Army Recruitment Going Interactive

Brand Week reports that the US Army plans to wage a game-oriented attack on subpar recruiting efforts.

In August the Army will unveil the first of a new wave of recruitment centers in which prospective soldiers will play America’s Army and fly missions in Apache and Blackhawk helicopter sims.

Apple’s retail stores and venues like the ESPN Zone are said to be the inspirations behind the new approach. Army official Edward Walters told Brand Week:

In the past we’ve focused on traditional media vehicles. [But] the millennial generation is used to engaging in interactive assets and we need to adapt to them.

From the description, the days of handing would-be recruits a brochure will soon be over:

The first new recruitment center is designed to be less intimidating and more "like walking into a NASA center," said Walters. It will consist of three large simulators with full-scale mock-ups of Army equipment and wrap-around 270-degree video screens…


The Apache simulator allows a pilot and co-pilot to experience the aircraft and its weapons systems. The Black Hawk helicopter simulator provides four door gunner positions. And, the armored HMMWV vehicle simulator has positions for a driver and several gunners. The centers also will include an area where visitors can compete in America’s Army, a videogame…

Via: Gizmodo

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. oto kirlama says:

    I’m all for freedom of ttnet vitamin speech and allowing rent a car game makers to put whatever they want in games, but there’s one thing about this app that has me scratching my head.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but from araç kiralama the previous article araba kiralama on this I gathered that players can use Google maps in-game to find the other (real-life?) dealers in their area.  If this is the case, has travesti anyone considered what’s stopping someone from using this app to actually move drugs between hands for reals?

    But majority araba kiralama of their outrage araç kiralama stems from what it could DO TO children, not the content itself.  Talk to one of these people and you’ll find they don’t think any books kiralık araba should be banned from children.  Mention American Psycho and they talk about kiralık araç the redeeming value of using imagination to construct a story.  Reading, no matter what the content, is largely viewed as a consequenceless activity for people of any age.  The reason why I mention American Psycho is because of the content itself.  Gaming never has and likely never will have any scenes where someone has sex with a severed head.  Not gonna happen.  Yet despite this, they’ll fight tooth and nail to protect their children from two boys kissing in Bully but whatever they read is harmless… yeah.

    The entire arguement is kiralık oto based upon a social normality inflicted by luddites who can’t figure out the controls for Halo so it’s frightening and terrifying and obviously the cause of youth violence on the rise even though, in reality, it’s in decline (which is actually a HUGE suprise given minibüs kiralama the economies status).  In  a perfect world, we would have parents that actually parent.  The idea of sales restrictions on media on oto kiralama any form to accomidate parental unwillingness to get involved with their child’s life is the real problem to me.  Here I am, 32 years old, and being held up at a self-scan rent a car needing to show ID before I can buy a $10 M rated game all because Soccer Momthra can’t be bothered to look at the crap Billy Genericallystupidson does in his free time.  It’s too hard for her, so I have to suffer?

  2. Anonymous says:

    They’re total bears about drug testing, too. I knew a guy back from Korea, he was sitting around with us while we were smoking pot and he ended up testing positive. They tested him first thing back from leave.

  3. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    Fallacious statement, let’s apply everything to the same timeframe, rather than taking things out of the same time, and applying the rules to them. They don’t care if you used to mention dating a guy. Like with shooting up and robbing liquor stores in the present, there are laws in place currently in the UCMJ that prohibits homosexuality. However, unlike the two previous criminal activities, it is acknowledged that it is not criminal to be homosexual, so as long as you don’t broadcast it to people, they cannot ask you about it, and everything is OK. Then again, it really isn’t discriminatory if you bother to look at the UCMJ, the only list of "approved" sexual activites is very, very small, and each of the ones that aren’t allowed could be grounds for throwing you out of the military.

    Further, to separate this bizarre and incorrect comparison between criminal activities and homosexuality, if you are found to be a criminal, and doing criminal activities in the military, the penalty is far more harsh than the civilian world. Even things that would be considered misdemeanors in the civilian world are automatically felonies in the military. Why? Because the military is a federal organization, and the UCMJ is federal law for those who serve in the military. If you shoot up, you most likely end up in a federal, military prison, same as if you rob a liquor store. And the military prisons aren’t like their civilian counterparts, they basically are Basic Training/Boot Camp magnified about 1,000x, and being your existence for 24 hours a day, until you serve your time… and this time does not count against your contractual obligation to serve in the military, once it is done, you still owe the military for the years of service you signed up for… or they just could end up kicking you out on a Dishonorable discharge, which has some interesting ramifications in the civilian job market.

    These kinds of things do not happen with regards to homosexuals in the military. At most, the person/people in question nbasically have to leave. In certain branches and divisions (like combat arms for the Army), this is very much for the individual’s safety, as well as the welfare of that person’s unit. As the saying goes, friendly fire isn’t. All you need is one person who hates homosexuals to be in that unit, and in the mittle of a warzone… oops, that person "accidentally" shot the homosexual in his unit. The military would like to keep these kinds of things cut down to a minimum.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  4. MechaCrash says:

    So then they don’t care if you used to shoot up daily and rob liquor stores for a living, but if you ever mention dating a guy, you’re out on your ass.

    Perfectly logical and and not at all discriminatory.


  5. Dark Sovereign says:

    Not really. Blind hate is a specialty of the Klan. It’s just more on the liberal side here.


  6. Dark Sovereign says:

    Are you stupid? Seriously? We aren’t slaves to commercials. Capitalism, yes, but not to commercials. And the army doesn’t only serve in war. The U.S. military doesn’t suddenly pop out of the ground when there’s somebody to fight.

  7. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    Junkies have to be clean (regular, random drug testing monitors that), thieves and killers also have some serious changes they have to make or they end up in military prison for life (if not worse). Gays are permitted to enter, they just cannot tell anyone they are gay, and nobody can ask. So your little list is actually kind of opposite to reality.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  8. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    And the comparison to drugs is because…?

    I’m also wondering about the snip about there being a recruiting station on every corner. There hasn’t been any increase in the number of recruiting stations, nor the number of recruitment commercials, nor the number of recruiters. Of course the military will look for new ways to attract people to join — why this is so offensive to you is beyond me. The "America’s Army" game was not made solely for recruiting purposes, that was part of it, but not the sole reason for it, so please, get off your rediculous high horse about it, and come back to reality. The comparison to a druid-using Snow White also was uncalled for.

    Especially as you said you are from Canada… so what is it to you then anyway? Further, the military’s recruiting process is not trying to feed anything pro-war at all. Contrary to your innane idea, the military doesn’t exist to go to war. The US military is part of the DoD… The "Department of Defense", not the Department of Offense. Wars happen, and they do go to them, but that sure as heck is not the first thing they do. So please, drop the FUD and wake up to reality, m’kay?

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  9. Derovius says:

     I’m not taking anything out of context. The joke use to be that there was a McDonalds on every street corner in the US, now its a recruiting station. I’ve seen the commericals on television, as we get quite a few American channels here in Canada via Canadian satellite TV, and it borders on nauseous idolatry and pure fantasy.

     "Strength for now, strength for later", etc. Like many sales pitches, it feeds you what you want to hear, and leaves out the ever important reasons not to buy/biter/enlist. In this specific case, its the eminent chance of losings ones life, the psychological trauma of seeing people you have grown attached to (re: Friends/Comrades) laying dead and/or in several pieces, and the fact that you lose the one thing you’re told you’re fighting for: freedom. Strength, pfft, after careful consideration of the W’s, I’d be weak any day of the weak and live a full and happy life.

     Let us now look specifically at America’s Army, the video game developed for recruiting the new generation of meat. Ever wonder why you don’t see Snow White lighting up a cigarette or shooting some heroin while waiting to be rescued by Prince Charming? Oh yeah, because its encourages imitation and pattern forming behaviour. So what happens when you put testosterone pumped teenage males in the same medium as people that want to exploit their dillusions of grandeur? You get stories about these early 20-something gamers from our community coming back in boxes. Some of these people are as old as I am FFS, and I am no where near ready to end life. The thought of them being scammed out of their lives makes me sick to my stomach.

     This once again harkens to the notion that games are not for children alone; however, no one here can say with a straight face that the US armed services is not trying to feed the pro-war notion to the next generation.

  10. GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    That’s a bit of a leap…

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large. For information on games and psychology, look up: Jonathan Freedman (2002)Block and Crain (2007)Grand Theft Childhood, a book by Harvard Medical School researchers Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl Olson

  11. Anonymous says:

    The military’s actually quite strict about it’s drug testing. But I suppose if you’re just trying to blindly hate like a klansman you won’t care about these silly “fact” things.

  12. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    I think you are taking it completely out of context. Using the newer forms of media for recruitment is not some evil, vile, manipulative means to draw people into the military. It is a sign that the military is moving forward in technological terms with the recruiting methods, rather than becoming irrrelevant.

    Sure, there will always be those who will volunteer to serve in the military without needing recruiters, but there also has been shown that there are those who may be interested in joining, but were not necessarily aware of it completely, and the recruiters are there to help. They do not lie to the recruits (or rather, if they do, they get into serious trouble for doing so). However, they do throw sales pitches to make it attractive, because by the end of the day, it is a numbers game. If there are X number of people entering the military, and there are Y number of people leaving (by any means, including dying), it is the recruiters’ jobs to make that ratio whatever the government requires.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  13. Derovius says:

     Apparently my name holds some sort of weight for the man below, so there it is. Does my comments have any more or any less weight to them now that you know a pointless moniker I use to refer to myself?

    Moving on,

     When a war is morally justified in the minds of the citizens, a draft is not necessary. For example, one can consider Canada during WW2; our entire armed services was comprised of volunteer citizenry almost to the end of the war. Do you know why they had to enact a draft? To streamline getting people to the front to replace those dying so willingly in the first place.

     Americans as a whole are selfish, your entire social system depends on this. Those that volunteer for the armed services should be looked upon with respect, and those tricked into service with some grandeous farce should be given ones pity. There is nothing glorious or fun about war, and attempting to mingle the concept of war with the concept of fun, as with Americas Army and these simulators, is tantimount to defrauding these young people of their right to live at peace.

  14. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    I have so many friends who are in Iraq, and a number who have died in it. My own brothers were both there and fortunately came back uninjured and alive. In the end, it is part of the job, part of what you signed up for. There are a good number of people who joined the military who will re-enlist during wartime conditions out of a desire to protect their brothers & sisters in the military, that is true. There are also those who can’t wait to get away from it all as well.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  15. Tony says:

     The thing you have to remember is the people who are on the ground are like a tight-nit family.

    If you get sent home at the end of your tour, and someone you consider close as (or closer than) a brother is still over there, you will probably want to go protect them.

    So you sign up and go back to protect them (and then, when their time is up, they will likely do the same)

    I think if the things were changed so everyone in a squad was let off at the same time, would reenlistment drop?

    But alot of guys will feel like they are abandoning their brothers if they don’t sign up again.

  16. MechaCrash says:

    The fact that this disastrous clusterfuck was initiated by a retarded chimp and not the generals in no way changes the fact that we are in it, and signing up for any branch of the armed forces is likely going to get you sent there.

  17. Conejo says:

    The U.S. Military: we’ll hire killers, thieves, and junkies, but we don’t want fags.

    Here are we — and yonder yawns the universe.

  18. Joker ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It simply amazes me that a simple point that I saw repeated here doesn’t sink in. 

    The military does not dicate the policy under which it is employed.

    So all the commentary about ‘unjust’, ‘unpopular’, or ‘illegal’ wars have nothing to do with the DOD mission.  The DOD follows the orders of the CIVILIAN leadership that are ultimately ELECTED by you, the people of the United States (and even a few gamers).  Quite frankly, if the DOD were allowed to prosecute conflicts on their own with the sole purpose of WINNING, there’d be alot less misery experienced by our personnel and a whole lot more inflicted on the targets. 

    The DOD is an instrument of US policy, not the creator.  The innane rantings of some toward the Armed Forces is much like blaming your vehicle for hitting that telephone pole and not your own failings as a driver who’s responsible for the operation and maintenance of said vehicle.

    If serving your country (in any fashion) isn’t your cup of tea, fine.  Enjoy the protections those volunteers provide.  But please think twice before bad-mouthing any of those citizens or their service.



  19. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    We could always reenact the draft. That was an unmitigated success last time it was used.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  20. Anonymous says:

     I wonder if they have a multiple amputee simulator that lets you see what its going to be like to live the rest of your life without your legs, or only one arm? Or, on the lighter side of things, a divorce councilor simulator as you and your wife/husband struggle to keep your family together with you being away from home for months on end.

     But hey, whatever stops them from hunting for young people at the super market and threaten them with whatever they can to fill their quotas. Pfft.

  21. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    Actually, only a very few join the Army to be a tank commander or apache pilot, or join the Air Force to be a pilot or Gunship crewman (which actually is an Army job). Most people join the military to get out of difficult life situations (drug addicted family/friends, lack of jobs in home town, etc.), many also join to get the college money in order to better themselves. There is a very slim few who see the job as glamorous, and those ones usually don’t make it through Basic Combat Training/Boot Camp.

    Despite what people are demonizing the recruiters for here, it just doesn’t show up as true when surveying people who are in the military, and why they joined. Most don’t even care for being in too much, they see it as a stepping stone, a means-to-an-end to have a better chance to succeed in the "real world". There are a few who really anjoy the military, and they get promoted quite high because of it. But anyone with delusions of grandeur often finds him or herself really in the wrong place, and that person finds a way out pretty darned quick.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  22. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    Their recruitment methods are no more unethical than that of a sales clerk at a store. I don’t see why the recruiters are obligated to educate through gaming, when nobody else is obligated to do so. When Scion made a simple little goofy video game to promote their xD line of cars, were they obligated to educate people about driving? And before you jump on the "the Army sends people to war" argument, remember that more people die in the USA from traffic accidents than US military personnel die in duty per year. The most dangerous thing you can ever do in your life in the US is get behind the wheel of a car and drive down the highway. Yet Scion wasn’t obligated to educate people on the importance of driving safety.

    I’d also like to understand why it is so wrong for the US military recruiters to make it attractive for people to join the military? The US Military is a volunteer military — that is, people volunteer for it, they aren’t forced to join. The only people who join the military and don’t know what they are getting into, are the people who, quite honestly, decided to not find out for themselves. Further, probably over 80% of military jobs, in all branches, are not "front line" jobs. When you go into basic combat training (or boot camp as some branches call it), any misbegotten belief that you are living a video game is quickly and completely extinguished.

    The truth of the matter is, there are people leaving the military all the time. Whether it is because the enlistment contract is up, retirement, getting busted, dying, becoming injured (in or out of warfare), heck even getting pregnant/becoming a single parent is grounds to be able to leave. The military also has, a number of times, given severance pay to people so they can get out early if they desire. Now… if there is not an adequite number of people coming in to match those going out, the military rapidly disappears. There is an "acceptable ratio" of those joining vs. those separating from the military. If this ratio starts to shift too much one way or the other, different measures are taken. If there are too many people joining and not as many leaving, then severence pay options start cropping up. If too many people are leaving and not enough joiing, the military looks toward new avenues for recruitment, and adjusts the requirements for recruitment, trying to make it more appealing for people to join. It is a numbers game, nothing more. Honestly, it is a foolish idea to suggest that this is somehow more unethical than anything else that is similar.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  23. Anonymous says:

    Its not that they’re "adapting" to modern times that bothers me so much.


    Their "recruiment tatics" can at times be unethical to begin with. I don’t believe for one second that they’re trying to educate through gaming but rather are using it as a lure.

  24. Except that the Army doesn’t have a "right to free speech." The Army is not a person. The Army is not a corporation. The Army is a government entity. Whether or not a government has the "right" to propagandize its citizens is up for debate. Also, your classification of his disagreements as "knee-jerk" are warrantless, as you do not know upon what information that disagreement is based.

  25. rdeegvainl ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    You do, it’s called voting. You vote for someone who you think will deal with the situation the way you would want them too.

  26. Anonymous says:

    It’s my taxes paying for it, I think I’m entitled to have a say in it.

    Get this straight, armed forces: you are not above us.

  27. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    So because some people might be likely to use F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) as well as other Luddite tactics, the Army shouldn’t adapt to modern times with their recruitment process?

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  28. Haggard ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Well, they of course have a right to advertise however they see fit, but this will drive more people on Faux News or in small town newspapers to shout about how all FPS games are designed by the army to brainwash the children.

    Then again, they say something along those lines (or rather warn that it could happen) in Metal Gear Solid 4.

  29. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    And yet, at the same time, being completely unrealistic warfare. I don’t think the Army has anything to worry about that game.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  30. TheEdge says:

    Well spoken!

    Although,I do believe the Army should try to keep Call of Duty 4 out of as many hands as possible,cause no one would want to join after playing that game,so damn realistic looking.

  31. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    There is a difference between misstating the truth (lying outright), and withholding information. Even in the civilian market — does that car salesman outright lie to you about the car he’s trying to sell, or rather, does he focus on the good traits/qualities of the car, and downplay or even ignore the bad parts? If it is an outright lie, that is grounds for legal action. If it is ommitance… and you don’t ask about it, while not necessarily honest, it often isn’t grounds for legal action.

    As a disabled vet, I do understand the frustrations behind all of that… but the military *does* cover expenses involved with the injury I got in the military… just nothing else, I don’t have a high enough disability percentage for that.

    I went into the military fully aware that there was the chance I could be injured or killed. For most military personnel, that is part and parcel of the job — not necessarily the part you want to focus on. Instead, you just do your mission, and then move onto the next one. If something happens, it happens… bad luck of the draw.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  32. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    "Unflinching obedience" is a statement you want to be careful of — the Nuremberg Defense is not an acceptable defense — that is, the military personnel are stull obligated to say no to orders that are blatantly illegal, and no amount of "I was just following orders" will cut it when it comes to war crimes.

    That said, an individual’s personal opinion on a war — whether it is right or wrong, is immaterial. When you are down on the lines, and have bullets whistling past your ear, believe me, you will not be concerned about whether it is right to be there, you will be concerned with one and only one thing — base survival instincts, which will be hopefully influenced by the training that has been reinforced in you to accomplish what you need.

    The US military’s job is to go where the US government tells them to go, and to do what the US government tells them to do. That same government elected into positions of power by the US citizens. If people don’t like what is being done… then vote to have someone you do like be in office holding the reigns. Don’t spit on the members of the military who are doing what is required of them.

    When it comes to the military spending, the sad truth is that most of that spending never actually reaches the military itself. Often, it is simply used by the government officials to line their own pocketbooks. Maintaining a standing military is always expensive, and the US military is one of the largest, most technologically advanced militaries in the world — technology that is an attempt to change warfare and save US military personnels’ lives.

    The funny thing about the DoD spending is… where is that money going to? The machines that are built for/used by the military are made by… US civilian corporations — the DoD has a very strong "Made in USA" stance on what they buy. Other money goes to the paychecks of those who work in the military and where do they spend that money? Once again, most of them (short of those who are stationed overseas) end up spending it back in the local civilian economy in the US, bolstering that community’s money. Yet again, the money goes right back into the US economy. The parts that don’t go into the US economy directly are those that go into foreign economies (soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines who are stationed overseas spend their money most often overseas), or the civilian officials elected into office by the US citizens lining their own pocketbooks. So honestly, the outcry against the DoD spending is a farce, for the most part. Get over yourself, and check out how economies really work.

    The US military, for the record, has been downsizing considerably for a couple decades now. When I was in, I saw an office that went from being 100 personnel to 10 personnel in one year, and then from 10 personnel to 1 person in the next year and a half (one person doing all the photography, articles, editing, publishing, and distribution of a 80-page magazine that is distributed throughout the US Army European theater every month… not a pleasant job). The old army slogan of "An Army of One" was something of an ironic joke that somehow got through… because the way the Army was heading, it wasn’t far from the truth… The other branches aren’t doing much better — they are all supposed to support the same locations as they always have, but with an ever decreasing number of personnel to do so. The whole "do more with less" motto that has been holding true for a couple decades now. And yet… the spending has increased — on what? on the technological goodies? maybe a little (but as I said, that goes right back into the US economy, since they are built by US civilian corperations) on military personnel paychecks? Not really… less personnel means you need to pay them less…. Then what? A good portion is ending up lining the pockets of the officials that you either helped elect, or never voted for (and therefore can’t say anything about with any merit).

    You might have some personal grief with the military, but at least you can try to have actual facts to support it, rather than be upset over inaccurate information you seem to have.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  33. Tony says:

     It depends on ones interpretation of the word "manipulated’


    I’d say if someone misstates the truth and you sign up, even if you would have signed up knowing the truth, you were manipulated.

    Look at all the military men & women who have been injured and had the the government basically tell them "Screw you, we’re not paying for any more medical expenses for the injuries you suffered serving under us"

    I’d consider them to have been manipulated.

    Maybe they would have served anyway, but the fact is they thought that they’d get more assistance than they did.



  34. rdeegvainl ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I haven’t come across anyone yet in the service who was "manipulated" to join.

    "The military should try putting on a bake sale next time it wants a long-range bomber."


  35. Chuck (no cookie, no login) says:

    I am damn glad that no matter how bad things get, the bulk of the army respects the chain of command, and is not the one deciding which wars to wage.

    But at the top, we have the civilian commanders who don’t respect the army worth a damn, who see it as a tool to be used because some Rasputin like Karl Rove said that a war might bump their base a couple percentage points (oops).  They come with a gaggle of yes-men with several pounds of brass on their shoulders and chest, and together they spend more than the rest of the world put together on the military and kill hundreds of thousands of people and support brutal evil regimes all for power, glorification, and just a general desire to pump one’s fist at girly-man diplomacy.  And it’s the civilians being "protected" that pay for the School of the Americas, that pay for continued nuclear weapons development, for weapons programs that cost more than our entire education budget, for Guantanamo Bay.

    And I guess part of respecting the chain of command, doing what you’re told, is an unflinching obedience, so I guess it’s to be expected that the enlisted men and junior officers will all defend without question the motives of the armed forces as "protecting freedom".  But you’ll pardon me if I don’t actually take you at your word — the generic you, the members of the armed services — when you say it’s all for noble goals.  I’d like to say it’s nothing personal, but I can’t lie, it’s personal to me.  You became part of something that is necessary in some respect, but has become the militaristic specter that Eisenhower warned us about.

    As long as the military continues to be the size it is, it will continue to wield the "soft" power it has, including having unlimited funds to run recruitment campaigns to manipulate youth into enlisting.  Youth who have no other opportunities in life partly because the nation is too impoverished to afford anything but a bigger military than the rest of the world.

    So if I’m a little bitter about my taxes being forcibly taken from me to fund this, perhaps you can understand my bitterness.  It’s not about the money, it’s about where it’s not going.  The military should try putting on a bake sale next time it wants a long-range bomber.


  36. BlackIce, Dragunov Marksman ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    No, it won’t, because you probably won’t die if you’re shot down or hit an IED.

  37. Brokenscope says:

    Eh, I don’t think America’s army was worth it honestly, I think they would be better off focusing on making their simulators as interesting as possible.

    Everyone joins the Air force to be a pilot or a Gunship crewman, and then ends up being a base guard.

    Everyone joins the army to be a tank commander or an apache pilot.


    You get people mostly for the glamorous jobs, so make the glamorous jobs look damn good.


  38. nighstalker160 says:

    Oh yeah, THIS isn’t going cause controversy.

    I’m actually a little surprised the army would go this route right now.  With an unpopular war going on and the whole issue surrounding the  banning of recruiter in Berkely and other locations etc.  It seems like the army would want to lay low a little rather than going the videogame route again which will just cause the "brainwashing our children!" people to rise up and scream.

  39. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    True enough. The Army does have a lot of jobs that don’t really need much brain power to do. Heck, even the Signal Corps has its "Wire Dogs"… where the entire job is to pull wire from the back of a moving vehicle and bury it in the ground.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  40. Belgarion89 says:

    True, but the recruiting tools the Army’s using are more set up recruit people for combat arms and close air supprt rather than rear echelon jobs.  Granted, I don’t think anyone wants to play a SINCGARS simnulator, although there might be one in the Humvee, so it’s a little hard to advertise Commo jobs.


    So speak I, some random guy.

  41. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    While true (as I was one of those Signal Corps nerds fixing computers and networks), it really isn’t a good idea to judge based off of percentage points. If 20% of the Navy needs to be "nerds", while only 5% of the Army needs to be "nerds", the Army could still easily have more "nerds", simply because the Army has significantly more personnel than the Navy — it just is the nature of the beast, and the differences in the kind of warfare being done by both branches.

    But I digress…

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  42. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    I joined the Army, because I was raised with a desire, no, a need to serve my country — if the country I live in is offering me a relatively peaceful existence, with freedoms abounding, it was the least I could do to help defend those freedoms for a little bit. I also was raised with the idea that it would be good to go to another country, and see what that other country’s culture and existence is like, to compare and contrast what it is like in the US, with the idea being that then I’d not take so many things for granted, which is why I volunteered to serve overseas.

    The Army, heck, the military’s purpose is not to determine whether or not to fight in a popular or unpopular war. The military’s purpose is to do what they are told, military personnel give up a few of their own personal freedoms so that the civilians can enjoy theirs. The military is comprised of people from all walks of life throughout the US — and you’d find just as many of those in the military find this current war unpopular as you would in the civilian world. However, as much as they might not care for it, the difference is that the military personnel still are required to follow their orders. Wars, after all, are not fought simply because they are popular, or stopped because they become unpopular — and the military isn’t the final say as to which wars are fought or not, that is the civilians in charge. And believe me, you do not want the military being the deciding factor in this.

    Me, I ened up getting out of the Army long before Sep. 11, 2001, and the subsiquent reactions afterwards — because my back got screwed up pretty bad. But both of my little brothers ended up serving in Iraq (or the Persian Gulf), one in the Air Force, the other in the Navy. Both were raised same as I was, with a desire to serve in the military, with a desire to serve outside of the US borders. This does mean there is a tendency to have to go to war… that doesn’t necessarily mean that my brothers or myself enjoy war, it is a "necessary evil" that in the end helps keep people in the US with the freedom to be able to decry the war(s) if they want to.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  43. Mark says:

    Actually, I’m sure that there will always be people who want to join the Army.  For some, that’s what they want.  War or not, they wouldn’t care.  Some probably see it as being a responsible choice and/or a neccessary choice.

    I don’t begrudge them and/or think less of them.  They must have their reasons. 

    Armed services offer some people what they need/want.  The Army is one of those places for them to go.  I’d rather they find their place than spin their wheels.



  44. Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    The US military is a volunteer military. As such, they *need* recruiters and recruitment programs. The alternative is a forced draft — which I think you’d like less. Honestly, I think it is great that the Army is trying to use newer forms of media to help with recruitment. They’d really be hurting themselves if they didn’t move forward with the times.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  45. Brokenscope says:

    You know, my first reaction was to take you seriously, but your spelling mistake made me think that maybe you were attempting something humorous.

  46. Anonymous says:

    I know. How dare a group you have a knee-jerk disagreement with exercise their right to free speech.

  47. Unrated ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    What the army REALLY needs to do is invest in save point and extra life technology. Then EVERYONE would want to join the army.

  48. Haggard ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Around 655,000 Iraqis have been killed by Gulf War 2: The Showdown – so that’s about 1 in every 44 people who lived there dead. In addition, almost 2 million have fled the country.

  49. Anime_Otaku ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I really don’t think the army can do much to boost the numbers short of conscription. As has been said Afghanistan and especially Iraq are a mess and we see it on TV everyday that an IED or suicide bomb has killed another dozen people (Half serious question: How long will it be until the only people in Iraq will be terrorists and the military?) so I doubt many people will sign up if they have options.
    Hell if I were give the choice of enlisting as an officer and a McJob I’d happily flip burgers despite the lower wages. I doubt any hi-tech simulators will change people’s minds.

  50. Kris ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    They complain about low recruitment a lot.  One wonders if they realize the fact that they’re in a messy, endless war tends to deter people from signing on.  I don’t know if some high tech simulaters is really going to help.

  51. Black Patriot ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Of course, havn’t you seen any movies, the government is all about killing people that disagree with it…

  52. Tony says:

     Disclaimer: This post is intended to insult the "Games make Killer" morons, not the army.

    My father was in the army, and many of my older family served in WWII, and I know at least some ancestors fought in the Civil War. (on the losing side, but still technically in the military.)

    On with the post.

    You know, I just can’t help but think of the irony what with the whole "Guy shot a couple of girls, he must have been a gamer" news story down on the front page.

    So I guess video games make people into homicidal maniacs, but that’s okay so long as they only kill people we want them too?

  53. Belgarion89 says:

    Granted, it takes a lot more nerds to run a Nuclear-powered ship than to drive an Abrams.  The Army still needs its nerds, but they want them to wind up in the Signal Corps fixing computers and networks rather than running around in the Infantry.


    So speak I, some random guy.

  54. Anonymous says:

    The Navy’s been on the nerd bandwagon for a while. They’ve got ads voiced by the same guy who voices Optimus Prime, ads hyping their space launches, and ads hyping their remote death robots. As it is they’re a Gundam away from me signing up.

Comments are closed.