Why did the U.S. government spend millions of dollars in tax revenue on the development of a videogame?

Question

The game America's Army, which was developed by the U.S. government, cost many millions of taxpayers' money to make. The government claims that it is a good recruiting tool for young Americans who might be intrigued by the cool combat that the game portrays war to be. Proponents also claim that the game provides combat training for soldiers. I've played the game, and I think it's fun, but I don't think it's an appropriate use of taxpayer money. You could even contend that this game is a sort of propaganda. In the game, the player is forced to go through army training (this training is relatively easy, especially when compared to the real thing); when that is complete, he/she can play online in the team-based game as U.S. soldiers battling terrorist enemies. The game is basically like Counterstrike. After dying, the players simply respawn and battle again to try to stop other players all over the world on the other team from completing their objective.

The game has been around for over a year at least (I'm not sure about exact figures). Even now, money is being spent on updates and such. What do you think about this game? It's a free game that anyone can either download from the site (www.americasarmy.com) or pick up by free CD from a U.S. army recruiting center. Search for "America's Army" if you want to know more. How do you feel?

Hey, Mr./Ms. Angry, I know that the taxing on us hasn't increased, but the question is how the U.S. government uses the tax money that they already got from us! If anything, the U.S. government could at least buy every citizen a free cookie. I like cookies. Also, after playing the game, I didn't really learn how to be a good fighter. I mean, it's a cool experience to pretend to be a soldier, but one can only gain combat experience as a real soldier. The game isn't very realistic too, so it doesn't train very well for practical situations. In fact, I learned more combat techniques from Jack Bauer from TV's 24 than I learned from this game. And TV's 24 did not use our tax money!

Mr./Mrs. Mikegolf, I must ask how much more effective is using this game for planned combat than simply pointing to a map and telling soldiers where to go in the traditional way while warning them of possible enemy dangers? In fact, if this is what is being used to help train U.S. soldiers, it ought to be stopped considering how many U.S. soldiers have died in their battles. As I said before, it's not realistic. It simply aims to put a "fun" element to war and thereby capture the minds of young Americans who might then sign up for their country's army. In fact, when I played, I saw that those players who were in army had a special designation in the game, suggesting that young people might join the army to simply "level up" in the game!

Actually Ms. Coombs, according to http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,53663,00.html, the game costed about 7 million dollars to originally develop in its totality. Probably even more money is being spent as it is being updated. I don't deny that the game is fun because even I've played it, but I don't think it's an appropriate child of our tax money. Appropriations of the money ought to be reconsidered.

sorry, the link above is
http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,53663,00.html

Mr/Ms. djgriffiny, as a matter of fact, that broken link is there because I accidentally put a comma at the end of the URL; I fixed it in the next part. Also, don't come here and post your American-freedom propaganda. It's people like you who are shame to not only the American country but also the rest of the entire world. Why? Because you seem to have no sense of logic. We weren't even discussing this. Sure, there are many armies that are defending their peoples' sovereignties, but only the U.S. army uses a game as a resource. I think it's wasteful. There are other more effective ways of training this freedom-force that you praise so much. In fact, the very fact that there's protest means people think that spending on money on something else could defend their freedom better. So, what's done is done anyway. The U.S. government already used tax money, and you helped pay for basically nothing but a fun time for countless people.

I should also add that most of the players I've encountered aren't even from the U.S.; they are from Poland, Russia, and such.

Answer 1

Video games have been used for years to help train newcomers to the field of combat, etc. Although the initial cost for these games is expensive, it pales in the cost of live fire exercises. It also gives the trainees some perspective of what to expect, once they do get into live fire training.

One thing we should all know about the army, it spends money like it was playing monopoly. Money, to the army is just a means to the end. Like so many government agencies, their attitude is that you must spend this years budget, or they will cut next years budget. God forbid, we'd let that happen.

Answer 2

I always enjoy when a source of information is a broken link(cost of developing game), makes me wonder about the credibility of the whole statement.

The government is developing these games as recruiting tools to encourage people to enlist.

Because people have enlisted and fought in the past, you have the freedom to criticize your government and not worry about being shot by the local dictator.

I don't think a lot of things are appropriate use of my government money, but I have to take the good with the bad.

If this game makes a difference in recruiting or training, go for it. People like you will certainly not be there to defend us.

Answer 3

Because it is not only an excellent recruiting tool - it has been adapted into several training simulations to prepare soldiers for 'real world' situations.

The fact of the matter is that it achieves what it was intended to do in a manner that is most cost-effective of the taxpayers money and it has provided unexpected benefits as a tactical simulator. (Modifications of the game have been used in Iraq for 'dress rehearsals' of planned combat operations.)

Don't knock something that works.

Answer 4

If the game helps to train our military members, it can help save lives, and to me, that is worth the money. My 18 year old son is a marine and loves this type of game. When he went to boot camp last summer, he scored as an "expert rifleman," and so did a lot of the other guys there. When I attended my son's graduation at the MCRD, someone there told me that it used to be unusual for so many to score so high, but they contribute the high scores to all of these young men playing the army video games.
I watched my son play once, because I wanted to see how he did and he mastered the game. This was a relief to me, because I want to know that he has a good chance of protecting himself.

Answer 5

It hasn't cost us any additional taxpayer's money. The taxes would have gone to something else if the videogame development hadn't come to fruition. The tax cost has stayed the same.

Besides, if it makes people better fighters all the power to them. Would rather have a nation full of gifted warriors than a nation full of whimpy naysayers.

Answer 6

My son the LT and Army Ranger loves it. It was not a million to make & several of his men looked at Army instead of Marines because of this game. Look at big expenditures.

Answer 7

To give George W Bush something to play with so he won't put us into another real war again.

Answer 8

I didn't read it all..... but I did catch the fact that they made a game with tax money. I say that is bull crap... we have plenty of other things that money should be spent on...

Answer 9

Thanks for the address. I'll have to check it out.