Army Recruitment Going Interactive

June 16, 2008 -

Brand Week reports that the US Army plans to wage a game-oriented attack on subpar recruiting efforts.

In August the Army will unveil the first of a new wave of recruitment centers in which prospective soldiers will play America's Army and fly missions in Apache and Blackhawk helicopter sims.

Apple's retail stores and venues like the ESPN Zone are said to be the inspirations behind the new approach. Army official Edward Walters told Brand Week:

In the past we've focused on traditional media vehicles. [But] the millennial generation is used to engaging in interactive assets and we need to adapt to them.
 

From the description, the days of handing would-be recruits a brochure will soon be over:

The first new recruitment center is designed to be less intimidating and more "like walking into a NASA center," said Walters. It will consist of three large simulators with full-scale mock-ups of Army equipment and wrap-around 270-degree video screens...

 

The Apache simulator allows a pilot and co-pilot to experience the aircraft and its weapons systems. The Black Hawk helicopter simulator provides four door gunner positions. And, the armored HMMWV vehicle simulator has positions for a driver and several gunners. The centers also will include an area where visitors can compete in America's Army, a videogame...
 

Via: Gizmodo


Comments

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

The Navy's been on the nerd bandwagon for a while. They've got ads voiced by the same guy who voices Optimus Prime, ads hyping their space launches, and ads hyping their remote death robots. As it is they're a Gundam away from me signing up.

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Granted, it takes a lot more nerds to run a Nuclear-powered ship than to drive an Abrams.  The Army still needs its nerds, but they want them to wind up in the Signal Corps fixing computers and networks rather than running around in the Infantry.

---------------------------------

So speak I, some random guy.

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

While true (as I was one of those Signal Corps nerds fixing computers and networks), it really isn't a good idea to judge based off of percentage points. If 20% of the Navy needs to be "nerds", while only 5% of the Army needs to be "nerds", the Army could still easily have more "nerds", simply because the Army has significantly more personnel than the Navy -- it just is the nature of the beast, and the differences in the kind of warfare being done by both branches.

But I digress...

"I'm not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

"I'm stel not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

True, but the recruiting tools the Army's using are more set up recruit people for combat arms and close air supprt rather than rear echelon jobs.  Granted, I don't think anyone wants to play a SINCGARS simnulator, although there might be one in the Humvee, so it's a little hard to advertise Commo jobs.

---------------------------------

So speak I, some random guy.

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

True enough. The Army does have a lot of jobs that don't really need much brain power to do. Heck, even the Signal Corps has its "Wire Dogs"... where the entire job is to pull wire from the back of a moving vehicle and bury it in the ground.

"I'm not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

"I'm stel not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Oh yeah, THIS isn't going cause controversy.

I'm actually a little surprised the army would go this route right now.  With an unpopular war going on and the whole issue surrounding the  banning of recruiter in Berkely and other locations etc.  It seems like the army would want to lay low a little rather than going the videogame route again which will just cause the "brainwashing our children!" people to rise up and scream.

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

No, it won't, because you probably won't die if you're shot down or hit an IED.

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Eh, I don't think America’s army was worth it honestly, I think they would be better off focusing on making their simulators as interesting as possible.

Everyone joins the Air force to be a pilot or a Gunship crewman, and then ends up being a base guard.

Everyone joins the army to be a tank commander or an apache pilot.

 

You get people mostly for the glamorous jobs, so make the glamorous jobs look damn good.

 

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Actually, only a very few join the Army to be a tank commander or apache pilot, or join the Air Force to be a pilot or Gunship crewman (which actually is an Army job). Most people join the military to get out of difficult life situations (drug addicted family/friends, lack of jobs in home town, etc.), many also join to get the college money in order to better themselves. There is a very slim few who see the job as glamorous, and those ones usually don't make it through Basic Combat Training/Boot Camp.

Despite what people are demonizing the recruiters for here, it just doesn't show up as true when surveying people who are in the military, and why they joined. Most don't even care for being in too much, they see it as a stepping stone, a means-to-an-end to have a better chance to succeed in the "real world". There are a few who really anjoy the military, and they get promoted quite high because of it. But anyone with delusions of grandeur often finds him or herself really in the wrong place, and that person finds a way out pretty darned quick.

"I'm not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

"I'm stel not responcabel fer my comuter's spleling errnors." -- Xlorep DarkHelm

Re: Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Im surprised it took them so long with the simulators.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
Andrew EisenNo one's crossed a line but I just want to remind you all to keep discussions civil.09/20/2014 - 1:54pm
Craig R.tldr: I'm a gamer, and imo those who support GamerGate should feel free to take a flying leap off a cliff.09/20/2014 - 1:27pm
Craig R.Not only that, I'm pretty sure that if actual studies were done, you'd still deny them, Sleaker. After all, it's not what you'd want to hear to support your rose-colored view of GamerGate.09/20/2014 - 1:18pm
Craig R.There IS an issue. Nor do we need a study to show that if you deny it then you're part of the problem.09/20/2014 - 1:17pm
Sleakersimply oust people that do harass others.09/20/2014 - 11:34am
Sleaker@Conster - I can say the same thing if you think there's been more than a handful. Until there's an actual study on rates no one can claim to know how widespread the incidence of harassment is. Thus the best we can do is 'there might be an issue' and...09/20/2014 - 11:33am
ConsterSleaker: if you think there's only been "a handful of" incidents, you have your head stuck *somewhere* - I'm assuming it's sand.09/20/2014 - 5:38am
prh99Most of it's agitprop clickbait anyway.09/20/2014 - 5:27am
prh99A good reason to stop reading reguardless of view pointhttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/apr/12/news-is-bad-rolf-dobelli.09/20/2014 - 5:22am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician