Someone in the government apparently believes that violent video games DO lead people to violent behavior, and they intend to capitalize on it
Not horrible logic, just slightly backwards. The army already has developers making simulators (imagine - OpenGL and DirectX programmers making "games") and the game
Real War (
http://www.real-war.com/) was made with the help of the armed services. Not to mention the Marine DOOM modification the Marines commisioned and that special version of
Battlezone the Army had Atari make for them all those years back.
The real question is whether this makes a soldier a soldier. Ask any soldier whether or not playing a simulator adequately prepared him for the real thing and he'll tell you no. There's simply a world of difference between shooting/killing someone "for real" and in a simulator. Obviously since most of us have never killed anyone for real, it's hard to tell him he's wrong.
So why do they commission these simulations? Simple - they're still cheaper than "the real thing" (like the
Battlezone simulator) and in the case of shooting people, more realistic than shooting a paper target. Plus, it's better than nothing.
Lt. Col. David Grossman is simply a man with a book to sell - had he paid more attention he would have known better.
However,
Real War was a horrible game and a game with a name like
America's Army just doesn't bode well to me. I will of course hold off judgement until the game ships but
Real War had a minimal commitment to fulfill and was developed with no initial profit motive in mind - then turned around and used the lone gimmick as a sales tactic. I hope
America's War fares better.
Schnapple
http://members.tripod.com/schnapple99/