Slashdot Mirror
America's Army Games Cost $33 Million Over 10 Years
Responding to a Freedom Of Information Act request, the US government has revealed the operating costs of the America's Army game series over the past decade. The total bill comes to $32.8 million, with yearly costs varying from $1.3 million to $5.6 million.
"While operating America's Army 3 does involve ongoing expenses, paying the game's original development team isn't one of them. Days after the game launched in June, representatives with the Army confirmed that ties were severed with the Emeryville, California-based team behind the project, and future development efforts were being consolidated at the America's Army program office at Redstone Arsenal in Alabama. A decade after its initial foray into the world of gaming, the Army doesn't appear to be withdrawing from the industry anytime soon. In denying other aspects of the FOIA request, the Army stated 'disclosure of this information is likely to cause substantial harm to the Department of the Army's competitive position in the gaming industry.'"
Three games in total on the budget of a startup... That's pretty good.
This would have to be one of the army's most cost-effective projects ever then, wouldn't it?
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
The real deal; not quite as cheap.
and the US army has managed how many releases over ten years for less money incl hosting?
Methinks the industry is doing something wrong.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
An average of $3.3 million a year for ANY government program seems quite reasonably priced!
How much does it cost to recruit new soldiers via other methods? How about weighted by efficiency?
Just because it costs $33 million, doesn't mean it isn't a good deal.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Maybe not. But it's pretty damn awesome.
o hai
I'd wager they're doing more with the game than just recruitment. I'm sure there are a lot of interesting studies you could run on a game like that. This doesn't mean it's tin foil nefarious stuff - a lot of academics would probably like to get their hands on that data set.
Behavioral factors, navigation patterns, learning and adapting.. I'm not even a scientist and I can think of all kinds of interesting offshoots from the game - I'd be pretty surprised if there were no scientists with government grants pursuing some sort of research involving it.
Google tells me a single Javelin missile (shoulder fired anti tank missile) costs about 80 grand. So that's 410 missiles for 10 years of gaming.
However, a big fancy Tomahawk cruise missile is (according to wikipedia) $600,000 a pop. So that would get you almost 55 cruise missiles, which would cause a heck of a lot more destruction.
... I guess American Communism didn't reach their level of efficiency just yet.
Also the game was a massive success in the beginning regarding recruiting, don't know these days since I've stopped playing, but when I played there was a lot of people talking about signing up because of the game.
Or on the flip side, maybe all that we know in our world is just an advanced video game to entertain some higher life forms.
-Orson Scott Card, circa 1985
I'm gonna steal that idea and put it in a short story - thanks!
-Orson Scott Card, circa 1977
Play Command HQ online
'In denying other aspects of the FOIA request, the Army stated 'disclosure of this information is likely to cause substantial harm to the Department of the Army's competitive position in the gaming industry.'
I'll be the first to admit that I'm a fan of America's Army and like the games. But that the Federal Government, much less the Army, should be concerned with its ability to compete against private industry? Isn't that contrary to our beliefs regarding the purposes of Government and of our economic system (at least in the U.S.)? And to top it off, it's denying a FOIA request on the basis, not of national security, an on-going criminal investigation or violation of someone's privacy, but on the basis of what could be called a trade secret? And it's so bogus to boot, they can invest as much as they want into the program to out-compete their private industry competitors without fear as they don't have to recoup their expenses... the Army won't go out of business if they spend foolishly. Private companies on the other hand do go out of business when they fail to have excess revenues to costs... unless you're a car company or a well connected bank of course. I know it's not the first time this has happened (Amtrak, USPS), but still... aren't the existing game companies good enough?
(Stepping off of soap box and taking big breath to facilitate big sigh)
Numerous studies have shown that games are about the most consistent and effective way to reach young US males. They generally watch a lot less TV (sports being the possible exception). Considering the huge marketing budget that is spent on advertising the Army, I'd wager that programs like this are highly effective--but I'd be very interested in additional data that reveals how many recruiting leads the Army associates with the program!
I was at the auto show and the had a booth setup with a humvee and a bunch ov xboxes and pc running for people to play. I remember at E3 one year and the had special forces guys drop in from a chopper and stuff like that. I think the cost are probably more but they write the costs off as traning or recuritment or just plain old PR stuff.
32 million seems to much for just 3 video games. Why is it so high?
People seem to assume that is development costs; but AA's budget, in true Army style, could include a lot more - from printing copies, facility costs, operational costs such as vehicle gas, travel and TDY expenses, etc.
That said, 33 mill is pretty impressive, especially if it is all in costs of the organization.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Figure ten to twenty million plus per team fielded.
At least AA doesn't present war as a clean and easy and dismissible.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
If I were the Air force, I would grab one of the OSS forms of a sim (flight gear comes to mind), and then enhance the daylight out of it, so that it can do dogfights. Finally, include both regular aircrafts AND the new drones on these.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
wahhhh wahhh wahhh fucking baby probably the best 33 mil the army ever spent..
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
Recruiting teams per shopping mall @$10 per hour, 8 h weekends, ~a few per ~50 states over ten years, front and back.
The cost of having kids play a 33 million US$ Army branded computer game.
Having kids turn up at a recruiting office after playing a game:
Priceless.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I have played America's Army a bit and there are a ton of active duty military playing the game. So it has quite an appeal. Plus the army runs training simulations with America's Army. So it has many more benefits than just being "a game". Of course some people are still going to claim it will be a waste of money. If you haven't played, it isn't just another FPS. The game is based on realism. You don't respawn after you die. If an enemy sees you first you die. There isn't kill streaks that give you power ups. Oh, and the current version is super buggy. Probably because they fired the entire development team after the last release.
War is foolish.
When 9/11 happened I said to myself, "This is tragic, but I hope the president and Congress doesn't do something foolish, like waste billions of dollars fighting a war, just because ~2000 people died. After all more people die every year from just car accidents, and we don't declare war on Ford or Toyota."
Well my hope was forlorn. If I didn't know any better, I'd think we were re-enacting the downfall of the Ancient Athenian Democracy - death through war and foolish, out-of-control spending.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
War is foolish.
When 9/11 happened I said to myself, "This is tragic, but I hope the president and Congress doesn't do something foolish, like waste billions of dollars fighting a war, just because ~2000 people died. After all more people die every year from just car accidents, and we don't declare war on Ford or Toyota."
Well my hope was forlorn. If I didn't know any better, I'd think we were re-enacting the downfall of the Ancient Athenian Democracy - death through war and foolish, out-of-control spending.
War may be foolish, but it's a necessary evil in our world. What if we'd approached Pearl Harbor with the mindset of "Yeah, we were attacked, and a few thousand people died, but it's better to just sit there and take it than to do anything about it"? Things would've turned out a lot differently in Europe, I'm sure. Refusing to participate in war doesn't make it go away, after all.
Until we pay back foreign lenders....which are probably never. Of course we probably could of just printed the money...oh..did that too.
War is foolish.
So is sex, but we do it anyway. It's all just a question if the benefit outweighs the cost. If you look at the cost of STDs and the impact of an ever expanding population upon the human eco-system, the sapping of the human creative spirit, you might actually think sex is bad and war is pretty good.
Let's all ban sex and have a national army of all men.
This is my sig.
Bad idea. It wouldn't take long until someone decides to fire at the "virtual" civilians or find out if the IFF keeps him from shooting his "virtual" teammates and if he can overcome it by starting a salvo and then rapidly turning.
And assume people found out about this (perhaps by virtue of the drones teabagging killed enemies): They'd have to immediately cancel the project before someone hostile to the Army makes his way into the game and intentionally goes on a rampage.
Letting random civilians remotely control military hardware is a phenomenally bad idea.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
War is foolish.
That depends on how War is conducted.
Agreed. But it WOULD provide a wonderful base of recruits if the software functions the same - recruit those who do well. (They do track success/failure rates)
War is foolish...
Speaking of foolish...
more people die every year from just car accidents, and we don't declare war on Ford or Toyota."
If Ford and Toyota willingly created devices that were meant solely to kill people for ideological reasons, we most certainly would and should declare war on them.
Bingo.
Lets put this into perspective. How many TV commercials, all across the US, can you pay for with $33.00 million dollars over ten years? Not many. Now consider how many of those commercials are primarily targeting the very people who you want to entice? Not many. Figure $100,000 per 30-seconds of national airtime. That same money spent on national commercials would have only purchased 330, 30-second, national commercials. Or, thirty three commercials per year. In reality, its likely it would be even fewer than that as $100,000 per slot is likely the minimum. Had they wanted placement during something like American Idol finales (ya, likely bad example), the slot price is likely to be 30% to 50% higher; or more. And even then, the number of people who are actually effectively targeted would be very limited. Especially when you consider with a game the same people they are targeted become inundated with the concept of actually joining the military, versus as most, 165 minutes (2.75 hours) of exposure with the concept - assuming those same people see every commercial, which simply isn't likely.
Simply put, this is clearly one of the most cost effective advertising campaigns ever produced by the military, let alone government, and is likely providing a huge bang for the buck! Especially when you consider the same game is then used as a direct recruiting tool at public events - as it allows would be recruiters to directly talk to potential recruits at said events. This in turn significantly improves the bang for the buck ratio.
I don't have a problem with this at all.
$10 an hour for a recruiter? Most recruiters are in the E6-E8 range, which is a salary roughly around the $50,000 a year mark. That's a lot more than $10 an hour!
If our Army is going to continue to make videogames, surely we can provide our citizens with Universal Single Payer Health Care....
The VA provides single-payer, single-provider, socialized, health care for the Army.
Sure, because $33 million on a PR and training sim is the same thing as several trillion dollars on a single payor healthcare system.
If we can provide citizens with Universal Single Payer Health Care for $32.8 million over 10 years, I'd say you have a point. Something tells me that $32.8 million wouldn't last very long though.
As a 12-year vet myself, it is pretty clear to me, and the overwhelming majority of people who sign up, that our military is completely voluntary, so nobody is being sent "to their death".
33 million / 300 million = 0.11 dollars / 10 years = .01 dollars per year per person.
of course that's assuming everyone pays the same amount of taxes.
I don't make a lot of money so it cost me nothing, on the other hand it probably cost my parents 3 cents a year or something.
lose != loose
Actually my brother and I showed up to the recruiting office to pick up the game, they were disappointed when we said we only wanted the game. I was 6ft and in reasonable shape, and my little brother was 6'5" defensive end on the football team.
If that was true why wouldn't they allow aim bots?
When you consider Avatar has an advertising budget of something like $100 million I'd say the Army had found a cheap and effective way of getting their name out there.
I think there's more to it than that. Hopefully the cost includes America's Army as a Platform. I know military training has been trying to enforce compliance to standards (e.g. SCORM) and Learning Management Systems so they can track who has what training. Something like this can bring it all together, and that cost over 10 years sounds like an excellent investment considering they took the time to proof something out, then extend functionality as opposed to the typical requirements swirl that ends up with programs that never actually come to fruition.
The difference is that in the case of Pearl Harbor, an actual government was responsible. We could identify and fight that enemy. In today's Iraq / Afghanistan mess, no government is responsible, just a bunch of extremists.
There is no way to "win" when you're talking about a handful of extremists, when you kill one group another pops up. Their "goal" is to achieve destabilization and they're happy to die in pursuing that goal. We will find no end to these wars because of this. You can't fight suicide bombers with an army, the best case is to make yourself uninteresting as possible rather than keep stirring them up, while increasing security at our borders. We have no idea how many of these people are already in our country, more keep popping up every day.
Just make the early levels an actual game and then switch them over to controlling a murderbot (without telling them, natch) once they reach a high enough score/rank/level to have weeded out the experimenters/griefers/etc. Problem solved.
Read my blog.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Great post, except the part where you ascribe untruths to the Democratic party. They (we) represent a majority of Americans right now, and are not "far left" and DEFINITELY don't "hate the military".
Democrats AND Republicans = False Dichotomy.Both are sides of the same coin. The rank and file are overwhelmingly decent people who are concerned about their families and communities but are clueless about how things are accomplished in government (HINT: follow the money). The political leaders are almost without exception opportunistic asshats.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
This comment deserves to be Score:5, Troll, if I've ever seen one. Give 'em a +1, underrated.
Sure, it's a troll, but it's oh-so accurate. There's no reason a troll can't be admired, on rare occasions.
Never actually considered to talk with these extremists to know what's pissing them off instead of labeling them extremists did ya? Oh and maybe robbing them out of their oil...
It's funny Pearl Harbor is mentioned, because it's got to do with - that's right! - oil! In that case, the skillful manipulation of the Japanese empire into attacking first or loosing their supplies of oil.
I fail to understand how is it that you always manage to think you are the victims of unprovoked attack and aggression. You guys really live inside your own little bubble isn't it? You really believe the whole world hates America because they don't like, what, your flag? The way you talk? Or maybe it's the fact that your successive governments persist in fucking with everyone that has something they would like to have? You fuck with them, they fuck with you... I'll tell you more. You think it's going to stop? Think again. This is not the 40's... Your big bad army is pretty much useless. It's been like 8 years since Afghanistan was invaded right? Are more troops going to finally win the war? Think again. The war is lost already. Whether you want it or not, the talibans are returning to power. It's a matter of time and dead Americans. It's sad but true. Your people is dying there for what? Freedom? Come on...
Welcome to the big wide world.
You're modded Insightful, but your comment is unfortunately off topic. The Japanese were a credible threat, Pearl Harbor was a preliminary strike, to be followed by like, a real war, and the WW2 and modern day political climates are completely different. For one thing, the Axis really was the biggest threat to the quality of life of the average citizen, hardly a claim any terrorist can back up with data. Although I guess these days there is data to suggest that a single terrorist attack really can affect average quality of life :/.
Way to play the field with your political shenanigans.
Please, don't ever bring that up again when talking about something not even remotely close to it.
Have a good one.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
da = the
dis = this
dat = that
I figured I'd decipher for those that actually type and read right.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
I'm pretty sure the people responsible for hijacking the planes on 9/11 disappeared from the face of the earth when the planes they were on crashed into buildings and the ground. Kind of hard to try those guys. And we did try the one guy who survived... and that we can find. I'm sure Bin Laden will get a nice trial whenever he's caught... alive that is.
Ahh, the good old days. I left my computer on overnight so I could download the game on my "640Kbps" (really only about 480Kbps sustained) DSL line. Remember back when hosts didn't have lines for servers, and everyone was downloading at-once at 5KB/s? That was exatly my experience downloading America's Army.
Then after all the wait, I installed the game and - hey, why can't I connect to multiplayer servers? It turned out, you had to go through "basic training" before you could play online on the official servers. Part of the training was single player on your local machine, and that was easily completed, but the second half was online.
Here was the problem with the online training servers:
(1) There were not enough training servers to handle the load, and dozens of people were sitting there waiting for when a training session was over, and the server would clear-out.
(2) The training session was an ungodly 45 minutes long, and if you failed any part (or got disconnected), you had to start over.
I gave up after just 2 45 minute failures, and decided to bypass the whole "official" server system, just to see what kind of game I was missing out on. The game, it turns out, was not any more interesting to play than say Return to Castle Wolfenstein multiplayer, and it paled in comparison to the upcoming Battlefield 1942 (demo released the following month). I uninstalled AA and never touched the series again.
So, what did the Army get for their millions? A marginal free team FPS that got trounced by better game developers. I don't think that's worth it.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
Fuck you from a proud veteran
Surely you mean, "proud babykiller"?
Yes, I know. They paid the millions in licensing fees for it, though, and did enough modification to make it into a game.
Comment removed based on user account deletion