British Army Chief Commends "PlayStation Generation"

November 29, 2007 -
While West Ham goalkeeper Robert Green whines about the effect of the PlayStation and other video game consoles on the quality of England's football play, the top general in the British Army has only praise for the "PlayStation Generation".

As reported by icWales, British Army Chief of the General Staff Sir Richard Dannatt (left) praise the efforts of his nation's young soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq:
There is no doubt in my mind that our people, whether from the specialist Air Assault and Commando Brigades, or from the Ground Manoeuvre Brigades are all up to the job.

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. 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.

The courage, steadfastness and professionalism of our soldiers has been exemplary.

Dannatt made his remarks during an address to the Cardiff Business Club.

Via: Joystiq

Comments

Re: British Army Chief Commends "PlayStation Generation"

All that game playing is good for something!

@Kurisu


exactly, he only thought the less offensive stereotype that gamers are lazy wastrels, but stands corrected when proven wrong

now if only the nutjobs like larouche and thompson could comprehend the idea of 'being wrong' about everything and realise their mistakes. But alas, I fear it wont happen.

I usually don't do this, but....


LaRouche "I told you so!" in 5, 4, 3...

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Well, at least someone isnt trying to have us destroyed.
Now if only we could get him back to the UK and let him have a wack at manhunt.

well, he who shall not be named thinks you can train on Doom to become a great soldier so why the doubts over the "playstation generation"? Of course you need extra training to look skywards, as you can't look up in Doom. But if games can de-sensatise you to killing, the Army must be laughing, but they had doubts?

yep, yep, thats right

if your sports team screws up a match, you blame it on video games

makes perfect sense

Heh, kind of odd how opinion sweeps between how video games turn people between cold phsychopathic killers and lazy unmotivated couch-potatos when the situation suits.

Basically, the army were concerned that this generation that were bought up 'on their butts' playing video games wouldn't be able to match the physical demands of the army.

They aren't saying the Playstation makes people good soldiers, they're saying they are surprised that it didn't make people into bad soldiers.

This has nothing really to do with videogames. The latest generation is referred to as the "playstation generation" as it has been one of the most successful products to appear during that generation and has had an effect on marketing, etc. and been accepted into the language. People who grew up in the 60's might be referred to as the "Flower power" generation, or 70's as the disco generation.

The man isn't saying that playing on a console had anything to do with how suitable they are to be soldiers. The latest generation (as many others have been I imagine) are often seen as softer or weaker than generations past ("Things were tough back in my day, you don't know how easy you have it...").

All he is saying is that despite concerns that today's youth may not care as much, or be brave enough or talented enough to be members of the armed forces, many of them have proven that they are up to the task, and he salutes them for that.

Speaking of unnameable's, any updates one the bar hearing?

I like this man, which is interesting because I dislike most officers.

I'm in the same boat with Shoehorn on this one. Look at the three qualifiers he mentions at the end of the article. Courage, steadfastness, and professionalism. Simply because he states that they are capable of handling "gritty, bloody conflict" means that they have taken their training (see from the military) and adapted to it.
We are considered a softer generation than our forebearers. We are also seen as lazy, apathetic, and , in extreme cases, inept. However, a General is going out there and dropping the hammer saying these young men and women are just as capable, just as professional, just as willing as those first frogmen to scale the cliffs outside of Normandy 63 years ago. Well, maybe not the frogmen per se but the drive and discipline is there.

A general is basically stating that my generation is competent in a very high stress environment.


I'll take a complement where I can get them.

I agree with Shoehorn and others. This guy is not saying that video games make people better soldiers but that this generation is just as willing and capable of serving and previous gernations.

Ah, see? We have some competant people in the Army. Problem is, the MoD can't stay out of Military Operations.

@Austin Lewis

He's talking about God's Own, not you Americans.

See? I told you gamers make better killers.

What's that? He's not talking about games at all? He's just saying that a particular generation, having grown up in the 90s, has turned out to be quite good when it comes to army-type things despite other claims that they're worthless layabouts and yobs?

If games can teach people to become killers, then couldn't they also teach people to be heroic? For some reason no one ever thinks of that one, they always just call it "murder training" or something.

How ironic, considering that his generation of soldiers shot up crowds of protesters in Free Derry.

@ Trevor

That is a very good point. Most games on the market star a very heroic character. Very few games are about criminals.

So let them train me to be a one man army in defense of the world from invading zombie aliens.

To perpetuate the point made my shoehorn et al

His comment is nothing to do with games in general, but one important piece of information is implied here.

He is imlying that beforehand he (or the commenters etc) thought the playstation generation would not cope as well as previous generations in combat, it was their professional opinion that games would lead to worse performance in combat.

@chris

SO he thought the opposite of what people like the Larouche cult and Thompson shove in people's faces, but was pleasantly surprised.

Well, video games do encourage thinking on your toes and quick decision making

All that game playing is good for something!
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
MattsworknameDitto kotaku, Gawker, VOX, Polygon, ETC07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
MechaTama31So, between pulling a game from one chain of stores, and forcing editorial changes to a media source, only one of them strikes you as being on the edge of censorship, and it's the game one?07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
Andrew EisenHave gamers ever tried to ban a product? Can you be more specific? I'm not clear what you're getting at.07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
Mattsworknamethey should have expected some kind of blow back. But I didn't participate in that specific action07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
MattsworknameAndrew Youd have to ask others about that, I actualyl didn't have much beef with them till last year, so I can't speak to there history. I simply feel that gamesutra chose politics over gaming and chose to make enimies of it's prime audiance. For that,07/28/2015 - 8:40pm
Andrew EisenI'm still not clear on how Gamasutra was lacking in accountability or what it was lacking in accountability for.07/28/2015 - 8:38pm
MattsworknameAndrew: You and I agree on most of that. I don't diagree that there should ahve been other actions taken. Now, I do want to point something out, casue Im not sure if it's happened. Have gamers ever tried to have a product banned?07/28/2015 - 8:37pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician