It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Gamers Soldiers of the Future?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I dont think gamers will be watched by the government to get soldiers.. I play CS competitively and I'm def. no soldier. Then all the really good players (as the joke goes) would need quite a lot of training to get into shape to ever be a soldier.
I do, however, see the government using video games to try and manipulate people into joining the armed forces (we see this already with America's Army). The game has people use teamwork to accomplish goals, while shooting off the enemy. Although the game, last time i ever played it, wasnt that realistic, to young gamers it could easily manipulate them into thinking the Army was something they may want to do.




posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
You talk about these games helping your eyehand coordination ect. Major league baseball players make millions..when some gamer converts his "skill" to ball diamond then I will believe games can teach motor skills.
Sure I have no doubt many help in areas of strategy ect. Still waiting for Madden 2007 champ to go head to head with Ladanion Tomlison on field...



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Have any of you heard of the new upcoming game, called Crysis? It promotes the idea of the United States going to war against North Korea, and then fighting with aliens and stuff.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by TheoOne]



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
I don't think gamers are soldiers of the future.

Would you rather sit at a desk and play soldier while slurping a big-gulp and munching on pizza.....or get shot at for real and be dragging the remains of your best mate out of a ditch before the tanks flatten you into obscurity?

I can't see how any "gamer" would sacrifice their comfort zone to risk everything for someone they'll never meet with a hidden agenda.

Games may train soldiers, but gamers are not soldiers.

Unless of course.....conscription....



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Saw an advert on T.V. for recrutment purposes for the British army today and it shows a squad advancing through some valley and they have a small UAV flying above them for recon. The thing that got me was that when you see the guy back at camp flying the thing, he's using an x-box controller!!!!!

gotta be honest that struck me as a little odd...then I saw this thread so I thought I'd post it. can't find it on the net though, might be new.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 06:23 AM
link   
definately it will give future soldiers the edge.. the difference is, you don't grow a pair of balls behind the computer screen and they play a big part in warfare. heh

[edit on 25-9-2007 by arclore]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 06:31 AM
link   
I cant really see gamers being future soldiers.. hell i play CSS all the freaking time but for me its a form of stress relief. out in the battle field i belive ti would be a completely different sort of game. The only thing I can see helping woul;d be the gamers that seriously play all these Flight sims as it has been prooved that many of them are better at flying the UAV's than some of the proffessionals.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:11 AM
link   
As a bonified geek myself, this topic has come up numerous times during drunken rants with friends.

We came to the following conclusions.
Most fps's will enhance minor motor kinetic function and perhaps speed of thought and strategy.
Will def enhance strategic thinking with regards to killing other human beings.

However...
Almost all fps's suffer from major downfalls in regards to training a super soldier. Games offer a measurable amount of 'health' as well as health packs. To negate these (as in a real life situation) would dramitically change standard strategies.
All strategies for these games are based on values programmed into the game, this creates a limited number of scenarios (unlike real life).

While an avid fps gamer would probably be more adept than a non-gamer I sincerely doubt that the difference would be substantial enough to warrant 'gamer conscription' :p Perhaps a series of games could be created that would better serve this purpose.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
I learned better strategies from Rome total war, Empire Earth, Battlefield 2, and etc, then any general's school could hope to teach me. I think this is because you don't learn strategies, you make them.


I so agree, if I ever am commanding a squads of pike men, cavalry, and archers I will rock!!
I actually like the games that have more realistic production and supply models, but AI always sucks.

Seriously they call them games for kids, when they graduate and join army they call them simulators. They are networked to so soldiers can each control one element while others move with him, like an online game.

(OP said FPS this not a dis on idea) We might have lots of stupid kids in America bad schools and on the streets, but if we ever have to fight trolls or dragons with swords and magic, we will kick tail.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spec01
We came to the following conclusions.
Most fps's will enhance minor motor kinetic function and perhaps speed of thought and strategy.
Will def enhance strategic thinking with regards to killing other human beings.

However...
Almost all fps's suffer from major downfalls in regards to training a super soldier. Games offer a measurable amount of 'health' as well as health packs. To negate these (as in a real life situation) would dramitically change standard strategies.
All strategies for these games are based on values programmed into the game, this creates a limited number of scenarios (unlike real life).


Good point that health bar is really not very realistic, but it still trains people to keep moving and not freak out when contact occurs.

The idea of not getting shot is badly simulated in shooters, for instance in real life you might wait hours to get an ambush or a snipper shot, nobody going to do that in a game.

My experiance online saved my butt one night. A guy came up ask for a smoke I said "no", started to walk. He moved in front of me forcing me to keep facing him. I flashed on DAOC, memory of the game completly, I knew when this happens, when you are being baited so a stealther can come up and get a back stab.

He was keeping my facing the direction he wanted, just like in DAOC. I did a quick head check sure enough this big guy is moving fast and low right at me. I got out ok, health bar in the green
only because of DAOC video game experiance. I sh** you not.

[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]

[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Not only teaching tactics and team work but also: making use of all available tools, clearing the "fog of war" from the mind, learning how to stay cool under pressure, break down of fear of death...

There are down sides to having games as well - limitations on creativity, improvisation...

I don't know if we'll ever use robots, but these kids would probably do better in combat than other first timers who were never exposed to these games. However, I wonder how many of them have physical limitations...



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I've always thought about this. I don't think they're monitering like top players, and maybe wanting to recruit them or anything.

But still, even though you're correct about training the eye/hand coordination, I think many of the 'top players' wouldn't be soldier material.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   
People seem to be ignoring my posts lol.
So i'll put it plain and simple.
This is the software that some armies train with.

VBS2, made by Bohemia Interactive, company that also made OFP1 (Commercial war realism game), ArmA (same), VBS1 (Military war realism game)

For VBS1, here is a page with people that use their software:
www.virtualbattlefieldsystems.com...

Sound seems to be a bit off, but just search for the same vid on video.google for the proper working version.







[edit on 25/9/07 by -0mega-]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I've been on the battlefield and I also play FPS games like the COD series. I've got quite a lot of military experience (I'll be retiring soon). So, I think I speak from a position of some experience. IMO, FPS games can be valuable in teaching the fundamentals of squad tactics and strategy, but they're not that valuable in teaching someone how to be a soldier on or off the battlefield. There is just no substitute for hands-on training and real-world experience. Period. The military has found that there is no amount of training that can truely prepare soldiers for the battlefield. Only experience on the battlefield can do that.

The difference between FPS games and the real world is night and day. I don't think that they desensitize a person to the violence of the battlefield as much as some believe. Although, FPS games do that to a certain point they don't even come close to approximating real life. For example, I've never heard of anyone claiming to have PTSD from playing an FPS game.
Additionally, I think people don't understand what qualities in a person are needed to make a good soldier. IMO, being good at an FPS game is not an indication that a person would do well on the battlefield or make a good soldier. All it really means to me is that they have enough free time to become good at a game.

Also, just a note on those armed robots that were shown on Futureweapons: I thought that the idea was cool, but my first thought was 'what if the weapon jams or misfeeds or the thing gets knocked over?' In that case it would be just another really expensive hunk of crap that somebody is responsible for.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Oh man Omega, I have put like 3 months of my life into Operation Flashpiont Cold War Crisis/Resistance. I just love that game and the mission editor is amazing! I have only played a little Armed Assault because my graphics card is too old on my home PC. That VBS1 and 2 look amazing too though. Are they available for home PC use? I heard that OFP2 is coming out on PS3. That should be great as long as they retain the realism and mission editor. I may have to buy a PS3 just for that game.

OFP Rocks! Not sure how well it would prepare me for battle though.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darce
Oh man Omega, I have put like 3 months of my life into Operation Flashpiont Cold War Crisis/Resistance. I just love that game and the mission editor is amazing! I have only played a little Armed Assault because my graphics card is too old on my home PC. That VBS1 and 2 look amazing too though. Are they available for home PC use? I heard that OFP2 is coming out on PS3. That should be great as long as they retain the realism and mission editor. I may have to buy a PS3 just for that game.

OFP Rocks! Not sure how well it would prepare me for battle though.


Hehe I reinstalled The GOTY edition to play it again =p.

Anyway, yeah, VBS1 and VBS2 are available for Home PC usage, the only difference between VBS and OFP though:

OFP: 5 Dollars / Euros? (It's ancient, so uber cheap lol)
VBS1 and 2: VBS1 is still a few hundreds of dollars if I'm right, and VBS2, will probably cost immense amounts of money when it's released lol.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Wow I just watched all the vids and that is hot. I can only imagine with the VR goggles how amazing it could be. Is there even a system in the civilian market that can run such an unbelievable program? Even the ArmA demo chugs on a PC that ran BF2142 smoothly.

I can never bring myself to uninstall OFP because I always know that I will want to play it again. Does anyone play it online anymore?

Back on topic, I suppose that this program would be useful to test out battle plans or exercises before hand to weed out any problems that may arise in the virtual cold run. Also training how to manage disastrous real world scenarios with the resources available to the squad that would otherwise be impossible to train for. I imagine that you would first have to train to become a soldier, then train virtually to retain the experience of cold run missions without wasting major resources. Seems worth it to me as long as the AI is as unpredictable as us humans.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I never had this thought, so once again an ATS thread is expanding my view. excellent.

I guess it would make sense to ask world champion gamers if they have ever been approached by recruitment personell.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 05:14 AM
link   
I'm a self-described geek and an avid gamer.

I gots no problem saying it.
I play paintball, hike, and camp from time to time, too.

Usually, I'd think of myself as a terrible solider, but sometimes I think what I've learned while gaming is of tactical value. I think if I was fighting for something and with people I believed in, I could be rather effective. I'd want more training, but if my country was directly (and I mean directly) threatened I'd sign up.

I don't know if anyone here plays tactically with a squad, but having good communications and knowing where you men are is huge and can make a real impact on a game. It's a skill you have to learn and develop over time. Also knowing what a good firing angle is and being able to predict troop movements... this is all knowledge that would be helpful on the battle field.

That said, here's a little treat for my fellow gamers.
This is a vid I put together from a round on Battlefield 2142.
It shows some of what I'm talking about... squad based tactical skills... but mostly this is a furball:

Google Video Link

Hope ya like TOOL.


[edit on 26-9-2007 by BitRaiser]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Darce
 


Nice vid!

I love TOOL, one of my favorite bands.

Thanks for the replies people!

Keep on gaming.


BTW
To all the people who didn't read my first post.....I am not saying gamers are going to turn into human soldiers, I am simply saying that gamers might control robots similar to human soldiers. Like a robo-soldier controlled by and geek behind a screen. Please read the whole post before making out of topic statements.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join