Army Opens New Front: Video Game Development
Army Opens New Front: Video Game Development
November 24, 2008
Stars & Stripes reports that the U.S. Army will sink $50 million into training-oriented video games. The project will launch in 2010. There's even a new unit devoted to the ambitious project.
Lt. Col. Gary Stephens told Stars & Stripes that the Army will be keeping tabs on developments in the game biz, but doesn't plan to compete there: The Army takes this seriously. We own gaming for the Army — from requirements through procurement... We don’t have the intent to become a competitor with the commercial gaming industry.
In addition, the Army plans to award a contract in the next few weeks for what sounds like a fabuloulsy cool mod of current FPS gameware:
The new game — dubbed "Game After Ambush" — will be an off-the-shelf commercial product that comes with tools that will allow the Army to make almost any modification necessaryto terrain, scenarios, missions, etc....
Col. Mark McManigal, the capabilities manger for gaming under the Training and Doctrine Command, said the selected game must provide low-cost training and must not require large number of technicians to run. It must also have a play-back function for after-action reviews, he said...
the Army will have 70 gaming systems in 53 locations in the United States, Germany, Italy and South Korea between February and September 2009... Soldiers will be able to drive virtual vehicles, fire virtual weapons, pilot virtual unmanned aerial vehicles... in a virtual battle space as large as 100 kilometers by 100 kilometers, she said.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
This sounds more like team building than training, taking war games into VR.
I think Solid Snake called this one in MGS2. Jokes notwithstanding, I see this as both good and bad for the military. On the one hand, it's a cost effective and safe way to train soldiers, from the grunt to the commander. On the other, it's less effective and presents even more of a realistic detachment than basic in-the-field training. Though, kickass games for the private sector? I'll take it, regardless of recruitment messages.
********************
"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst."
[SolidSnakeImpersonation]
On the battlefield you don't have time for simulators. Whatever you learn and practice on the field are your best skills.
[/SolidSnakeImpersonation]
Solid Snake FTW!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon
Haha, I was offered a position working on that... before it was even an official project... should have taken in, but I was required to serve in the Air Force for 4 years. Wouldn't have been a bad deal.
---
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
oh i give it 5 minutes before JT comes on here spouting cr*p like:
"see this is PROOF games train killers!"
or something more sarcastic like " Oh.. so the army can train soldiers, but games could never train anybody... right.? "
well JT let me ask you this. IF GTA and other games train people 'so well' , then why the heck is the army investing $50 million into developing training simulations? I mean... surely they'd just pay for a license to let the troops play GTA.. and save ooh i dont know around $49 million.
Oh n wouldnt they scrap all the other training too? i mean thered be no need for physical fitness training, pschological training, or more importantly actual hands on weapons training. After all, a game can make you physically fit, and accurately let you feel the size, weight, recoil of various weapons... *sigh*
They did in the past but people used to Infinite Ammo Cheats used up all the rockets to blow up infantry and try to cross rivers by letting cars jump, rather than using bridges. Needless to say they found themselves in trouble when they encountered an enemy tank.
Obvious Department: The situation described is purely fictional.
i totally dont get your point ;) .
Why wouldnt we want our soldiers using those cheats? I mean just tell the guys in iraq that they can type IDKFA to get all the guns and full ammo, and ICANFLY will let them walk through walls! Games are just like real life and i cant believe youd say otherwise! I flipped my car off a 150 ft jump today across a freeway, rolled 10 times, and kept driving safely to work. Those skills are invaluable!. Your like the guy who says santa isnt real! *sob sob sob*
GTA can turn our army into flying, infinite ammod, rocket jumping, invicible badass mot***kers!
They are simply using it to train tactics, not actual combat. In fact, you could probably do the same thing with chesspieces and model buildings, but they don't offer the possibility of replaying and pointing out mistakes.
We had a group of soliders devoted to animation in WWII, not that amazeing.
This just doesn't work. And look at all that wasted money.
--- Official Protector of Videoland!
Video games are a strange branch-off from military technology. I saw a special on it once, and this guy was saying how he and some buddies would try to alter radar screens to do things (example: primitive Pong). Going farther into the future, they had flight simulators. The military has generally been ahead of the gaming industry in terms of realism, and some of that stuff does leak out into the gaming industry.
They should use the Novint Falcons that simulate physics and gun-holding in lieu of a mouse.
Hmm, sounds cool, maybe I should work for the army... not...
Nice to know that programmers are needed everywhere this days though, even building games for the army...