U.S. Army Stays Unreal [May 10, 2005, 5:32 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
The U.S. Army announces they have licensed the Unreal Engine 3 to power the next
version of the America's Army shooter, just as the first America's Army game was built upon a previous version of Epic's Unreal tech. Here's the
plan:
West Point, NY May10, 2005 The U.S. Army today announced that it is expanding its technology agreement with Epic Games. Since 2000, Epic's Unreal. Engine 2 has served as the foundation for America's Army, the Official U.S. Army Game. To take advantage of leap-ahead capabilities afforded by Epic Games' newest engine, the Army will begin developing its next generation versions of America's Army on the Unreal Engine 3. in the coming months.
"The Unreal Engine has enabled us to develop one of the most popular games in the world. At the same time, the Unreal Engine has provided us the power and flexibility to develop revolutionary training and education applications for use across the government," said Colonel Casey Wardynski, project director and originator of the "America's Army" concept. "The gameplay, environments and immersive action generated using Unreal Engine 3 will allow us to create ever more realistic scenarios and environments through which young adults can learn about Soldiering and through which Soldiers can master skills ranging from lifesaving to countering IEDs in the Global War on Terrorism."
The America's Army game (www.americasarmy.com) has placed Soldiering into popular culture by providing young adults the means to explore key Soldier lifecycle experiences from basic training to operations in the Global War on Terrorism. Since the America's Army game launched, gamers have completed more than 1.34 billion missions and 94 million hours virtually exploring progressive developmental experiences ranging from basic training to the Special Forces Qualification Course. Upcoming versions of the game include America's Army: Special Forces Overmatch, which will release this fall; and America's Army: Stryker-Overmatch to be released this winter.
By harnessing the power of the Unreal Engine, America's Army produces extraordinarily engaging and realistic environments and experiences. As a result, a wide variety of agencies from the U.S. Navy to national laboratories have repurposed America's Army for applications ranging from appended training devices for weapon systems to adaptive thinking and leadership
training simulations.
"Our relationship with the Army has proven that Unreal Engine 3's flexibility, versatility and wide array of features can be deployed for greater purposes beyond traditional gaming," said Mark Rein, vice president of Epic
Games. "We are delighted that our technology is supporting the Army in achieving its mission of showcasing the Army and helping to drive the America's Army game series to new levels. It's also really exciting for us to see how our technology can be used to help the Army prepare its Soldiers for the challenges they confront in real-life scenarios."
To say that America's Army is any more disturbing than anything else out there is just being plain ignorant of the world you live in and the games you play.
There's a difference between killing Zerg or Combine, and an actual military shooter, especially one endorsed by the Army. The difference is that one presents a fictional environment, while the other is an existing organization, which in that case amounts to propaganda. No one actually goes out and kills cops, or floods a city of joins Clan Starwolf as a result of playing games. The same can not be said for America's Army.
Given that the Army uses its games to attract recruits, being too realistic will ironically have the opposite effect. If the Army gets too realistic with its games, it will have a harder time convincing young people to "play army" for real.
In other words, lying. Using misinformation to attract individuals to a certain organization or set of ideals; isn't this the very definition of propaganda?
As far as gore, what do you expect? They want to keep a T rating for one, and two, WHY SHOULD THEY SHOW STUFF THAT WOULD HURT THEIR CAUSE? If you're trying to sell something, are you going to show all the bad parts?
Whatever happened to holding advertising, which AA certainly is, to some standards of truthfulness? Hell, Advil commercials are required by law to list all the side-effects, why not hold that same standard for the military, and in fact all advertising?
Dictionary.com gives the definiton of militarism:
1. Glorification of the ideals of a professional military class.
2. Predominance of the armed forces in the administration or policy of the state.
3. A policy in which military preparedness is of primary importance to a state.
America's Army certainly promotes #1, in fact that is it's primary goal, and arguably it promotes #3. Some people might of course claim that this is a good thing, that militarism is the backbone of a healthy national sentiment. But for some odd reason, I can't quite seem to agree with them, having at some point in my life glanced through a history textbook.
There's a difference between killing Zerg or Combine, and an actual military shooter, especially one endorsed by the Army. The difference is that one presents a fictional environment, while the other is an existing organization, which in that case amounts to propaganda. No one actually goes out and kills cops, or floods a city of joins Clan Starwolf as a result of playing games. The same can not be said for America's Army.
Given that the Army uses its games to attract recruits, being too realistic will ironically have the opposite effect. If the Army gets too realistic with its games, it will have a harder time convincing young people to "play army" for real.
In other words, lying. Using misinformation to attract individuals to a certain organization or set of ideals; isn't this the very definition of propaganda?
As far as gore, what do you expect? They want to keep a T rating for one, and two, WHY SHOULD THEY SHOW STUFF THAT WOULD HURT THEIR CAUSE? If you're trying to sell something, are you going to show all the bad parts?
Whatever happened to holding advertising, which AA certainly is, to some standards of truthfulness? Hell, Advil commercials are required by law to list all the side-effects, why not hold that same standard for the military, and in fact all advertising?
Dictionary.com gives the definiton of militarism:
1. Glorification of the ideals of a professional military class.
2. Predominance of the armed forces in the administration or policy of the state.
3. A policy in which military preparedness is of primary importance to a state.
America's Army certainly promotes #1, in fact that is it's primary goal, and arguably it promotes #3. Some people might of course claim that this is a good thing, that militarism is the backbone of a healthy national sentiment. But for some odd reason, I can't quite seem to agree with them, having at some point in my life glanced through a history textbook.
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2025 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2025 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 22 June 2025, 20:45.