America's Army is looking pretty good

[RampantAndroid]

Probably because it was a recruiting tool.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/11/technology/uncle-sam-wants-you-to-play-this-game.html

Oh, I know it was. Who the hell knows how well it worked, though.

 

[micrometers]

Probably because it was a recruiting tool.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/11/technology/uncle-sam-wants-you-to-play-this-game.html

He also hopes that by providing more information to prospective soldiers, the game will help cut down on the number of recruits who wash out during the nine weeks of basic training and subsequent specialized training, which can last up to a year. (All told, the Army loses 13.7 percent of recruits during training, according to a spokesman for the Training and Doctrine Command in Fort Monroe, Va.)

Recruits who signed up but then quickly changed their mind ''had an information problem,'' Colonel Wardynski said.

''That's $15,000 down the drain,'' he added.

A recruiting tool that discourages some people? Oh the horror.

 

[Childs]

A recruiting tool that discourages some people? Oh the horror.

Bolded the important part for you. You don't get to weed people out if you don't recruit them in the first place. Using games as a recruiting tool is a small step above using Elmo to indoctrinate our youth with nationalistic propaganda. Young people are impressionable, so its understandable why some people would think of AA as an evil recruitment tool.

As for its effectiveness...probably didn't improve their recruitment rates significantly, otherwise the Army would still be funding it.

 

[Northern Lawn]

Bolded the important part for you. You don't get to weed people out if you don't recruit them in the first place. Using games as a recruiting tool is a small step above using Elmo to indoctrinate our youth with nationalistic propaganda. Young people are impressionable, so its understandable why some people would think of AA as an evil recruitment tool.

As for its effectiveness...probably didn't improve their recruitment rates significantly, otherwise the Army would still be funding it.

Not just young people, all You people. You you people, You, USA USA chanting people. There is a reason why the Army, navy and airforce pimp out their Tanks, Boats and planes for certain movies. I mean half YOu people think John Wayne was the first President. The smart ones know it was Daniel Boone.

 

[micrometers]

Bolded the important part for you. You don't get to weed people out if you don't recruit them in the first place. Using games as a recruiting tool is a small step above using Elmo to indoctrinate our youth with nationalistic propaganda. Young people are impressionable, so its understandable why some people would think of AA as an evil recruitment tool.

As for its effectiveness...probably didn't improve their recruitment rates significantly, otherwise the Army would still be funding it.

More people probably join the Army after playing Call of Duty or Medal of Honor than they do after America's Army. If anything, AA would probably dissuade people from joining, compared to those other two.

And yes, a failed recruit wastes everyone's time. Nothing wrong with discouraging those who can't make it.

edit: and it appears that it gives a realistic impression of what to expect, for people who are serious about joining. More information is always better.

I mean, the Army also prints flyers and brochures. Is that evil?

 

[Childs]

Not just young people, all You people. You you people, You, USA USA chanting people. There is a reason why the Army, navy and airforce pimp out their Tanks, Boats and planes for certain movies. I mean half YOu people think John Wayne was the first President. The smart ones know it was Daniel Boone.

You underestimate our love of our presidents. We have bad ass presidents...George Washington ran over brits in a Challenger and Lincoln killed vampires with an axe. And Hamilton's exploits are real. John Wayne isn't isn't even in Chuck Norris's league, although admittedly he is more man than Ronald Reagan (punk ass gipper).

I mean, the Army also prints flyers and brochures. Is that evil?

If they hand them out to kids with lollipops, then yes. Not that different than tobacco companies targeting kids. Going to a high school is one thing, but making it fun and entertaining via a video game is pretty low IMHO.

 

[micrometers]

The thing is: they could have made AA far more appealing to HS kids. They could basically have made it a free Call of Duty.

Instead, it's a realistic sim with tons of suckiness. Most of the playerbase of the game looks fairly mature, actually.

It appears very responsibly done. COD/MOH are the irresponsible games.

 

[Childs]

The thing is: they could have made AA far more appealing to HS kids. They could basically have made it a free Call of Duty.

Instead, it's a realistic sim with tons of suckiness. Most of the playerbase of the game looks fairly mature, actually.

It appears very responsibly done. COD/MOH are the irresponsible games.

It could be why they stopped funding AA...COD was so successful that it could have been creating a halo effect for recruiting. I wouldn't presume to think their intent was to make a realistic first and foremost and a recruitment tool a secondary benefit. I would think if they knew the COD formula at the beginning I'm sure they would have went that way. I wouldn't expect the Army to actually design a fun game.

 

[micrometers]

It could be why they stopped funding AA...COD was so successful that it could have been creating a halo effect for recruiting. I wouldn't presume to think their intent was to make a realistic first and foremost and a recruitment tool a secondary benefit. I would think if they knew the COD formula at the beginning I'm sure they would have went that way. I wouldn't expect the Army to actually design a fun game.

it's still being funded, but it does look like the developers of AA3 were fired b/c they were unhappy with the results.

from my look at it, if I knew a HS kid who was interested in the army, I'd definitely point him to the game. Tell him to go through all of the basic training segments to know what to expect at bootcamp.

I'd be far more worried if the kid really was gung-ho about COD/MOH.

I think you presume too much.

 

[Childs]

it's still being funded, but it does look like the developers of AA3 were fired b/c they were unhappy with the results.

from my look at it, if I knew a HS kid who was interested in the army, I'd definitely point him to the game. Tell him to go through all of the basic training segments to know what to expect at bootcamp.

I'd be far more worried if the kid really was gung-ho about COD/MOH.

I think you presume too much.

And perhaps you don't presume enough. The Army says its a recruitment tool, which is aimed at young kids and adults, then thats what it is. If you don't see why people might see that as evil (your word) or questionable (my word), then there really isn't much to discuss, is there?

 

[micrometers]

And perhaps you don't presume enough. The Army says its a recruitment tool, which is aimed at young kids and adults, then thats what it is. If you don't see why people might see that as evil (your word) or questionable (my word), then there really isn't much to discuss, is there?

But you're saying that its simple existence is questionable, while I"m saying that judging by the design of the game, it is actually pretty responsible in giving an accurate picture, within the limits of the medium.

 

[Craig234]

But you're saying that its simple existence is questionable, while I"m saying that judging by the design of the game, it is actually pretty responsible in giving an accurate picture, within the limits of the medium.

The point isn't the accuracy, the point is the function, to recruit people to join the military in a time our military spending is too high, our military too large.

When someone criticizes the Marlboro Man ads for recruiting smokers, it's not a useful response to say 'but they used a real cowboy who actually smokes, good realism'.

Ya, romanticizing war is another bad thing that this isn't really guilty of (though it still makes war 'entertainment'). But you're discussing a different issue.

 

[Aikouka]

it's still being funded, but it does look like the developers of AA3 were fired b/c they were unhappy with the results.

Yeah, the game is being worked on here in Alabama. Need me to go knock some sense into the guys working on it?

 

[micrometers]

The point isn't the accuracy, the point is the function, to recruit people to join the military in a time our military spending is too high, our military too large.

When someone criticizes the Marlboro Man ads for recruiting smokers, it's not a useful response to say 'but they used a real cowboy who actually smokes, good realism'.

Ya, romanticizing war is another bad thing that this isn't really guilty of (though it still makes war 'entertainment'). But you're discussing a different issue.

Why compare this game to the Marlboro Man? Compare the Marlboro man to the actual military commercials which you see running.

And the Marlboro Man isn't really telling you anything useful about smoking, but is selling an image.

If you want to see an glorified image of a soldier, let me point you here:

AA is more like Counterstrike anyways and is very sim-like.

 

[Northern Lawn]

The thing is: they could have made AA far more appealing to HS kids.

I agree. It was my first online playing experience so I didn't know what to expect.

First hurdle was the training, haven't seen that on another video game. I mean watching medical VIDEOS and taking tests? LOL, what a joke. Then they actually made training harder, with that recon thing, where you have to sneak through the forest at night without alerting any of the guards. Parts of that were hard.

I think that was the biggest barrier to getting new players to try it out. I would find myself playing with the same people everyday on the same public army server. When the public servers started leaving, the game tanked fast.

I disagree though that they should have made it appealing by having regenerated health, or fibrillation paddles like BC2 LOL, or even re-spawning. EVen though I like re-spawning now. I liked the tking...for the PRO players I wish the 100 honor cap was raised to 1,000 or something.

 

[Northern Lawn]

it's still being funded, but it does look like the developers of AA3 were fired b/c they were unhappy with the results.

EVerysingle long time player, all 100 honors btw, that I know actually quite before AA3. It was just too boring and had a lack of players and no public servers (my biggest gripe). But they all came back to try AA3, including myself. Terrible, terrible, terrible. I mean the Audio alone, sounding like it was recorded in a bathroom, all echoes, that alone should get you fired.

But I remember long before we even heard of AA3, hearing of them de-funding AA2, firing that staff.

 

[Childs]

But you're saying that its simple existence is questionable, while I"m saying that judging by the design of the game, it is actually pretty responsible in giving an accurate picture, within the limits of the medium.

I'm with Craig on this. IMO the military using a video game to recruit kids and young adults is the problem, not the game design. Just feels wrong.

 

[power_hour]

Great game. Using this game to recruit always made me a bit uncomfortable. There is no reset button in real life.

 

[Northern Lawn]

It was funny, when I would do an all night session on the same public server. People would start to talk all these forieng languages, russian, german, and whatever, as primetime worked it's way around the globe. Lots of people love America's Army.

I would tell them go play Russian Army. AA is for Canadians and Americans only, Lol.

 

[micrometers]

I'm with Craig on this. IMO the military using a video game to recruit kids and young adults is the problem, not the game design. Just feels wrong.

So you're saying the military shouldn't recruit at all? Kind of ridiculous. All organizations have to recruit. And this medium to me looks a whole lot better than those commercials they run with the guy mountain climbing, or with the limited information that they give you in recruiting brochures.

 

[Childs]

So you're saying the military shouldn't recruit at all? Kind of ridiculous. All organizations have to recruit. And this medium to me looks a whole lot better than those commercials they run with the guy mountain climbing, or with the limited information that they give you in recruiting brochures.

No, I'm not saying that all. But targeting kids by using video games? Yes, I'm saying the military shouldnt do that. Just as despicable as a tobacco company.

 

[micrometers]

No, I'm not saying that all. But targeting kids by using video games? Yes, I'm saying the military shouldnt do that. Just as despicable as a tobacco company.

Not really analogous to tobacco companies IMO. It's not cartooney, it's not gory, it's not stylized at all like Marlboro Man or Joe Camel. It's realistic and restrained.

Here's an interesting read:

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/10/19/the-real-soldier-behind-the-call-of-duty-games/

At first these veterans would tell me that they didn't want to have anything to do with a video game," Keirsey told AOL News. "And I'd say, 'Well, then, your story will never be told.' And they'd say, 'Well, OK.'"

 

[Childs]

Not really analogous to tobacco companies IMO. It's not cartooney, it's not gory, it's not stylized at all like Marlboro Man or Joe Camel. It's realistic and restrained.

I think its more analogous to big tobacco than you think. Its hard to keep track of all the despicable things tobacco companies have done to recruit, but they gave free cigarettes to kids. Or gum shaped like cigarettes. AA is a video game, which is free, and the users are encourage to give it to their friends. Its almost like a drug pusher system.

I will say, I think AA is probably the least effective means of a recruitment tool, for the reasons you mentioned, and things like COD or movies are probably better. I just don't like that they are doing this. Seems sleazy, and reasonable to me that others would feel the same way.

Here's an interesting read:

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/10/19/the-real-soldier-behind-the-call-of-duty-games/

Don't get me wrong, there is a place for these games, and the stories they tell. I just object to the notion of using it as a tool to indoctrinate youth in a military mindset. I dunno, certain mind types are better suited for the military than others. They'll find their way to the military on their own....no need to go after children.

If anything, playing FPS games should be used a screening tool to exclude people from joining the military. 300 hours in MW3? GTFO...no quickscoping in the real world son!

 

[coldmeat]

I played this game a while back, but only for the shooting ranges. Then I found out that it wasn't complete. Kind of let down because I enjoyed the range parts of the training.

 

[Craig234]

So you're saying the military shouldn't recruit at all? Kind of ridiculous. All organizations have to recruit. And this medium to me looks a whole lot better than those commercials they run with the guy mountain climbing, or with the limited information that they give you in recruiting brochures.

It's a tricky topic. There's a reason a lot of schools tried to limit military recruiters' access to students - until Republicans made a political issue out of and passed laws to cut funding.

(And I don't know how many but plenty of Democrats went along, becuase it was a 'you're not loyal to your country' type political attack).

Issue is the military being too big, and I'd rather see fewer kids supporting the excessive size joining - and ya, recruiting with a 'game' paid for by taxpayers seems a bit Orwellian with all the influence that could have depending how they do the game. What if the next one was a propaganda tool building hate against an enemy to build support for a war?

How much do you want the government propagandizing people, and the age this targets is very susceptible to propaganda.

And I'm not ok with every military commercial. The one where the kid homes home and his parents are just so impressed and respectful plays hard on kids' emotions.

'Army of One' seems more appropriate.

The other day, I was considering buying a can of iced tea as I walked by a Cigarette shop and saw they had them. But I decided I didn't want to support a cigarette shop. I know that it's not exactly going to shut them down or leave smokers nowhere else to buy cigarettes, but I'm sill not wanting my money to support a shop like that.

I don't really like the hard sell for the military to teenagers. It might be 'effective' for recruiting, but it's a very serious matter kids can use better information on, not propaganda.

And when I say propaganda, I don't mean the thing you seem to think, romanticizing war, it's more subtle. From what I hear, the game is pretty 'honest', but that's not the issue.

I'd rather see them not that easily recruiting a lot of people to join way over what's needed - directly at odds with the goals they are pursuing.

And I'd rather not see a game be used for it.

We banned advertising for cigarettes in children's markets too; nearly 100% of smokers started in their teens when they are susceptible.

But the military relies on recruiting teens, so they can't really stand such a limitation.

I'm all for a more core military mission, and against the excess; I recognize this is a larger political issue as well, but it's one we citizens have a very hard time against; there's a reason FDR wanted the Pentagon to be a temporary building because Congress couldn't keep the big business under control if it had a huge powerful bureacracy, and Eisenhower warned of the 'undue influence' of the 'military-industrial-congressional' complex. Why we had pressures taking us to a war like Vietnam, and spending so much.

A game like this is part of the oversized military's machine, and since I don'tcare for it, I don't want to support it, and I mention that here.