Animavore wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Animavore wrote:

purplerat wrote:
So we're back to "blame it on the video games and movies"?

Well I guess if the OP is circa 1991...

Blaming video games for the Department of Defense spending billions on making propaganda video games?

Either I'm supposed to be worried about video games turning my kids into a psychopathic murderer or not, right?

I guess not, but I don't think that's what was being argued, but rather the American military complex does spend money on enticing people to join.

You can say that about any army though. Can't say it's the same as "grooming", so I guess it's a goalpost shift.

purplerat wrote:

Animavore wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Animavore wrote:
Blaming video games for the Department of Defense spending billions on making propaganda video games?

Either I'm supposed to be worried about video games turning my kids into a psychopathic murderer or not, right?

I guess not, but I don't think that's what was being argued, but rather the American military complex does spend money on enticing people to join.

You can say that about any army though. Can't say it's the same as "grooming", so I guess it's a goalpost shift.

I don't think anybody would deny that the US military aggressively seeks recruits. The debate is over seeing boogymen any time the military is shown in anything but negative light as "grooming".

Willie71 wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Animavore wrote:

purplerat wrote:
Either I'm supposed to be worried about video games turning my kids into a psychopathic murderer or not, right?

I guess not, but I don't think that's what was being argued, but rather the American military complex does spend money on enticing people to join.

You can say that about any army though. Can't say it's the same as "grooming", so I guess it's a goalpost shift.

I don't think anybody would deny that the US military aggressively seeks recruits. The debate is over seeing boogymen any time the military is shown in anything but negative light as "grooming".

Bullshit.

But before Mead can conjure the ethical dilemmas of bloodless virtual realities, or plumb lionized state violence, he acts as a historian. The military has used video games “at every organizational level for a broad array of purposes,” he writes. It’s had three big aims in this: to recruit soldiers, to train them, and, most recently, to treat their psychological disorders, such as PTSD.

That’s how it’s been since the years after World War II, when the army and commercialized gaming built a collaborative relationship, a kind of military-entertainment complex. It still lives: The military offers funding and technical expertise to game and computer developers, and, in exchange, they give it proprietary technology and technical consulting.

Beginning in 1960 and ending in the 1990s, “the armed forces took the lead in financing, sponsoring, and inventing the specific technology used in video games.” Spacewar!, the title historians consider the first video game, was developed by graduate students at MIT who were funded by the Pentagon. As Mead tells us, the 1962 side project was made on a Programmed Data Processor-1, an early microcomputer. The PDP-1’s manufacturer didn’t have a faux space-battle program in mind—one in which “two players used switches and knobs to maneuver spaceships through the gravity field of a star while firing missiles at each other”—when the hardware was designed, surely. But SpaceWar! gave birth to the navigational controls and monitor-as-sight set-up that would influence all subsequent games.

Willie71 wrote:

But before Mead can conjure the ethical dilemmas of bloodless virtual realities, or plumb lionized state violence, he acts as a historian. The military has used video games “at every organizational level for a broad array of purposes,” he writes. It’s had three big aims in this: to recruit soldiers, to train them, and, most recently, to treat their psychological disorders, such as PTSD.

That’s how it’s been since the years after World War II, when the army and commercialized gaming built a collaborative relationship, a kind of military-entertainment complex. It still lives: The military offers funding and technical expertise to game and computer developers, and, in exchange, they give it proprietary technology and technical consulting.

Beginning in 1960 and ending in the 1990s, “the armed forces took the lead in financing, sponsoring, and inventing the specific technology used in video games.” Spacewar!, the title historians consider the first video game, was developed by graduate students at MIT who were funded by the Pentagon. As Mead tells us, the 1962 side project was made on a Programmed Data Processor-1, an early microcomputer. The PDP-1’s manufacturer didn’t have a faux space-battle program in mind—one in which “two players used switches and knobs to maneuver spaceships through the gravity field of a star while firing missiles at each other”—when the hardware was designed, surely. But SpaceWar! gave birth to the navigational controls and monitor-as-sight set-up that would influence all subsequent games.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/a ... es/280486/


Hmmmm.........

Willie71 wrote:

But before Mead can conjure the ethical dilemmas of bloodless virtual realities, or plumb lionized state violence, he acts as a historian. The military has used video games “at every organizational level for a broad array of purposes,” he writes. It’s had three big aims in this: to recruit soldiers, to train them, and, most recently, to treat their psychological disorders, such as PTSD.

That’s how it’s been since the years after World War II, when the army and commercialized gaming built a collaborative relationship, a kind of military-entertainment complex. It still lives: The military offers funding and technical expertise to game and computer developers, and, in exchange, they give it proprietary technology and technical consulting.

Beginning in 1960 and ending in the 1990s, “the armed forces took the lead in financing, sponsoring, and inventing the specific technology used in video games.” Spacewar!, the title historians consider the first video game, was developed by graduate students at MIT who were funded by the Pentagon. As Mead tells us, the 1962 side project was made on a Programmed Data Processor-1, an early microcomputer. The PDP-1’s manufacturer didn’t have a faux space-battle program in mind—one in which “two players used switches and knobs to maneuver spaceships through the gravity field of a star while firing missiles at each other”—when the hardware was designed, surely. But SpaceWar! gave birth to the navigational controls and monitor-as-sight set-up that would influence all subsequent games.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/a ... es/280486/


Hmmmm.........

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

Access to schools isn't the only route into children's lives, however. The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents. The Army has even developed its own realistic simulation game, "America's Army," and recruiters give kids access to trailers full of video game consoles where they can play it.

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

Access to schools isn't the only route into children's lives, however. The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents. The Army has even developed its own realistic simulation game, "America's Army," and recruiters give kids access to trailers full of video game consoles where they can play it.

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

Access to schools isn't the only route into children's lives, however. The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents. The Army has even developed its own realistic simulation game, "America's Army," and recruiters give kids access to trailers full of video game consoles where they can play it.

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

Access to schools isn't the only route into children's lives, however. The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents. The Army has even developed its own realistic simulation game, "America's Army," and recruiters give kids access to trailers full of video game consoles where they can play it.

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

ED209 wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

Access to schools isn't the only route into children's lives, however. The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents. The Army has even developed its own realistic simulation game, "America's Army," and recruiters give kids access to trailers full of video game consoles where they can play it.

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Of course, the quote doesn't say that billions are spent on "America's army" as absolutely everyone who cares to actually read it should be able to see.

The_Metatron wrote:

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

That Google thing is a tough one. Let me dig that up for you:

Oh, yeah. Here it is (30 seconds later):

http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... erview.pdf

Not billions. Hundreds of millions. Just over $1.6 billion. See page 143.

purplerat wrote:

ED209 wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Of course, the quote doesn't say that billions are spent on "America's army" as absolutely everyone who cares to actually read it should be able to see.

The quote about "billions each year" is sandwiched between discussion of America's Army and "route into children's lives". The implication is pretty clear. I get that when dishonesty serves your purpose it's easy to look the other way though.

ED209 wrote:

purplerat wrote:

ED209 wrote:

purplerat wrote:
If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Of course, the quote doesn't say that billions are spent on "America's army" as absolutely everyone who cares to actually read it should be able to see.

The quote about "billions each year" is sandwiched between discussion of America's Army and "route into children's lives". The implication is pretty clear. I get that when dishonesty serves your purpose it's easy to look the other way though.

There is no dishonesty, except in your now-willful and intentional misrepresentation of the quoted passage.

If it were me that had made the error of reading comprehension, I'd be capable of admitting it.

The_Metatron wrote:

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

That Google thing is a tough one. Let me dig that up for you:

Oh, yeah. Here it is (30 seconds later):

http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... erview.pdf

Not billions. Hundreds of millions. Just over $1.6 billion. See page 143.

The_Metatron wrote:

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Mike_L wrote:

If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

That Google thing is a tough one. Let me dig that up for you:

Oh, yeah. Here it is (30 seconds later):

http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... erview.pdf

Not billions. Hundreds of millions. Just over $1.6 billion. See page 143.

The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents.

Willie71 wrote:



Explaining away a single incident within a pattern isn't intellectually honest, is it?

Skinny Puppy wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:

Skinny Puppy wrote:

purplerat wrote:
If the DOD is spending "billions each year" on developing "America's Army" then I see a bigger issue with wasteful spending than whatever influence it might have on some kids. Even the biggest AAA titles don't get anywhere near "billions each year" in development cost. Fuck, for that much money they could just buy the CoD franchise and actually have a game people want to play.

Perhaps it’s trillions of dollars a year?

I’d love to see the actual (verifiable) data for that ‘billions of dollars per year claim’.

That Google thing is a tough one. Let me dig that up for you:

Oh, yeah. Here it is (30 seconds later):

http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... erview.pdf

Not billions. Hundreds of millions. Just over $1.6 billion. See page 143.

Sorry, but the quoted part says:

The Department of Defense spends billions each year on video game development, as Mead's book documents.

So do they or don’t they? And I’m not talking about one game, the quote infers that money (billions) is being spent on video games.