Gamers make good Soldiers

[CptStern]

The head of the British Army has said that the "PlayStation generation" (zomg bias) is actually pretty good at shooting people in the Afghanistan and Iraq.

"There was a time when commentators and some more experienced members of the Army expressed concern as to whether the 'PlayStation generation' were up to dealing with the gritty bloody conflict that is routine business in southern Afghanistan and Iraq," General Sir Richard Dannatt told Cardiff Business Club in comments reported by BusinessInWales.

"Well, I'm pleased to say that they are. Our young soldiers, drawn from across British society, are more than a match for what is required of them and I salute every one of them."

Obviously Dannatt wasn't suggesting that years spent fine-tuning FOV settings and learning how to use TeamSpeak properly have been influential in all that horrible warring, but presumably it is useful for morale to operate under the assumption that once you've done what you're doing a giant dropship will land and extract you. General Dannatt's Gamertag is unknown.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=88481


i think they're not telling the full story here ..I think they failed to mention that terrorists are not used to seeing soldiers bunnyhopping or waiting in line to fly a f-18 or attempting to power jump with a rocket launcher ..so they're completely caught by surprise and just stand there, mouths agape waiting to be shot


i wonder if this is what they meant?

http://www.pyrosoft.co.uk/blog/2007/11/04/army-fly-uav-spy-plane-with-xbox-360-controller/


so proof positive Jack thompson was right that video games are "murder simulators"? armed with this knowledge it shouldnt take too long for Thompson to take on the US military headon for teaching kids to be murderers through games like Americas Army .. what? Thompson wouldnt touch the US military with a 10 foot pole? how hypocritical of him

 

[Raziaar]

Just because I may be a better killer because of video games, doesn't mean I'm more inclined to kill.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

My first thought...what will Crazy-Jack do with this new information. Ahh well...back to playing Manhunt 2.

 

[CptStern]

funny how they dont quantify exactly what it is that they're better at ..is it shooting? doing what they're told? successfully playing the part of cannon fodder?

 

[Beerdude26]

Just because I may be a better killer because of video games, doesn't mean I'm more inclined to kill.

I'm pretty sure only a small percentage of us know how to line up our sights, disassemble our guns in the field or even know any decent CQB tactics

 

[Raziaar]

I'm pretty sure only a small percentage of us know how to line up our sights, disassemble our guns in the field or even know any decent CQB tactics

Not what I'm talking about... those other things can be learned.

But we as gamers do have an advantage when it comes to being more immediately gifted with how to track a target, line up our sights, account for gravity... the necessity of proper cover and many more things. I learn a lot when I play video games and ponder about real world applications.

Your ordinary stupid kid probably doesn't take much stock in these things, but I am like a sponge when I play games, and if a game is made well, like Operation Flashpoint for instance, you can garner a lot of useful information that could make transferring it to real world applications much more natural.

 

[CptStern]

I'd take someone who excels in sports over a gamer any day when it comes to being a soldier ..video game skills dont really apply in a real world setting

 

[Darkside55]

Tell that to the guys who have 7 years Counter-Strike all-pro. They're cyber athletes, man.

Seriously what was the point of this? They wanted to know if gamers were any more inclined to handle violent combat than soldiers of yesterday? Why wouldn't they be? Who was concerned that they wouldn't be? Pointless.

 

[Raziaar]

Tell that to the guys who have 7 years Counter-Strike all-pro. They're cyber athletes, man.

Seriously what was the point of this? They wanted to know if gamers were any more inclined to handle violent combat than soldiers of yesterday? Why wouldn't they be? Who was concerned that they wouldn't be? Pointless.

I mean... seriously. It's not like all veterans were hunters or mercenaries in foreign wars or something... You've got bakers, you've got barbers and all sorts of things through history... things that can be construed as less conductive to being a good soldier than killing people in a video game...

"I make pastries for a living... I'll certainly know ahead of time how it'll feel to roast a german in his bunker with my flame thrower!"

And they worried that video games will make kids soft? Puhlease.

 

[No Limit]

So does playing Madden make me a better football player?

 

[Raziaar]

So does playing Madden make me a better football player?

Completely different situation. Things like football MOSTLY rely on athletic ability and some minor hand eye coordination when throwing a ball(which most players don't even do).

Hand-eye coordination would be incredibly valuable to a soldier, and that's something games teach us to be better at... when it comes to hand-eye coordination.

 

[CptStern]

I'm not a gun owner but even I know you cant trasfer video game skills to shooting a real gun

 

[Raziaar]

I'm not a gun owner but even I know you cant trasfer video game skills to shooting a real gun

That's ridiculous. Yes you can.

You're not going to be a master at it when you first pick it up, but you're going to learn to hone your technique far faster because of your video gaming experience than someone who never shot guns before in real life or video games.

You give somebody a machine gun who has little knowledge of firearms in any way shape or form, and they'll just spray and pray. You give it to somebody who has experience in more realistic combat simulations like operation flashpoint and stuff... and they'll know you fire in short controlled bursts, and they'll be better at coordinating the tip of the barrel to where they want to shoot it at.

You'd have to be a fool to think that firing guns in games lends absolutely zero transferable application for firing guns in real life.

 

[Beerdude26]

That's ridiculous. Yes you can.

You're not going to be a master at it when you first pick it up, but you're going to learn to hone your technique far faster because of your video gaming experience than someone who never shot guns before in real life or video games.

You give somebody a machine gun who has little knowledge of firearms in any way shape or form, and they'll just spray and pray. You give it to somebody who has experience in more realistic combat simulations like operation flashpoint and stuff... and they'll know you fire in short controlled bursts, and they'll be better at coordinating the tip of the barrel to where they want to shoot it at.

You'd have to be a fool to think that firing guns in games lends absolutely zero transferable application for firing guns in real life.

I'd like to see you hit a target at 50m and then 100m without adjusting your sights

 

[Raziaar]

I'd like to see you hit a target at 50m and then 100m without adjusting your sights

<pulls out his hair> Where did I say they'd be an instant marksman?

 

[Eejit]

I'm not a gun owner but even I know you cant trasfer video game skills to shooting a real gun

Time Crisis!

 

[Raziaar]

Hand guns and rifles aren't the only weapons anyways... have you guys ever heard of CROWS(common remotely operated weapon stations)?

That is PRIME REAL ESTATE for a gamer.

 

[CptStern]

That's ridiculous. Yes you can.

You're not going to be a master at it when you first pick it up, but you're going to learn to hone your technique far faster because of your video gaming experience than someone who never shot guns before in real life or video games.

source please, I'm inclinded to believe you but I'd rather see some evidence that clearly shows a corelation based SOLELY on video game skills ...anyways we're pointing or using our thumbs, skills not needed for firing a gun

You give somebody a machine gun who has little knowledge of firearms in any way shape or form, and they'll just spray and pray. You give it to somebody who has experience in more realistic combat simulations like operation flashpoint and stuff... and they'll know you fire in short controlled bursts, and they'll be better at coordinating the tip of the barrel to where they want to shoot it at.

which is common sense, however gamers do not have a monopoly on common sense, anyone could do what you propose

You'd have to be a fool to think that firing guns in games lends absolutely zero transferable application for firing guns in real life.

yes, zero ..remember that in this case skills are physical, not mental ..so I'm correct when I say it doesnt lend itself to physical skills as you imply, there's no crossover in skills because they're not the same skillset

a gamer might be better prepared or even less (unrealistic pov honed from thousands of hours playing games where there is zero consequences to your actions), but that's probably as far as it goes

 

[Raziaar]

Well I guess all the research the military is putting into it has absolutely no basis.

There are already studies out there that show that gamers think better on their feet in tense situations, it enhances their tracking abilities in fast paced environments and other areas of visual performance.

Not even all these studies are being done by the military... just do a search and you'll see that many studies are being shown to prove these aspects.

You tell me that stuff doesn't translate into a more effective soldier. It's one reason the military has such interest in it. They want better soldiers, and they are seeing that video games really enhance many critical areas that their soldiers need to be better at.

Not to mention soldiers out there on the front lines that even equate their ability to react more readily to the battlefield because of games and the situations they have faced in games before.

There IS a reason why troops in the modern military train extensively in virtual simulators rather than just having real world hands on experience... it works.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021302437.html

"It felt like I was in a big video game. It didn't even faze me, shooting back. It was just natural instinct. Boom! Boom! Boom! Boom! "

"The insurgents were firing from the other side of the bridge. . . . We called in a helicopter for an airstrike. . . . I couldn't believe I was seeing this. It was like 'Halo.' It didn't even seem real, but it was real."

"Live training on the field is still done, of course," but, he adds, "using simulations to train them is not only natural, it's necessary."

"When the time came for him" -- meaning Swales -- "to fire his weapon, he was ready to do that. And capable of doing that. His experience leading up to that time, through on-the-ground training and playing 'Halo' and whatever else, enabled him to execute. His situation awareness was up. He knew what he had to do. He had done it before -- or something like it up to that point."

Not only does the military acknowledge that games make their soldiers better, the soldiers themselves acknowledge it.

It's not like they're saying.. "Oh shit man... we were ambushed and I just sat there like a brick. I experienced many situations like this in video games and even our training, but none of that prepared me for what I might have to do in the real situation!"


I can understand your desire and reasoning to contest the idea about gamers being able to instinctually fire guns better than non gamers, since I can't conclusively prove that right now even though I feel that way...

But you cannot go and deny that games do not improve a soldier's ability to act and react in many ways that have been shown in study after study, both in the civilian world and in the military world.

 

[CptStern]

Well I guess all the research the military is putting into it has absolutely no basis.

you dont know what their criteria is, you just assume it's to create people who can shoot, when for all you know it could be something that is far more useful for teaching teamwork or even as a tool to desensitize soldiers ..unless there's a sensor attached to the gun you cant assume it's all about training markmanship ..in fact I'm willing to bet the military would never teach it that way seeing as how a real weapon is far more practical

There are already studies out there that show that gamers think better on their feet in tense situations, it enhances their tracking abilities in fast paced environments and other areas of visual performance.

perhaps if you're a laparoscopic surgeon ..havent seen anything that says they're better marksmen

Not even all these studies are being done by the military... just do a search and you'll see that many studies are being shown to prove these aspects.

yes and every single one says the same thing: it improves "visual skills" ..doesnt make them better with a firearm (which is what we're talking about)

You tell me that stuff doesn't translate into a more effective soldier. It's one reason the military has such interest in it. They want better soldiers, and they are seeing that video games really enhance many critical areas that their soldiers need to be better at.

you dont know that ..it could be they want better teamplayers, it could mean they want soldiers that are more likely to follow orders, it could mean that they want soldiers who are able to understand video game like informational systems in tanks etc ...unless they come out and say it you cant assume that that is their goal

 

[Raziaar]

you dont know what their criteria is, you just assume it's to create people who can shoot, when for all you know it could be something that is far more useful for teaching teamwork or even as a tool to desensitize soldiers ..unless there's a sensor attached to the gun you cant assume it's all about training markmanship ..in fact I'm willing to bet the military would never teach it that way seeing as how a real weapon is far more practical

perhaps if you're a laparoscopic surgeon ..havent seen anything that says they're better marksmen

yes and every single one says the same thing: it improves "visual skills" ..doesnt make them better with a firearm (which is what we're talking about)


you dont know that ..it could be they want better teamplayers, it could mean they want soldiers that are more likely to follow orders, it could mean that they want soldiers who are able to understand video game like informational systems in tanks etc ...unless they come out and say it you cant assume that that is their goal

Read my edit.

I can understand your desire and reasoning to contest the idea about gamers being able to instinctually fire guns better than non gamers, since I can't conclusively prove that right now even though I feel that way...

But you cannot go and deny that games do not improve a soldier's ability to act and react in many ways that have been shown in study after study, both in the civilian world and in the military world.

Games make better soldiers... a soldier isn't all about his ability to fire a gun. Even battle hardened soldiers aren't going to be masters at firing a gun and hit their target all the time.

The amount of ammunition expenditure vs casualties inflicted in many wars reveals this fact.

 

[CptStern]

I read you edit, it says nothing about transfering over skills with a gun

But you cannot go and deny that games do not improve a soldier's ability to act and react in many ways that have been shown in study after study, both in the civilian world and in the military world.

I never said it didnt, in fact I said repeatedly that it did ..at issue is whether skill with guns transfers over, I dont think it does and none of your supplied material says it does either

 

[Raziaar]

I read you edit, it says nothing about transfering over skills with a gun

I never said it didnt, in fact I said repeatedly that it did ..at issue is whether skill with guns transfers over, I dont think it does and none of your supplied material says it does either

Well, I'm withdrawing my point, that's what I was saying. It's only my opinion.

 

[CptStern]

I havent fired a gun in years, when I finally do, I'll let you know if my years of playing video games helped or not

 

[No Limit]

Shooting a gun in a video game does not help you shoot a gun in real life. Anyone that says otherwise has never shot a gun, simple as that.

A game can not simluate the type of adrenaline, fear, and all the other skills you need in battle just like madden can't simulate catching a ball. Is there some small benefit, probably. But to say video gamers are better soldiers (still haven't seen the criteria for what makes a better soldier) is absolutely insane. Personally I think this is the problem, far too many people in this world think war video games somewhat are similar to real war. Its pretty damn sad.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Whether or not skill in virtual shooting affects RL shooting, there is a difference between shooting some virtual terroists, or aliens, or whatever, than real people. I may not have nay experiance of killing actual people, but I know from friends that is not an easy thing to do, even after the 100th time or whatever.

 

[jverne]

That's ridiculous. Yes you can.

You're not going to be a master at it when you first pick it up, but you're going to learn to hone your technique far faster because of your video gaming experience than someone who never shot guns before in real life or video games.

You give somebody a machine gun who has little knowledge of firearms in any way shape or form, and they'll just spray and pray. You give it to somebody who has experience in more realistic combat simulations like operation flashpoint and stuff... and they'll know you fire in short controlled bursts, and they'll be better at coordinating the tip of the barrel to where they want to shoot it at.

You'd have to be a fool to think that firing guns in games lends absolutely zero transferable application for firing guns in real life.

i agree to a point with mr.cowman.

playing shooting games makes you more familiar with weapons. you accept them easier. it's a psychological thing. you get more familiar with shapes, uses and so on.

a gamer who would get a gun would (in general) make better logical conclusions what some parts do (safety, cocking lever,...)
ok dumbasses will be dumbasses, but in general

playing games also increases your awareness, as in you can track more things at a time, make better predictions for moving objects, 3d view ability.

hand to eye coordination also shouldn't be underestimated.

it enhances some of your reflexes. like pulling the trigger when you feel you got the chance,...

i bet also gamers are less afraid to work with a firearm.


as for physical skills, nah i doubt it gives you any. but like i said it makes you more familiar to the stuff.

of course i'm mostly talking from experience, but also what i see and hear from others.

 

[15357]

This was proven ages ago here. The recruits shot better and faster than their sargeants, and had generally faster reflexes.

 

[Mr Stabby]

In the 50's or 60's the British Army, did a study on soldiers, willingness to kill the enemy, they found that many soldiers didn't shoot to kill. They looked at various ways of trying to train a willingness to kill, maybe video games has an affect on that.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Does playing God game make me a better God?

 

[Emporius]

Dammnit Johnson, Crouch Jump! CROUCH JUMP!

 

[Kyorisu]

A game can not simluate the type of adrenaline, fear, and all the other skills you need in battle just like madden can't simulate catching a ball.

And yet the military uses games to train their soldiers for many combat scenarios. Oh sorry did I say games I meant combat simulators.

But to say video gamers are better soldiers (still haven't seen the criteria for what makes a better soldier) is absolutely insane

Insane I don't think so. I believe there would be substantial difference between a common person put through military training and a gamer put through training. Assuming both of these people where roughly of the same build/intelligence. The gamer would be able to understand and learn how to deal with various real world combat situations faster than the common person because they've been doing so in games for years. Someone who can learn and understand combat faster (having played various combat simulators), can think of their feet in tense situations (a vital skill for many pro gamers), has the ability to keep calm no matter what is going (another vital skill, keeping calm in a tournament can be the key to victory), etc will make a better soldier in the long run.

It won't immediately make them a better soldier. Nothing can do that for you, but it'll help over the course of time.

Personally I think this is the problem, far too many people in this world think war video games somewhat are similar to real war. Its pretty damn sad.

What problem? The military uses combat simulators which are effectively games to teach their soldiers. How is that sad? Oh you meant normal games did you, well even then you're still wrong as various "games" can teach you some core combat information and somewhat prepare you for the real thing i.e. firing a weapon at another human being. Theres nothing sad about it and frankly saying it's sad is a pretty stupid comment in the first place. You're the sad one.

There are benefits to playing video games if you're going to be a soldier. Alternatively being a soldier there are benefits to playing video games which relate to what you do. Simple end of story, enough bullshit from people who say otherwise. If the military finds positive results from soldiers playing video games and that somehow improves their abilities as a soldier all the better.

 

[CptStern]

why do people autmatically assume it's a skill thing? it could easily be that gamers make better soldiers because of their mindset ..the majority of people I meet in shooters are right wing conservatives who support the military (of course it varies from game to game) .. it could also be they have a greater aptitude for teamwork, following orders or are more emotionally detached to horrific scenes than the average person

I wonder if they were looked at whether atheletes make better soldiers ...the answer seems a lit more obvious but the principle is the same, by the very virtue that they bring a skillset that not everyone has

 

[Kyorisu]

Frankly I don't care what it is, maybe it has nothing to do with skill at all. Fact of the matter is the military clearly sees video games as a positive thing. That means they must be doing something for the soldiers. In effect that makes someone who has played a combat simulator a better soldier in the long run now doesn't it? Having skills from a video game may not directly translate to the real world but they very well could help in learning the ones required for real world situations.

 

[CptStern]

the goal of combat simulators is rarely honing markmanship as it is in video games it's more about learning situational procedures

btw, no one is arguing gamers dont make better soldiers ..it's a vague statement that could mean a multitude of things

 

[<RJMC>]

one thing is that we just pick up controllers and press buttons

while firing a real weapon you must carry it,which sure is heavier, aim whit it and I heard that while shooting a pistol you have to make two sight in the front and back of the gun to match so you can aim well,recoil and such stuff like that,plus being in a warzone whit bullets passing trough your head and your body in the dirt whit the weight of the equipment and such

while we just sit our asses in a sofa

I have never fired a gun but I dont think I will be da marskman just by playing games

 

[No Limit]

And yet the military uses games to train their soldiers for many combat scenarios. Oh sorry did I say games I meant combat simulators.

I am not familiar with the similuators they use but I have a hard time believing they are anything like Counter strike, BF2, or other arcade bullshit. You can not market a video game by making it a realistic combat simulator, nobody would play it because of how insanely boring it would be.

Insane I don't think so. I believe there would be substantial difference between a common person put through military training and a gamer put through training. Assuming both of these people where roughly of the same build/intelligence. The gamer would be able to understand and learn how to deal with various real world combat situations faster than the common person because they've been doing so in games for years. Someone who can learn and understand combat faster (having played various combat simulators), can think of their feet in tense situations (a vital skill for many pro gamers), has the ability to keep calm no matter what is going (another vital skill, keeping calm in a tournament can be the key to victory), etc will make a better soldier in the long run.

Your entire argument again rests on the idea that games provide you with real world situations, they dont.

i.e. firing a weapon at another human being. Theres nothing sad about it and frankly saying it's sad is a pretty stupid comment in the first place. You're the sad one.

Yeah, except that you are firing at pixels by pushing a trigger on your xbox controller instead of real life humans. Have you people ever experianced the shock of firing an actual gun? Chances are that if you have it was in a controlled enviroment. There is nothing a video game can do to prepare you for the shock, fear, and adrenaline of firing that same gun in an uncontrolled enviroment where your life, or someone elses life, is in danger.

 

[nurizeko]

Maybe its not all gaming, and just a by-product of the digital generation. We've all grown up with computers, electronics, and generally had to grow up to have a certain aptitude for handling equipment.


I remember going to a jobs fair once and there was a royal airforce recruiting station. I tried out the flight simulator, and the guy was pretty darn impressed with how well I took to it. Granted it was just a flight simulator, but perhaps folks with gaming in their history take to training better, and thats what the army was talking about?. Other guys before me were crashing and all sorts, and I was flying about without even being told how to take off.



No, perhaps gaming doesn't make people automatically better soldiers, but perhaps it just about makes them take easier to training.

And if you take to the training easier you progress faster and its just a tad easier to learn the real skills needed?.

I don't think having developed some ability for certain activities in gaming is a detriment to soldiering.

 

[Bob_Marley]

You're all missing the point.

Its not that they make better soldiers, its that they arn't bad soldiers. It has long been expected that the youth of today would be incompatible with the group mindset and such required in the armed forces. Indeed, not too long ago I read an article that former convicts were much more suited to service as they had experiecened complete integration into a larger group and the removal of privacy.

This has precisely nothing to do with gaming. Its simply that the current generation of military service have proven to be equal to thier forebearer's skill and dicipline, in spite of what many people were expecting.

 

[No Limit]

But you are ignoring what Stern is saying, what defines a good soldier? what standards are they using? In my personal opinion this is all bullshit.