Shakes Head In Sad Disbelief

At what? At a game about beating a woman. As in savagely, brutally, unforgivably, not as in “at badminton” or “in a round of cribbage.” It’s horrible, despite being nothing more than crudely looped video footage overlaid with a strangely undersized floating hand. As it spools hideously onwards, a voice demands you hit her harder, even as blood and bruises blossom gruesomely across her face. Horrible.

Shockingly, it turns out to be a Danish public service announcement about domestic abuse, designed to deter gentlemen who think of themselves as ‘gangsta’ from treating their girlfriends and wives with horrific, violent contempt.

Apparently calling you a “100% idiot” after making you spend five minutes beating a woman to the floor is enough to justify the game and to affect some kind of social change. Perhaps their insane approach to philanthropy sounded arch and affecting on paper, but all the good intentions in the world don’t change the fact that it’s still a game about repeatedly punching a woman in the face, and only that.

Since causing an understandable storm of controversy last week, the game’s now blocking anyone from outside Denmark (it was formerly available here, if you want to futilely click on something), but one chap managed to record a video, erm, walkthrough of the awful thing before it closed its door post-horse-bolting. Sadly he’s not translated the Danish dialogue, but instead overlaid some none-too-subtle captions of his own. The bewildering horror of the piece is very much intact, however.

Perhaps its message might have worked if it presented any possible interaction beyond violence – an opportunity to do the right thing, to learn, to refuse the shouting prompts to attack the poor woman. Instead, you’re essentially forced to hit her, depending on where you stand as to inaction being action. In a lot of ways, it’s doing what That Modern Warfare 2 level did – the same out-of-context shock tactics, the same confused belief that a message is stronger when couched in enforced moral transgression. November, you’ve done us no good.


  1. LewieP says:

    In a similar fashion to how I feel about No Russian, I really think that including scenes and acts like this in a videogame is not a fundamentally bad idea, I just think that it should be done far more tactfully and far more skillfully, with much more thought given to context.

    Just plonking the player down with some civilians to shoot, or with a woman to click on, doesn’t really say anything.

  2. Psychopomp says:



    • Bhazor says:

      Who: Torgo

      What: He finally gets his wife.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      oh my god Bhazor I love you forever for that one.

      “The Master likes you…!”

    • Nick says:

      Torgo’s Pizza!

    • Lars Westergren says:

      Torgo’s KNEES!

      In the MST3K book they have the trivia that apparently they are supposed to be goat legs (so he is a satyre for some mindboggling reason).

    • mark says:

      awesome derailling. +1 for everything Torgo.

    • Bhazor says:

      Sadly there were no clips of Torgo’s touching her up scene but it’s the first thing I thought when I saw the video with the angry woman just standing there whilst a clawed hand jerkily reaches for her. The closest I got was this link to which is rubbish.

      If you think the MST3K version was bad, watch the uncut version. Know the driving montage at the start? Lasts more than 20 minutes.

  3. Mattaustin66 says:

    Makes you think..

  4. egg says:

    Hmm, I just got this message:

    Dear non-danish visitor,

    Due to an extremely high amount of traffic “Hit the Bitch” has been limited to only allow users from Denmark.

    However, domestic violence is a global problem, so please support the fight against it in your local country.

    Thanks for your interest.

    Kind regards
    Children exposed to Violence at Home

    Information in english about the organisation

  5. john t says:

    Denmark is on a roll.

  6. jsutcliffe says:

    This is abhorrent. However, I appreciate that the intention behind it is a good one. As with many things like this (e.g. “No Russian”), I wonder how could it be made better. One thought:
    The user uploads a picture of himself (or herself), then progress through the game as it is now. At the end, all the harm inflicted is displayed on the photograph the user uploaded. Still not a great idea, but a less terrible one at least.

  7. Arsewisely says:

    It’s justifiable if the woman herself is ‘domestic violence’ and the game is encouraging you to fight it, in some kind of spiralling, meta-symbolic narrative that make my head hurt.

  8. Clovis says:

    But if the slapper is a woman, the game is suddenly fun.
    Here’s the link to the actual woman on woman slapping game.

    • Mattaustin66 says:

      I guess if you’re going to play about with morality in relation to context, for all we know the girl could have shot someone dear to you..

    • Bhazor says:

      That wasn’t domestic abuse that was essentially a beat em up. It’s like saying Street Fighter is domestic abuse if one character was playing as Cammie.

    • Persus-9 says:

      Yeah, those women are evil snobs who were bullying recently widowed lady because she’s commoner (which is pretty damn evil). They’re just getting what’s coming to them in a fair fight. Having said that I didn’t find it fun.

    • Dominic White says:

      Rose & Camellia is a piece of inspired madness. I mean, it’s Punch Out, but with a plot, and with an all-courtly-ladies cast.

      And an amazingly brilliant final boss, too.

  9. Ricc says:

    I don’t know what to make of this…

    I’ll be honest, I had to laugh at the youtube video, because of the stupid captions and because it wasn’t convincingly acted at all (Which I am kind of glad for…), in my opinion.

    It is bewildering, yes, very much.

  10. M.P. says:

    I agree with LewieP – making a player do something horrible is probably a really powerful way to communicate how horrrible it really is. It’s just that this is done really badly. I’m guessing it was a basic free little flash game on their website or something, right?

  11. xenothaulus says:

    I hit it.

  12. itsamemario says:

    No Russian mission isnt that bad. it reflect reality. In WAR you dont have a BOUQUET of FLOWER and shoot fragrant rose lazer that heal people with joy and happy music. THEY SHOOT AT YOU IN THE FACE and you die.

    Continue to live comfortable on your couch.

    • jsutcliffe says:

      Shit, man. I’m going to stay away from civilians next time I’m in a warzone.

    • Paul S. says:

      This is stupid. Taking the moral high ground to defend an entire level dedicated to shooting defenceless civilians in the face in an otherwise popcorn blockbuster is a slightly ridiculous stance, chef.

    • MadMatty says:

      Yes indeed. As for the tart-smacking im from Denmark and i kindof get it. Might get someone thinking, tho probably not. Whats the outrage?
      I got one woman friend who keep getting smacked by her boyfriends, but she keeps sticking to them anyway- get sum self-respect .

    • Rinox says:

      Yes, because ‘war’ involves 4 man walking into the airport with AK’s and mowing down stupefied civilians.

      No Russian is about a terrorist attack, not a war (yet). While the result may be the same, in one the goal is to kill defenseless civilians. In the other it’s a nasty and often unavoidable byproduct, but rarely the point of a modern war.

  13. HexagonalBolts says:

    It’s just like the Modern Warfare 2 article on RPS the other day: An excellent opportunity to convey a powerful message, executed appallingly.

    • DerangedStoat says:

      haha for a moment there I thought you were dissing an excellent article!

  14. ordteapot says:

    It seems to me that if you find the game abhorrent from the get-go, you’re not the “target audience.” Rather, it targets those with the mentality that this is somehow an A-OK form of entertainment, and, by the end, hopefully jars into their skull just how terrible of a person they are. If they’re still enjoying themselves at that point, they’re probably a lost cause for this sort of correction.

    I’m still not linking my mum to it.

  15. Poopscrubber says:

    I can try translatin’ some o’ dis Danish speak!

    First three lines from the girl:
    I had the best night, what about you?
    Yes, of course I danced with someone.
    You know what, you don’t need to decide who I dance with!

    Then, the narrator guy in a voice that is very “Danish gangsta”
    What’s wrong with you? You’ve lost control of your bitch!
    A couple of flats (slaps) should help

    At this point the romance begins!

    Girl’s lines from here (some repeat – it’s probably a random looperino)
    Why would I fuck your best friend? He’s just as ugly as you.
    You’re so petty it’s crazy.
    Why would I fuck your best friend? He’s just as ugly as you.
    You always – (interrupted by user’s slap)
    Are you stupid or what? A no is a no!
    You little insane man! Fuck you!
    You little boy, you think you’re the only one who can fight?
    You feel strong – (interrupted by user’s slap)
    Is that all you’ve got?
    If I really love you, then I’ll do what? No, if you really love me you won’t force me to do things I don’t feel like doing.

    100% Gangsta

    Narrator kicks in:
    Idiot! It’s not gangsta do hit bitches. You already lost the game the first time you laid hands on her. There is no reason to hit. None! Seek help before it’s too late.

    Girl crying.

    In Denmark, two girls in each class from 9th til 12th grade live in a violent relationship. If you’re one of those that hits, or a girl that is being hit – seek help.

    Done! It’s not a great translation, but you get the gist of it.

  16. Spod says:

    To quote John Walker from the BBC article about MW2

    “For all those who mowed down citizens in Modern Warfare 2’s controversial airport level, I have the sneaking suspicion that not a great deal of them think this is lawful, nor appropriate, behaviour.”

    I feel exactly the same about this flash animation. I abhor violence, particularly to vulnerable people but this flash animation did absolutely nothing for/to me. I was quite happy to slap the crap out of her and felt it was quite shoddy programming that I wasn’t able to give her a backhand – plus, the slaps should have been rated ala : link to

    • Oak says:

      I don’t think that’s quite what he meant.

    • Spod says:

      The point I was making, and on reflection the quote didn’t back it up as much as I’d hoped, is that it’s quite easy to discern reality from notsomuchreality. In that respect, this little “game” didn’t affect me in the slightest. I can understand people being more affected by it than I was, but I don’t understand people being shocked/offended.

      It is crap at what it sets out to do though, I can’t imagine it’ll be in any way effective.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      Spod, you don’t find your intelligence offended with such bad things?

      The game basically encourages you to hit a woman. On the plus side, maybe some of these jerkasses will play this game instead of actually hitting someone.

      Probably not.

    • Spod says:

      Absolutely not, after all they’re the ones who made this crappy thing so I’m not left questioning *my* intelligence :).

  17. Spod says:

    Argh, that should have been a after behaviour.”

  18. Spod says:

    Grr – that should have been, “Argh that should have been a [close italics] after behaviour.”

    Edit required %L!

    • jsutcliffe says:

      If you’ve registered, and are logged in to the forum, you can find this thread there and edit your comments. It’s long-winded, but it works. Usually.

    • Spod says:

      Oh. Well I look even more of a tit then, I’ll have to go do that at some point :).

      This post is in response to jsutcliffe just in case I’ve ballsed it up somehow and end up posting it in response to some totally random post.

  19. invisiblejesus says:

    News flash: anyone fucked up enough to beat their girlfriend/wife isn’t going to be convinced otherwise by a shitty flash game. The only people who’ll feel badly about “playing” this stupid game are already not going to do it. GG waste of taxpayer money!

    • Solario says:

      Yeah… You do realise it’s a privately owned organisation that’s built on charity, not government funding?

      And the point about the game isn’t the game itself, it’s a campaign designed to raise awareness about domestic violence in relationships in the age 14-19 group. Which, given the fact that it’s been in the major papers, and even here, seems to have worked out pretty well.

      To compare it with “No Russian” is, quite frankly, ridiculous. No Russian is a part of an entertainment media, a game, whereas this is designed to get people talking. The Interactivity of this is to get people uncomfortable and thereby talking. We’re suppose to judge all kinds of entertainment based on what they’re trying to accomplish, right?

    • Solario says:

      Goddammit, being able to edit would be nice. I changed the last sentence, when I wrote it, but forgot to change “entertainment” to “product”.

  20. FRIENDLYUNIT says:

    I’m starting to suspect that some people just don’t ‘get’ how interactivity and games work.

    Um… and this is a little sickening but have they done studies? Have they any evidence to suggest that people who are inclined to ‘smack their bitch up’ have, after having tried it virtually first, decided that they didn’t in fact want to when having a real argument with their girlfriend?

    Because I would hope they have, to have made this stupid thing. My gut instinct is that people fall into two categories: people that would be sickened by beating on a women and people who wouldn’t and I don’t think ‘try before you buy’ is ever going to change that.

  21. whalleywhat says:

    I heard there’s games where you full on murder people.

  22. A-Scale says:

    Truly, this is worse than no dedicated servers in MW2. Well, almost.

  23. TeeJay says:

    I am reserving judgement. This isn’t aimed at me – I am not violent, not a ‘gangsta’, nor am I a victim of violence. I don’t even know anyone who is any of these things.

    If this is effective at getting an anti-violence message to certain kinds of people, and if it has been shown to be useful and effective, then it has my support.

    That for me is the bottom line. How I ‘feel’ about it personally is less important. I don’t work in this area nor have I studied it. I am willing to listen to what people who work in the area of domestic violence think about this before potificating about it and passing judgement.

    Anyone got any decent links to comments from people who have any expertise?

    • invisiblejesus says:

      I don’t, and I doubt anyone does. Anecdotally though, I work with a guy who’s hit his girlfriend before. He’d laugh at something like this. He’d think it was funny. He might even play a couple rounds for giggles.

    • TeeJay says:

      Some people will never be violent, others are already far too fucked up…

      …then there are people who could go either way. Probably young guys aged 16 to 20.

      Maybe ‘the wrong kind of people’ will be attracted to this for ‘the wrong reasons’ – but doesn’t mean you are going to be preaching to the right audience, rather than preaching to the choir?

      It might make me feel sick to think that somewhere on the internet someone is getting off to this, but they can do this anyway via violent porn/xxx-rated games, the difference being that these don’t contain the message/punchline and do often involve genuine abuse.

      But me feeling sick about some people getting off on it is irrelevant in the face of whether this makes a difference in reducing actual violence. If it is effective in making a difference then I should just ‘hold my nose’ and put up with my distaste as the price to pay.

      (nb. I’m sure there will be soon be ‘What I Think’ articles in the Indie and Guardian by ‘experts’ followed by readers responses)

    • Rinox says:

      I am reserving judgement. This isn’t aimed at me – I am not violent, not a ‘gangsta’, nor am I a victim of violence. I don’t even know anyone who is any of these things.

      TeeJay, I certainly hope so, but chances are pretty big that you do know someone who is either a victim or offender among your friends or family. But maybe not a gangsta, no. ;-)

      UK numbers for domestic violence:

      1 in 4 women will experience domestic violence at some point in their lives.
      2 women a week are murdered by a current or former partner.
      Over 45,000 women and children stay in a refuge each year.
      UK police attend a domestic violence incident every minute of every hour of every day.

      So…people may not talk about it, obviously, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Happens all the time apparently (like you I never experienced it first-hand though, thankgod).

  24. Jad says:


    Civilians: The Hidden Killer

  25. JoeX111 says:

    Man, at first I thought it was Chloe from 24.

    • Spod says:

      And if ever there was a human being in desperate need of a slap* :)

      *Said in jest, not to be taken seriously, not to be taken with food, do not operate heavy machinery.

  26. twb says:

    Suddenly, I understand where Lars von Trier got it from. Danish cinema, will you never stop mocking me?

    Next, I plan to crusade against alcoholism by drinking myself into a blinding stupor.

  27. Muzman says:

    Was I the only one who chuckled slightly at the misguided good intention here?
    It’s clearly from that school of community announcements where they just show you the horror (they had some in the UK recently about immigrant sex slaves where it’s all very in your face).
    But you do something like that juuuust a little bit wrong and it becomes completely ineffective. Thinking that you make ultimedia content about it by merely taking that sort of advert and making it interactive is one such problem.
    What they were going for was, I think, something like that clever execution flash game. But Fail! as they say on the ‘tubes.

  28. int says:

    I have to be the only one who thought of the fmv game “A fork in the tale” with Rob Schneider when watching that.

  29. capital L says:

    Shockingly, it turned out to be a PSA?

    I found it rather predictably to be a PSA, but perhaps that’s due to decades of similar shock-style PSAs broadcast to us across a number of mediums in the US of A. Tedious really.

  30. invisiblejesus says:

    After reading about/playing this “game”, I think it’s worth considering how differently it seems to treat domestic violence from other social problems. Would a majority of reasonable people think it was appropriate to make a game in which you gassed Jews, with the caveat that it was about fighting anti-semitism? Or a game where you wrapped a noose around a black or hispanic person’s neck, with the caveat that it was about fighting racism? I don’t think that most reasonable people would consider those acceptable. It’s very telling that anyone would even consider defending this ridiculous “game”, and in that way I suppose you could say it partially accomplishes it’s goal; it shows just how deeply rooted misogyny is in western culture. Too bad the kinds of people who really need to get that message are going to be too busy smacking their bitch up to understand.

  31. grimman says:

    I think I should point out that… I would totally hit it.

  32. Louis says:

    ‘John Walker, one of the writers on the Rock, Paper, Shotgun games blog, said: “Games really are treated in a peculiar way.”

    He doubted that anyone would campaign for books to follow humanitarian laws or for James Bond to be denounced for machine gunning his way through a super villain’s underground complex.

    He said the authors did not understand that gamers can distinguish between fantasy and reality.’


  33. Centy says:

    Unlike the No Russian thing which didn’t really effect me one way or the other this I found to be appalling. I was linked to it by a guy who either thought it was clever or was a good way to shock. Frankly it’s just made of utter well fail is the best word. I didn’t even play as when I attempted to close my browser tab I slapped her and could see exactly where it would end up.

    I admire officials trying to use gaming or any new form of media to get a message across but there is a much better way of talking to young men about domestic violence than this. Having now, courtesy of that video, seen what happens at the end I don’t feel it’s strong enough to counter what it made you do to get there. All these things need a counter point and this just doesn’t have one.

    • TeeJay says:

      “…there is a much better way of talking to young men about domestic violence than this…”

      What is the better approach?

    • Nick says:

      What, are you suggesting with that question that this is the best one?

    • Psychopomp says:

      You could always cockpunch them.

    • Spod says:

      “I was linked to it by a guy who either thought it was clever or was a good way to shock.”

      Actually I linked it to you because I thought it was amusingly absurd. I genuinely didn’t think it would have that big an affect on you and I’m still quite surprised about that. You giant fairy.


    • TeeJay says:

      “What, are you suggesting with that question that this is the best one?”

      I’m not suggesing anything.

      As I posted before “I am reserving judgement … If this is effective at getting an anti-violence message to certain kinds of people, and if it has been shown to be useful and effective, then it has my support.”

      So when someone says: “…there is a much better way of talking to young men about domestic violence than this…”

      I genuinely want to know what this “better approach” is.


  34. Pippin says:

    I’m quite surprised to see nobody in thread (or in the article, or in the general response to this game on the internet) consider the very real possibility of not hitting the woman in the first place. There’s an odd tension or even contradiction going on:

    1/ People often seem to feel that the game is sick and a terrible thing to have represented; yet
    2/ People then also seem to go ahead and slap the woman around, presumably feeling that this is acceptable behaviour because it’s “just a game”.

    I don’t believe it’s the intention of the game to point this out, after all it doesn’t give you any information until you’ve gone through the motions. On the other hand, I do think that it’s a potentially powerful thing to take away from a game like this. No one’s making beat this virtual woman. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you have to. Even if there’s a meter rating you and the only interactive possibility is slapping and the game is called “Hit the Bitch”. Are we honestly so under the sway of the ‘interactive imperative’ that we can’t even consider not interacting?

    When I saw the game and the set up, I had no desire at all to hit her, I thought it was a deeply unpleasant thing to do. So I didn’t. I’d assumed that other people would generally feel the same way, rather than diving into it so whole heartedly, and I’m quite disappointed to find out how wrong I apparently am.

    • JB says:

      Pippin, I think you missed this post a few up from yours:

      Centy says:
      I didn’t even play as when I attempted to close my browser tab I slapped her and could see exactly where it would end up.

      So there’s at least one person who has posted. Personally I wouldn’t have clicked either, but I didn’t visit the site.

    • TeeJay says:

      I don’t see why you assume that people “go ahead and slap the woman around”.

      Like you I have no desire to ‘play this game’ (or ‘interact with this advert’ – it isn’t really a game). There are plenty of games that I have chosen not to play or stopped playing due to disliking the content.

      You say you are “quite disappointed to find out how wrong I apparently am” – I can’t see how you have ‘found out’ you are wrong. Personally I assume that most people here simply watched the youtube video and by the time most people found out about it the site had been blocked.

  35. Tull. says:


  36. sana says:

    A game about an actress acting like she’s hit in the face. Shocking.
    I suggest a 200+ comments thread about the terror of gibbing women in Unreal Tournament 3 next.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      Because that’s the exact same thing, right Sana?

    • Pippin says:

      Sana, I think that’s an interesting and understandable response.

      Say there’s no difference between blowing away a woman in Unreal and slapping a woman around in a Flash game. Why is that? Is it because they’re both “just a game” and thus have no moral/ethical content whatsoever?

      Can you imagine a game that would make you not want to play because it made you too ethically uncomfortable? I mean, I think it’s possible to imagine a combination of realism, detail, and awfulness that would lead to a game that I wouldn’t want to play – specifically because it reaches my ethical breaking point.

      What’s the difference between that game and Unreal or “Hit the Bitch”? Or is there no possible game you wouldn’t be ethically comfortable playing?

      It’s just such a weird situation, I think. There are games I can imagine that I wouldn’t want to play for basically ethical reasons, and I yet I’m not sure I can point out what the difference is.

    • sana says:

      Interesting point, Pippin. I’m really having a hard time imagining a game non-ethical enough to not be worth playing merely because of the moral aspect. If I didn’t want to play a game, it would be because it’s bad. Games entirely consisting of blowing up baby kittens and doing vile things to women would be repetitive, thus bad. Morals are a secondary thing in fiction, like gameplay and graphics would make a game worth playing regardless of immoral actions taken by characters in the plot. However no developer would dedicate enough resources to make a game with totally un-ethical content worth playing (everyone would feel too uncomfortable to buy it, hence no profit)…

      That being said, it’s still pretty laughable that gamers who have no problem with BLOWING PEOPLE THE FUCK UP in fictional context get their panties twisted over the _intended reaction_ of an equally fictional anti-violence campaign game. Are these people offended because the game is so horridly made or is hypocrisy at work here?

    • Rinox says:

      One is a videotape of an actress…other is a game with 3D graphics. The moment where 3D graphics are as convincing as a real human face/acting is still waaaay off. That’s the main difference between both.

      Also, this video is about domestic violence, which is a real issue and close to each of us. Unreal Tournament and other shooters aren’t exactly the pinnacle of realistic and relatable games for most of us. Games like UT3 and TF2 are so ridiculously over the top with gibbage that they don’t even qualify as ‘shocking’.

    • fulis says:

      It’s the same difference as watching a cartoon vs watching footage of real violence

    • sana says:

      So you’re basically saying they recorded live footage of the titular “bitch” being punched in the face for that game, yes?

      It’s just as fictional as any 3D slaughter, and it’d be a stretch to say that violence depicted in a live act is that much more influental than violence depicted in a 3D animation BASED on live acting…

    • sana says:

      Also, I can’t really disagree much with Rinox, however I’d like to add that I don’t see anybody being affected by death in more realistic games such as Insurgency. The shooter in question being over-the-top is of little relevance. Yet some sloppily done act of domestic abuse is more likely to be called un-ethical and inadequate than an Iraq war simulation. Why? Perhaps I am the only one not being extraordinarily affected by the fact that the actress in question is a real person?

    • TeeJay says:

      Many people would find a cartoon depicting the same interaction disgusting / upsetting / morally repulsive as well.

  37. Heliocentric says:

    La la la la. I can’t hear you, pc gaming is flowers and kittens.

    *fingers in ears*

  38. Tull. says:

    I’m very much with Sana on this one.

  39. Masked Dave says:

    Perhaps its message might have worked if it presented any possible interaction beyond violence – an opportunity to do the right thing, to learn, to refuse the shouting prompts to attack the poor woman. Instead, you’re essentially forced to hit her, depending on where you stand as to inaction being action.

    Closing the browser and NOT HITTING THE WOMAN is an action. That’s how you refuse. If you continue through to the end wondering when the violence will stop, aren’t you kind of missing the point?

    • Vinraith says:

      “Closing the browser and NOT HITTING THE WOMAN is an action.”

      But it’s not an action in the game. If you want to know anything about the game, you have to play the game, and the only way to play the game is to hit the woman.

    • Pippin says:

      As a couple of people have started pointing out, “not acting sort of is an action”. It’s not an “action” in the game in the sense that you click a button to “not act”, no. But we don’t suddenly cease to exist in reality as soon as we decide we’re playing a game, our not acting in the real world (not clicking etc) is tantamount to the “action” of not acting in the game.

      And actually, not acting is, effectively, an action in the game, so to speak. You can sit there waving the hand (gently) around and have nothing happen. There’s nothing in the game that makes you do anything. This argument from the ‘interactive imperative’ is currently just not looking strong to me… I’d be interested in anyone arguing for it, though.

    • Azazel says:

      I say we get proper existential on this mofo.

    • TeeJay says:

      “If you want to know anything about the game, you have to play the game”

      Or watch a youtube video of it. Or read a review of it by a video game critic. or… etc … etc.

    • Vinraith says:


      At which point you’re either watching some one else play the game, or reading about someone else playing the game. Someone still had to play the game, someone still had to hit the woman, and by reading or viewing anything related to the playing of the game you’re endorsing that.

    • Masked Dave says:

      But it’s not an action in the game. If you want to know anything about the game, you have to play the game, and the only way to play the game is to hit the woman.

      That’s nonsense. You already know about the game, its pretty obvious what it’s asking you to do. You have to decide if you can bring yourself to do it or not. And if you do, well then you see the consequences of your actions. Showing you basically that ‘beating women isn’t fun’.

  40. Bad Gangsta says:

    Isn’t this a lot like the controversial sniper game released last year (I think). The one where you saw this prisoner through a rifle scope, and the only possible action was to shoot the guy? Only that one actually congratulates you for quitting the game instead. I believe the general message was “the only way to win is to not play the game” or something.

  41. Optimaximal says:

    She looks like Chloe from 24 – IT ALL MAKES SENSE!!!

  42. Martin says:

    It’s actually easier to understand if you do understand danish..

    being a dane my self, I’m not wondering about the game, more that the morons making it didn’t make it on english to prevent misunderstanding across the countries..

    otherwise it would make more sence to make the URL in danish so instead of hit the bitch it should be slå kællingen or tæv kællingen

    feel free to ask for a translation.

  43. Janka says:

    My impression is (though I, to be honest, am too lazy to check) that there is evidence in plenty for desensitization to violence in the form of seeing it in TV, games, and real life making people more likely to use it, while no evidence whatsoever to same leading to less violence. If seeing the horrible effects of violence will tend to cure people from it, why is having seen abuse considered a predisposing factor to becoming an abuser?

  44. kyrieee says:

    She doesn’t say “fuck that” she says “fuck you”

  45. fulis says:

    lol I just laughed when I heard the dialogue, I can’t take it seriously
    The guy says something like “What’s wrong with you? You don’t have the bitch under control!” (I’m not Danish so it might not be 100%, but it’s sounds funny lol)

  46. Chaz says:

    > Do you want to fire torpedoes at the Belgrano?

    > NO

    > Well done, you sank the Belgrano!

  47. N says:

    “Shh… there, there…. KAPOW!”

    I lol’d.

  48. Nemon says:

    Anyone know a good combo to finish her MK-style?

  49. DMJ says:

    I feel uncomfortable watching TV shows in which a man hits a woman. But this is not a woman. It’s a woman-shaped punching bag on a computer. Its only purpose is to be hit. Should the “player” feel guilty? Or the ones who made the punching-bag in the first place?

    If this was released as a commercial game, there would be outcry and BAN THIS SICK FILTH NOW. Should we, as gamers, get offended when a government sinks to lower depths than Grand Theft Auto? First they brand our medium as “childish”. Then “pornographic”. Then they outdo the “pornographers”.

  50. KindredPhantom says:

    Whose for retconing the whole month of November?