Slashdot Mirror


America's Army Recruiting Success Discussed

Thanks to Nola.com for their article discussing the success of the America's Army game/recruiting tool, as the free PC first-person shooter "...now has more than 2 million registered users, making it one of the five most popular action games played online." Most interestingly, since "...the ultimate aim of the game is to arouse tech-savvy teenagers' interest in serving in the Army", can the success of the game be measured? The article gives an example of the Kansas City Recruiting Battalion, who are hosting monthly LAN sessions at a technical college, and "...can claim seven new recruits among the players, and expect to sign at least as many more in the coming month."

2 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. Slightly OT... by theridersofrohan · · Score: 4, Interesting
    But interesting indeed!


    Here's the other side of the story. Special Force, an fps " allegedly produced by the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah. The game's designers seek to "correct" the influence of western gaming concepts on the Middle East. In particular, they want to combat the view that the "oppressor" always defeats the "Arab."".


    I found an article about it in arstechnica.

  2. Assorted Thoughts by GeorgeH · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The game reportedly cost 1% of the Army's advertising budget, and they were able to outspend the industry to create what's generally considered a kick ass game. Finally my tax dollars are doing something I can stand behind, now how about a PS2 port?
    "The Army is training kids at taxpayer expense to become sociopaths and killers," said Thompson, who says he has written more than a dozen unanswered letters asking the Defense Department to pull the plug on the game. "I love the military, and I'd describe myself as a right-wing conservative. But the Army is doing something very bad."
    This is a very pertinent viewpoint, especially in light of the recent GTA shooting lawsuit. What the army is saying by publishing this game is "games affect behavior." The behavior change they're trying to create is an army joining one, but the premise is the same as the people who say that video games create psychopaths. If video games affect people, they can do so both positively and negatively.
    --
    Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?