The Military-Entertainment Complex
August 24, 2004 8:17 AM Subscribe
Live, play, fight, and die in the Matrix. While the Times catches on to the XboX warriors who train with Full Spectrum Warrior and There, Wired takes a look at what's next for the military-entertainment complex. After Toys and Ender's Game, after America's Army and 9/11 Survivor, where will the convergence of real killing, simulated killing practice, and killing for fun lead?
I don't know what "Splinter Cell stealth-action napping" is, but the room-sized simulator I describe in the Wired article was anything but "boring." If anything, it's not boring enough to be a true simulation of battlefield conditions -- where, in between the firefights in which you're praying for your life and the survival of your buddies, you're trying to kill as many Iraqis as possible.
In the article, I quote a young corporal as saying, "After I went through it, I was like, Can you send me over to Iraq right now so I can get on the ball?"
As photorealistic and immersive and surround-sound-mindblowing as the JFETS simulator is, does its resemblance to the coolest room-sized videogame in the world constitute false advertising of the experience of war for teenage recruits who grew up on videogames? Or are realistic battle-simulations like this the best way to save lives (American lives, anyway) in the urban battlegrounds of places like Najaf?
A pregnant question.
posted by digaman at 9:12 AM on August 24, 2004
In the article, I quote a young corporal as saying, "After I went through it, I was like, Can you send me over to Iraq right now so I can get on the ball?"
As photorealistic and immersive and surround-sound-mindblowing as the JFETS simulator is, does its resemblance to the coolest room-sized videogame in the world constitute false advertising of the experience of war for teenage recruits who grew up on videogames? Or are realistic battle-simulations like this the best way to save lives (American lives, anyway) in the urban battlegrounds of places like Najaf?
A pregnant question.
posted by digaman at 9:12 AM on August 24, 2004
Sorry, I scrambled the syntax of the first sentence of my post. (It's early here in SF). What I meant to say was: "...where, in between the firefights in which you're praying for your life and the survival of your buddies and trying to kill as many Iraqis as possible, you're sitting around in the desert."
posted by digaman at 9:15 AM on August 24, 2004
posted by digaman at 9:15 AM on August 24, 2004
I don't see these military video games as constituting "false advertisting" in that they fairly portray the player as vulnerable and killed easily. Certainly non-military games often portray the hero as able to burst into a room and take out dozens of enemies and absorb dozens of bulletes like they're Superman or Rambo.
Strange that a video game that tries to portray the danger on a battlefield would want to make people sign up and go to Iraq, but some people can watch an anti-war film like Platoon or Full Metal Jacket and want to sign up.
Also another thing that I've heard pointed out, ever notice that when politicians criticise violent video games they usually don't mention military simulations, it's always Doom or GTA or Manhunt.
posted by bobo123 at 10:00 AM on August 24, 2004
Strange that a video game that tries to portray the danger on a battlefield would want to make people sign up and go to Iraq, but some people can watch an anti-war film like Platoon or Full Metal Jacket and want to sign up.
Also another thing that I've heard pointed out, ever notice that when politicians criticise violent video games they usually don't mention military simulations, it's always Doom or GTA or Manhunt.
posted by bobo123 at 10:00 AM on August 24, 2004
I don't see these military video games as constituting "false advertisting" in that they fairly portray the player as vulnerable and killed easily.
Excellent point. What I meant specifically was the issue of whether or not simulating spectacular firefights in Lord of the Rings-quality graphics is a realistic representation of life in the field, which intersperses intense confrontations with long periods of downtime -- a question raised by one of the senior officers I interviewed.
posted by digaman at 10:08 AM on August 24, 2004
Excellent point. What I meant specifically was the issue of whether or not simulating spectacular firefights in Lord of the Rings-quality graphics is a realistic representation of life in the field, which intersperses intense confrontations with long periods of downtime -- a question raised by one of the senior officers I interviewed.
posted by digaman at 10:08 AM on August 24, 2004
Violence is good. Games are good. Violent games are good.
Or, hell, let's neuter every male on the planet, hand out testosterone suppressors to all the women, and see if we can push through some legislation banning the underage use of cowboys and indians.
We're killers. It's our nature. Hell, it is nature. We are trying to learn to 1) be more selective; and 2) do it less often. Now that we know that porn is good for us, violent realism in games is just around the corner as a way to get your nature on.
posted by ewkpates at 10:08 AM on August 24, 2004
Or, hell, let's neuter every male on the planet, hand out testosterone suppressors to all the women, and see if we can push through some legislation banning the underage use of cowboys and indians.
We're killers. It's our nature. Hell, it is nature. We are trying to learn to 1) be more selective; and 2) do it less often. Now that we know that porn is good for us, violent realism in games is just around the corner as a way to get your nature on.
posted by ewkpates at 10:08 AM on August 24, 2004
Anyone who joins the military and doesn't think that they or their comrades may take a bullet or have to kill someone is living in a video game.
As someone who went to basic in the British Army I can assure you that the number of immature numbskulls lining up just to kill other people was probably about 50%*. Whether that holds true in the US Army I don't know. It sometimes worries me that the kids we give guns to really dont have a goddamn clue about what they are doing and why.
My personal opinion is that anyone who wishes to join the military should read up on the subject before signing up. Reading about some of the field-expedient surgery in Blackhawk Down might make a few people think twice.
I was well aware of the chances of being wounded or killed and having to do the same to my enemy de jour - at the time that fitted in with my mindset. Thankfully as I have grown up the idea of inflicting harm on strangers has entirely dissipated.
*Most of those in the training unit I was dropped into were poor kids from Liverpool - some of them already had scars from being shot if that makes a difference.
posted by longbaugh at 10:14 AM on August 24, 2004
As someone who went to basic in the British Army I can assure you that the number of immature numbskulls lining up just to kill other people was probably about 50%*. Whether that holds true in the US Army I don't know. It sometimes worries me that the kids we give guns to really dont have a goddamn clue about what they are doing and why.
My personal opinion is that anyone who wishes to join the military should read up on the subject before signing up. Reading about some of the field-expedient surgery in Blackhawk Down might make a few people think twice.
I was well aware of the chances of being wounded or killed and having to do the same to my enemy de jour - at the time that fitted in with my mindset. Thankfully as I have grown up the idea of inflicting harm on strangers has entirely dissipated.
*Most of those in the training unit I was dropped into were poor kids from Liverpool - some of them already had scars from being shot if that makes a difference.
posted by longbaugh at 10:14 AM on August 24, 2004
ewkpates, I'm with you about 50%: games are good, and violent games are probably all right. But knowing that my increasingly realistic simulated games are used to train people to kill more effectively brings me, as a gamer, one step closer to the real killing, and it makes me uncomfortable. This is probably entirely subjective and unreasonable because war happens anyway and soldiers have been trained in one way or another all along. Still--it strikes me as a streamlining of the connection between my living room and the streets of Najaf, and given the psychological difficulties of turning people into killers, it is certainly in the military's interest. As a pacifist who likes to occasionally shoot at virtual targets, it troubles me.
posted by muckster at 10:47 AM on August 24, 2004
posted by muckster at 10:47 AM on August 24, 2004
To answer my own question, and think this through to its logical conclusion: when video games are the #1 entertainment industry and the games are virtually identical to war simulations that are designed to be as lifelike as possible, you end up with a citizenry that essentially consists of trained soldiers.
When I'm king, I'll make sure a hypersophisticated version of Dance Dance Revolution becomes all the rage, ensuring the unprecedented funkification of the nation.
posted by muckster at 11:11 AM on August 24, 2004
When I'm king, I'll make sure a hypersophisticated version of Dance Dance Revolution becomes all the rage, ensuring the unprecedented funkification of the nation.
posted by muckster at 11:11 AM on August 24, 2004
Well said, muckster.
In his account of riding with the Marines' First Recon in Iraq, Generation Kill, Evan Wright describes this scene:
"At least one Marine in Colbert's Humvee seems ecstatic about being in a life-or-death gunfight. Nineteen-year-old Corporal Harold James Trombley, who sits next to me in the left rear passenger seat, has been waiting all day for permission to fire his machine gun. Now Trombley is curled over his weapon, firing away. Every time he gets a possible kill, he yells, 'I got one, Sergeant!' Sometimes he adds details: 'Hajji in the alley. Zipped him low. I seen his knee explode!'
Midway through the town, there's a lull in enemy gunfire. For an instant, the only sound is wind whistling through the Humvee. Colbert shouts to everyone in the vehicle: 'You good? You good?' Everyone's all right. He bursts into laughter. 'Holy shit!'' he says, shaking his head. 'We were fucking lit up!'
Forty-five minutes later the Marines swing pickaxes into the hard desert pan outside of the town, setting up defensive positions. Several gather around their bullet-riddled Humvees, laughing about the day's exploits.
[...]
Trombley is beside himself. 'I was just thinking one thing when we drove into that ambush,'' he enthuses. 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. It felt like I was living it when I seen the flames coming out of windows, the blown-up car in the street, guys crawling around shooting at us. It was fucking cool.'"
posted by digaman at 11:24 AM on August 24, 2004
In his account of riding with the Marines' First Recon in Iraq, Generation Kill, Evan Wright describes this scene:
"At least one Marine in Colbert's Humvee seems ecstatic about being in a life-or-death gunfight. Nineteen-year-old Corporal Harold James Trombley, who sits next to me in the left rear passenger seat, has been waiting all day for permission to fire his machine gun. Now Trombley is curled over his weapon, firing away. Every time he gets a possible kill, he yells, 'I got one, Sergeant!' Sometimes he adds details: 'Hajji in the alley. Zipped him low. I seen his knee explode!'
Midway through the town, there's a lull in enemy gunfire. For an instant, the only sound is wind whistling through the Humvee. Colbert shouts to everyone in the vehicle: 'You good? You good?' Everyone's all right. He bursts into laughter. 'Holy shit!'' he says, shaking his head. 'We were fucking lit up!'
Forty-five minutes later the Marines swing pickaxes into the hard desert pan outside of the town, setting up defensive positions. Several gather around their bullet-riddled Humvees, laughing about the day's exploits.
[...]
Trombley is beside himself. 'I was just thinking one thing when we drove into that ambush,'' he enthuses. 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. It felt like I was living it when I seen the flames coming out of windows, the blown-up car in the street, guys crawling around shooting at us. It was fucking cool.'"
posted by digaman at 11:24 AM on August 24, 2004
The thread title reminded me of the AC-130 footage which we discussed back in 2002 here.
On a serpate note, with regards to the application of technology to warfare I think that simulation based training is less interesting - although it does posit intriguing socio-cultural questions - than the adoption of the some of the lessons of the advanced warfighting experiment and the evolution of today's technology-led network centric military thinking. Such thinking is not without its critics however.
posted by dmt at 12:35 PM on August 24, 2004
On a serpate note, with regards to the application of technology to warfare I think that simulation based training is less interesting - although it does posit intriguing socio-cultural questions - than the adoption of the some of the lessons of the advanced warfighting experiment and the evolution of today's technology-led network centric military thinking. Such thinking is not without its critics however.
posted by dmt at 12:35 PM on August 24, 2004
« Older Optimism as a revolutionary act | Act like a drunk acting sober Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by techgnollogic at 8:56 AM on August 24, 2004