Are Gamers Soldiers of the Future?

I used to play videogames, violent ones... on the internet. Eventually after 200 hours of playtime it became pretty much an instinct to shoot to kill, and you could EASILY do it without the slightest amount of thought. Infact, I would routinely hold TAB to check my score, and see how many people I've shot. I would think that, yes, it would reduce reaction time and thought required to go into killing, so much infact I saw videos of people getting blown to bits with snipers. I had no reaction.

You look at Western Military training. It's all about repeditiveness and adrenaline; kill or be killed. Same thing in a videogame, and after enough of it you'll be accustomed to it. I saw a show on Cable TV, 'The Truth About Killing' it was called. They had the host what a few hours of violent videos with his eye lids held open by hooks while being secured to a chair.

Afterwards he HATED violence and hated the thought of going to a military training center. At the centre, at first he hated it, but eventually he actually, found it fun.... especially when he smiled to the camera to show someone he had shot with fake bullets.

This training really works. In the Falklands, the brits and the Argentines both were armed with the same weapon. Yet, the brits with there modern training, could murder 3 Argentines for every one brit. Yep, the videogames really work too.

I do beleive videogames would certaintly help people to kill... maybe it could even aid in the training process for troops. But, I highly doubt people who play videogames (nerds) will ever become the soldiers of the future as current training does nearly the exact same thing, not to mention people who are good at videogames are often nerds.

Tata.

[edit on 24/9/07 by JimmyCarterIsSmarter]

i had the pleasure of training with an awsome peice of machine called cctt.
close combat tactial traning. it is a simulator that attaches sensors to your body so that when you move the screne moves with you. you could look up down around corners, hi tech stuff.. i would like to better explain but for time sake ill spare the boring details.

[edit on 15amu42007 by DaleGribble]

From my own personal experience of playing FPS or other games, the gaming world is no different to the real world. One of the reasons I dont play multiplayer games as much as I used too, is because of all the disrespectful teenagers who are nothing more than morons & cheats. I've certainly met my fairshare of them. If they win they hurl abuse at you, but if they lose they accuse you of cheating. It's truly sad when someone takes gaming that seriously. I think these people seriously need to get a life. Playing Pes6 has it's moments though. Especially when your playing 2v2 and completely wupping your opponents and then you sit back and laugh while they self destruct and start hurling abuse at each other.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by kindred]

[edit on 24-9-2007 by kindred]

Funny how noone mentioned it yet:
Commercial -Operation Flashpoint 1 (old war game, most realistic thing I've ever seen in that time).
Military -VBS1 (Same engine, same company, made for the military instead of the public.)

Currently scheduled for release in 2009, VBS2. (Military version)

Here's a 30 minute video about some features in VBS2.

IMO OFP1, ArmA, VBS1, VBS2, all made by the same company, are the BEST war games ever.

Though I guess it would be fun lol:
"YOU, [Alpha]-0mega-, are being monitored by us, and we noticed you got 294380248 kills and 0 deaths, and managed to heal 20 units!"

"For this extraordinary display of skill we will promote you to Real-Life General!"

Or imagine, the ultimate Soldier training simulator, a MMORPG with real-life stimulation.

Eg.: If you do 20 pushups, your character in "Virtual WarWorld" will get STR+

Despite the graphics, even OFP1 is sublime.

[edit on 24/9/07 by -0mega-]

This is a very interesting topic. They had a case in NYC a few years back where 17 cops opened up on one man firing 50 some odd rounds and hitting the man 17 times. Then you have a kid who was a gamer go into a school and open up in a library and out of 17 kills 15 were head shots. Not wanting to hype this kid up but that is unheard of. Let me google some links so i can back up my info. But to answer your question yes I do believe avid FPS gamers will be the next gen solders.

Computer games are limited in scope. There will be no next generation soldiers by computer games. Simply put, if the program was changed, you would be the hunted ones and not some image on a computer screen. Reality is different than dreaming while playing a computer game. The first time a computer game dishes out pain to the point of making gamers really think about real life once more, then again your thinking will change.
When the computer does everything faster than you can even dream of, you will soon be afraid, really afraid, and really learn something that is important.

Originally posted by emjoi
And then there's the old Sci-Fi novel "Enders Game"

Exactly what I was thinking, emjoi. For those who have not read this book, it's well worth your time.

They did a session on top gear because a racer said he could do Leguna Seca Race Way because he played it hundreds of times on Gran Turismo. So the the host Jeremy Clarkson got very good at the game and tried to mimic his score with the exact same car in real life at the track. He came 10 seconds short everytime because the game lacked fear and G Forces of real life. Games are a window but they are not reality. Saying gamers are the future of warfare is like being 12 and saying you know kung fu because you watched every Bruce Lee movie 20 times.

Originally posted by IMAdamnALIEN
I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the right forum but here it goes anyway.

I believe, as video games increase their ability to become "real", humans are inadvertently enhancing brain function. I will solely focus on first person shooters at the moment.

If anyone has ever played a FPS you already know that moving your mouse and using your keyboard to move a virtual avatar around a battlefield, takes skill and fine hand-eye coordination. Would this enhance reaction time?

Playing a multiplayer game such as Battlefield or Counterstrike requires teamwork and real time tactics. In order to win or gain skill you must work together, this would allow areas of the brain that form strategic thoughts to be exercised, thus, progressively making a perfect digital solder.

Now, are video games being monitored by the government? Wouldn't this make sense if games are already saving in-game stats like player accuracy, wins, losses, ability to take your enemy out in a split second. This information could be gathered with intent to create a perfect soldier for a digital future battlefield, except this time the game is real and the soldier is a robot controlled by a human super gamer!

Just something I wanted to type out before I forgot what I was thinking about.

Thanks for reading!

I kick ass on tetris and burger time

These games (with rare exceptions) are very unrealistic and are poor tactical simulators.

Ex. in the Call of Duty series, Day of Defeat and the Medal of Honor series there are 3 ways to fight: sniper rifles, submachine guns and machine guns and grenades. All people do is hop around the map like idiots chucking grenades in every direction including at their own team members.

The lamest of all time is in the Battlefield series with the idiots that bunny hop around the map with an MG42/BAR/M249/RPK as they alternate between throwing grenades in every direction and mowing people down ... you know what im talking about, the people who rack up 100+ kills a round while people who play normal like me (using a good ol bolt action rifle) get maybe 10 kills and 1000000 deaths per map because I cant even spawn without the army of uber Rambo bunny hoppers overrunning the base Fortunately some Battlefield 1942 servers actually banned sniper rifles and machine guns or restricted them to a handful per team (especially in the Soldier 9 realism mod servers). My greatest gaming moment was on one of the Battlefield 1942 Soldier 9 Realism Mod servers that was playing the Battle of the Bulge map and I got into one of the destroyed farmhouses (I was on the US side and had my trusty M1 Garand) and the Germans basically overran the entire map and I picked off about 30 German players before a tank noob finally figured out where I was and blew me up, I mean fight me face to face where I actually have a chance, but no hide in your tank you sissy lol

In short, these people would not last 5 seconds in a real battle much less in any military or paramilitary organization. Games are simply so different from reality.

What you should of named the thread:

Are Soldiers of the Present Gamers?

The answer is yes.

Rainbow Six
Ghost Recon
Halo
Gears of War
Battlefield
Call of Duty
etc, etc.

Most soldiers between the ages of 18-30 have large libraries of video games. They both impact and reflect the soldiers way of life.

Guys who excel at Halo, usually shoot 40 out of 40 at the range.

Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2, is probably the best "soldier simulator" out there.

The Future is Now.

I don't think such is the case. Yes, video games can give you better reaction times etc, but hey. Sitting at 3am in a comfy chair shooting n00bs on Counterstrike, knowing the map cos you've played it 600 times, and know where the enemy will appear and how to cap him quickly, drinking mountain dew and eating cheetos does not compare to lying in a drainage ditch full of s-t in Karbul, your friend of 2 years screaming and screaming, his stomach blown out of his body, another friend disintergrated nearby, covering you in blood and burnt flesh, crying and pissing yourself as bullets tear up the ground and explosions ring your ears.

There is no comparison.

You would be better to change the title to "Are Soldiers the Gamers of the Future?", because I feel FPS type programmes will be used more and more to train troops. Not that it will help them against IEDs. They have no ping rate or tactics.

I apologise. I really hate my laptop.

[edit on 13/09/07 by Subcomandante]

As I said Before.
OFP

i hope its not the future cuz my battlefield 2 scores lately have been suckingf hard games are not real life there is no fear in a video game.. but there is fear the video game.

This topic reminds me of the movie "The last starfighter", where the kid in that plays an arcade machine, and then becomes recruited to fight in a galactic war.

I'm not so convinced games will help that much, apart from maybe increasing reaction times and things, but I do think in the future when people are controlling robots and unmanned vehicles from a base it will be much more relevant and important.

reply to post by DaleGribble


Holy Sweetness Batman!!!


Man I wanna play that now! You can move your body and the sim moves with you? Incredible!

Thanks for the replies people, this thread is moving along nicely!

reply to post by kindred


HAHAHA!
Well put!

What you said was right on the money. I will continue to game knowing there are others among us that enjoy the game for what it is, simply competition. Using your own cunning and instincts real time is a great rush and its is shared throughout the world. It is people like you described that really ruin it for the rest of the legit gamers.

Check out Crysis everyone its going to rule!!!!

Originally posted by Subcomandante
I don't think such is the case. Yes, video games can give you better reaction times etc, but hey. Sitting at 3am in a comfy chair shooting n00bs on Counterstrike, knowing the map cos you've played it 600 times, and know where the enemy will appear and how to cap him quickly, drinking mountain dew and eating cheetos does not compare to lying in a drainage ditch full of s-t in Karbul, your friend of 2 years screaming and screaming, his stomach blown out of his body, another friend disintergrated nearby, covering you in blood and burnt flesh, crying and pissing yourself as bullets tear up the ground and explosions ring your ears.

There is no comparison.

You would be better to change the title to "Are Soldiers the Gamers of the Future?", because I feel FPS type programmes will be used more and more to train troops. Not that it will help them against IEDs. They have no ping rate or tactics.

I didnt say anything about being deployed. I said at the range as in M-16/M-4 range, not downrange.

My experience, which I have Seven years of. FPS players on consoles not PCs, not PCs, and not PCs usually shoot expert at the range.

Im going to have to agree with Omega, ArmA is about as realistic as it gets.

blog.pcformat.co.uk...
www.armedassault.com...

Just look at the amount of detail. Also ammo is limited (and the ammo boxes are pretty often quite far away), 1 shot 1 kill, 1 AT4/RPG takes out a tank where as in Battlefield 2 I once needed 7 RPGs to take out 1 tank and best of all; there are no bunny hoppers as jumping is disabled. The map is also gigantic and has almost every terrain feature from a big city in the desert to a small rural town in the mountains.