of people who might read this that have never even heard of you before (like myself). No surprise that those people might take you seriously; after all, you certainly wouldn’t have been the first person to make a wild allegation like that and mean it. And that one was out there, really. Interesting article.
on October 6, 2007 7:40 am
“Maybe you should start reading Vonnegut.”
The difference between your writing and the writing of Kurt Vonnegut? Humor. Kurt had a ton of it and you seem to have very little and, worse yet, absolutely no grasp on how to properly write satire.
on October 6, 2007 10:43 am
I’m just curious as to what her appearance has to do with her writing…. If this had been an article by a male, would you feel the need to say, “Guys, lay off a bit, HE’S joking. Attractive & joking.”
Or would you have said this about a male writer: “Truly, attractiveness and cohesiveness are mutually exclusive.”
I’m just trying to understand what the relevance is here. Anyone care to enlighten me?
on October 6, 2007 12:29 pm
@jenny: It’s because anonymity means that guys (and girls) on the Internet can be as vulgar and perverted as they want without fear of being caught.
That said, it’s still not a very well-written article. First time I read it, I thought she was serious, and that was annoying. Then I read through all of the comments and decided to read the article again with a different mindset, and it still wasn’t funny or interesting. Among other things, “urination” is used too much, the reference to Madden is unnecessary, the sarcasm didn’t come across well, and honestly? Just not that funny.
But does that mean that she’s a terrible writer and should quit her job? No. That just means that maybe satire isn’t exactly her forte.
on October 6, 2007 1:05 pm
She admits to not being a serious gamer. I think that her article is entertaining. I think that people need to be able to laugh at themselves, especially gamers.
on October 6, 2007 5:11 pm
*sight* we so much complain of people attacking games and our mindset that i suppose everyone is paranoid about it…
its obvious she was being sarcastic about the acceptance that videogame addiction is important for medics… but whatever… maybe this reactions is why we gamers are so critiziced.
but whatever, Jess i suppose like everyone else you just need to get better, hey no one was the best in his area after the first time! so good luck.
and for the the idiot that mentioned the Nintendo issue, please go and check what happened before vomiting over people… same for the chauvinists there. If she is woman (attractive or not) should not bring such issues abroad.
on October 6, 2007 5:44 pm
I don’t know how anyone could think that this article was not satirical. That being said, it wasn’t funny at all. Sorry, it was just stupid.
But then again, I hate Vonnegut, so maybe someone who thinks that Slaughter-House 5 was not a terrible book would like this. But I would guess not.
on October 6, 2007 6:00 pm
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention: whatever else you do, do NOT make a Wii pun again. It’s not funny, it was *never* funny, and it never will be funny. It’s just bad, and while I unfortunately have to expect that sort of thing from some people, for a professional writer to use it (moreover, as the final *punchline*) is simply inexcusable.
These criticisms might hurt (or you might blithely ignore them, and given the reputation of “internet people,” I understand the impulse), I hope you learn a valuable lesson: don’t try this again. Or at least make it *work*. I suggest running it past a few people first (in real life, of course). There is nothing to improve your writing like the cold hard opinion of people who don’t care about your feelings at all.
on October 6, 2007 6:20 pm
Come on Wii is such a moronic title for a console espeacially considering that playing games involves an input device and not only did they name the Wii to sound like an act of reliving your self they gave you a remote control so that while you play its like your holding your Wii in your hand.
If her comments or puns aren’t funny too you then likely the wii console is just as lame, any one who can write anything about the wii and take it seriously probably isn’t a real gamer or at the very least wasn’t until the wii cameout.
Maybe its not funny because some gamers actually wear diapers or defecate in socks so they don’t have to stop playing.
And I still feel dirty for having strangled that pissing guard in hitman 2 and then putting his clothes on….*shudders*.
on October 6, 2007 7:11 pm
@LordCancer: After reading your last comment about the Wii, I was instantly reminded of this video I saw. Here’s the link, you should watch it. It’s called Rejected Wii Play.
http://loadingreadyrun.com/videos/view/208/Rejected+WiiPlay+Games
I think you may like it.
on October 6, 2007 8:47 pm
@Jessica
I was almost convinced you were insane (especially after discrediting your gaming knowledge by mentioning Madden NFL, a franchise against which I hold an irrevocable grudge, as a fave) until I noticed the tagline: “Do you mind if I take a leak before I kill you?” I then proceeded to laugh immodestly at this oversight.
Granted, the humor in your article was veiled a bit too much for many readers, even for fans of the high-brow such as myself who hold their own satirical intelligence in high esteem. Granted, I’m a ‘contributing editor’ for a campus lampoon magazine, and I’m fairly critical about satirical writing, so please don’t take this personally.
Toodles!
on October 7, 2007 6:00 am
@DragonKnight24
lol Indeed, Indeed, was classic my good sir Thank you for the laugh.
on October 7, 2007 2:17 pm
@LordCancer: I knew you’d like that.
on October 8, 2007 6:06 am
It doesn’t matter if Wii is a bad name, the pun is still inexcusable.
The Wii is the only revolutionary console currently on the market. I don’t own one and probably will not because I don’t have the money, but anyone should be able to see that, even if you demand super realistic blood and gore.
on October 8, 2007 3:42 pm
whats so revolutionary about imprecise control and $50 casual mini game software packages?
the wii is a joke.
on October 8, 2007 5:38 pm
@LordCancer: If you ever used one for long you’d find that the Wii controls for SOME games are excellent, but not so much for others. I think the developers need to use them correctly. The Wii has the potential to be a great system, because of the control alone. Right now, however, the Wii is lacking in good game content (I own one) and if Nintendo doesn’t get it’s act together then the only revolution happening will be the selling of Nintendo’s rights to Sony and Microsoft. (I say this even despite the Wii’s high sales)
on October 8, 2007 5:41 pm
@Salvo: The Wii is revolutionary? Is it really? Let’s see, it uses the same technology as the GameCube(read: Last gen), it uses motion sensing (read: PowerGlove/UForce from the NES days) and still has the same, unchanged, franchises it always has.
Yeah, that’s really revolutionary alright. About the only innovation it brings is being able to charge $250 for a “next-gen” system.
on October 8, 2007 8:51 pm
lol @DragonKnight24
you forget to point out that the true revolutionary feature is how nintendo managed to repackaged and resell two gamecubes duct tape together with a miniaturized power glove in the shape of an easily insertable….*censored*.
@Talhadj
I disagree, the act of playing video games at its core requires a means to simulate precise action through an input device.
Motion control rejects this idea. Certain parties would have gamers believe that motion control in fact enhances game play but reality dictates otherwise.
Take Lair for instance, the most serious attempt at a real game to implement motion control falters because motion control is imprecise leaving you to attempt gestures multiple times to perform actions in the game.
I have not played metroid as of yet, i am honestly not a fan of the series but metroid supposedly has the best implementation thus far which im still skeptical of as the metroid prime series has had backwards controls since its inception.
I have played wii zelda and I felt the controls were frustratingly inaccurate. I have no intent of playing any of the mini game rubble that makes up the wii library with or with out precise control.
I don’t think the wiimote would make playing games, like bioshock, morrowind, or crysis any more revolutionary or satisfying then a regular controller.
I think that your hint at the need for content is far more paramount then the supposed evolutionary input device that is the wiimote.
The question is are those developers responsible for making revolutionary software going to take a step backwards to try and innovate on a nintendo platform with underpowered hardware with an imprecise input device and the complete lack of functional online capability?
I hardly think so.
Nintendo painted themselves into this corner before the wii and with it, all they have done to counter is sell there product to a non gaming audiance.
It’s all about the software and like usual nintendo isn’t going to have much, if anything to offer the hardcore gamer.
The only thing revolutionary about the wii is the moniker given to the wii pre-launch, nintendo promised a revolution but delivered more of the same.
Nintendo’s success so far has been the fact its the cheapest product available and the ignorant best buy employees who tell consumers its the cheapest next gen console.
on October 8, 2007 9:01 pm
@LordCancer: Everything you said, ditto for me.
on October 9, 2007 2:20 am
@LordCancer: Well said. It seems to me, though, that you are stating that motion control is, by nature, bad for games… I think that for some games it could be a great addition if done well (Prince of Persia: Rival Swords), but I’ll agree that at this time it just doesn’t quite work. I had high hopes for the Wii when I bought one… but those hopes have since dried up in the sun.
Also, I am a Metroid fan, but based on the promo videos of Corruption, I’m not very enthusiastic about it.
360 is starting to look very tempting…
on October 9, 2007 5:18 am
@Talhadj
I am saying motion control thus far isn’t good or at the very least hasn’t translated well for traditional style of gaming which rely on precision input.
I won’t say that its impossible to make software that takes advantage of such an input device but I will say it seems in creating any sorta of game that requires depth of control or precision input that it is likely to not translate well with out simplifying the level of input a player has at his control or the gameplay itself.
on October 10, 2007 10:13 am
You must really just float by on your looks because this is a horribly written piece. How do I give it zero stars?