Now I realize that there are lots of athletes out there who probably delight in playing themselves in video games (although I wonder if players on crappy teams play their team all the time knowing they'll be at a big disadvantage). I also realize that many voice actors have probably delighted in playing characters voiced by themselves. But this is a little weird. Okay it's really weird.
So the Army (yes THE Army) is funding another sequel to its little experiment known as America's Army, released in 2002 for the PC. There's been several updates and expansions since its initial, surprisingly well received release. What started out as a free game available for download on the internet and at Army recruitment centers (sneaky huh), eventually spawned a retail version for PS2 and XBOX this year. But now they're throwing in a twist by putting you in the shoes of actual existing soldiers. That means the playable characters are based on current soldiers, and the missions might even be based on their real experiences.
I honestly don't even know how to feel about this. Hell I still don't know how to feel about the game itself. I initially hated the idea of the Army doing a game, but I think in retrospect that's just because I thought it would surely suck hard. However it was decent, free, and people seemed to like it. I understand that the Army doesn't care about making good video games, they care about recruiting anyone they can. If that means making a game, no one in hell will care if the games no good.
So I guess my indifference is due to the fact that I'll respect just about anyone who makes a decent game, free or otherwise, even if I have no intentions of playing it. I give the Army credit for thinking outside the box, but I really wonder what recruiting payoffs the game has garnered. If anyone did actually decide to join the Army because of a video game, then that's probably the right place for them. However, most video gamers aren't as susceptible to suggestion as legislators would have the public believe. Also, we can be pretty lazy. I don't know about you, but the Army is no place for lazy people. So here's to staying on the couch with my controller.
So the Army (yes THE Army) is funding another sequel to its little experiment known as America's Army, released in 2002 for the PC. There's been several updates and expansions since its initial, surprisingly well received release. What started out as a free game available for download on the internet and at Army recruitment centers (sneaky huh), eventually spawned a retail version for PS2 and XBOX this year. But now they're throwing in a twist by putting you in the shoes of actual existing soldiers. That means the playable characters are based on current soldiers, and the missions might even be based on their real experiences.
I honestly don't even know how to feel about this. Hell I still don't know how to feel about the game itself. I initially hated the idea of the Army doing a game, but I think in retrospect that's just because I thought it would surely suck hard. However it was decent, free, and people seemed to like it. I understand that the Army doesn't care about making good video games, they care about recruiting anyone they can. If that means making a game, no one in hell will care if the games no good.
So I guess my indifference is due to the fact that I'll respect just about anyone who makes a decent game, free or otherwise, even if I have no intentions of playing it. I give the Army credit for thinking outside the box, but I really wonder what recruiting payoffs the game has garnered. If anyone did actually decide to join the Army because of a video game, then that's probably the right place for them. However, most video gamers aren't as susceptible to suggestion as legislators would have the public believe. Also, we can be pretty lazy. I don't know about you, but the Army is no place for lazy people. So here's to staying on the couch with my controller.
Comments
Dude, I talked to some really intelligent people about video games recently. Talk to you soon.