America's Army Invests $50 Million In Games

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Dark Pulse

Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
Sep 12, 2004
6,186
0
0
38
Buffalo, NY, USA
darkpulse.project2612.org
Gaming - Serious Business. At least, the US Army thinks so. You'd have to take it pretty seriously to not only fund a free-to-play online game (which would be, for the uninformed, the UE-powered America's Army series) but especially if you spent $50 Million on it, wouldn't you?

"The Army takes this seriously," Stephens said of PEO-STRI and its Army gaming unit, which will handle military video game requirements. "We own gaming for the Army -- from requirements through procurement," he said.

"We want to take advantage of that, but we don't have the intent to become a competitor with the commercial gaming industry," Stephens said. "We don't have the intent or capability to be a commercial game house."

In addition to the $50 million, the Army gaming unit has an undisclosed additional budget to purchase a state-of-the-art commercial video game system that will be fielded for training in February.
 

Phopojijo

A Loose Screw
Nov 13, 2005
1,458
0
0
37
Canada
That's about as much as a commercial game takes if you include all the marketing and stuff... ~5x the budget of Gears (5/3rds if you include marketing).

The thing is, the Government is known for not being the most efficient spenders of money... so that goes right about in line with what a standard commercial game requires for a budget.
 

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
This isn't a game ... it's advertising for the us army.
That's why they can afford to spend that big a budget.
And who can blaim them when they've got the worst PR-problem possible (fighting a neverending war against a non-existant enemy)

btw :
it's not just AA ... they're also making simulation-games for the army.
So while 50 million may look like much. You've got to consider that they're building at least 2 games and one of them is a very serious high-end simulation.
Not exactly the kind of thing that comes cheap.

/me wonders if the media (or any none-software developer for that matter) understands how much money is needed for the average software-project.
 
Last edited:

Alhanalem

Teammember on UT3JB Bangaa Bishop
Feb 21, 2002
2,238
0
36
40
Ivalice
uh, somehow i managed to get a post from another forum entirely into this space. lol.
 
Last edited:

pine

Official Photography Thread Appreciator
Apr 29, 2001
6,137
0
0
IRL
Visit site
I have to admit, that the military's affiliation with gaming makes me pretty uncomfortable. It becomes a lot harder to deny that games = combat simulators when the army is basically using them as such.
 

Hedge-o-Matic

New Member
Dec 29, 2000
204
0
0
Visit site
I have to admit, that the military's affiliation with gaming makes me pretty uncomfortable. It becomes a lot harder to deny that games = combat simulators when the army is basically using them as such.

Yup. And their using Epic's tech taints the entire company, in my opinion. I'd call it war profiteering, but the problem goes deeper than that. We'll never know, but I wonder how many of our soldiers joined the army after being influenced by AA to some small degree? Did any of them not return? Were any civilians killed by these soldiers who might not otherwise have been, considering the situation over there?

The very real chance that that has indeed happened would make me lose sleep, if I were on Epic's payroll. But I guess it's hard to think about larger issues when you've got new sports cars to drive and all.
 

Interbellum

I used to be a man
May 17, 2008
717
0
0
/me wonders if the media (or any none-software developer for that matter) understands how much money is needed for the average software-project.

Pure inefficiency, imo. Modders have proven time & again that a lot can be done with almost nothing. You don't need a 'company' with all its lard, flab & bureaucracy, just a few good men and a solid concept. And lots of coffee/Red Bull, presumably.
 

Zur

surrealistic mad cow
Jul 8, 2002
11,708
8
38
48
A few UT players I came accross 3-4 years ago said they were joining the armed forces. I don't know what became of them.
 

Kantham

Fool.
Sep 17, 2004
18,034
2
38
A few UT players I came accross 3-4 years ago said they were joining the armed forces. I don't know what became of them.

So I take it that what you mean is, it doesn't require a AA to make people want to fit in the Army?
 

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
Pure inefficiency, imo. Modders have proven time & again that a lot can be done with almost nothing. You don't need a 'company' with all its lard, flab & bureaucracy, just a few good men and a solid concept. And lots of coffee/Red Bull, presumably.
Those same modders have also proven that they can't finish a damned thing within a reasonable time-frame (in fact I'd estimate a 90% failure rate for the average mod).

You may not 'need' a company, but you do need the (fully licensed) tools (including Autocad, Photoshop, projectmanagement, user-requirements, bug-tracking, ...) and more than a little planning.

I still think that lot of people still don't have a clue what software-development costs even when it is done in a 'perfect' environment.
// ---
 

Pfhoenix

Programmer Extraordinaire
Dec 17, 1999
60
0
0
mep.beyondunreal.com
First of all, the article is very misleading in the title - the people involved with DARWARS have nothing to do with America's Army. Second, if you're going to cry wolf about military games training killers, go cry about every other war-sim FPS out there (not to mention the concept is total bull****). Third, AA has always been openly an information tool by the Army to get better information about the Army out to the public at large.
 

[SAS]Solid Snake

New Member
Jun 7, 2002
2,633
0
0
40
New Zealand
www.digitalconfectioners.com
From my knowledge the army doesn't use AA or whatever other war simulator to directly just train people on how to use weaponry. That's stupid. This is just like that 13 year old who thinks he knows how to handle a gun because he's played Counter Strike. As I recall, they largely use these sorts of simulations on how to handle situations cooperatively, as well as train and assess situations effectively. That sort of stuff is helpful within battle and you have to train in this, as this sort of stuff can mean life or death.

Pure inefficiency, imo. Modders have proven time & again that a lot can be done with almost nothing. You don't need a 'company' with all its lard, flab & bureaucracy, just a few good men and a solid concept. And lots of coffee/Red Bull, presumably.
And a lot of mod teams fail. Failure rate within mod teams are even higher than formalized software development teams. The reason why you need a company structure is because it resolves almost 50% of the reasons why mod teams fail.

In a company it makes sense to have a director in the various fields because you assume they have a basic level of management skills and are also very talented in that particular field. In a mod teams, it's kind of random as nothing is really formalized. The leader of the project automatically assigns directing leads etc based on essentially very little information (and misinformation). In my case, I've been told that I was a junior programmer under a much worse programmer simply because I joined the project later that him.

The other reason is for legalities. We all know the fall out that occurs if a mod team wins a competition (like MSUC) and the prizes aren't divided fairly among team members. We get tonnes bitching, complaining and moaning. No one is going to sign over their time and effort to a bunch of people / modders. I don't even accept 'contracts' from modders any more because they simply aren't worth my time (even the time that I have to take to respond to them is wasted). You want to work for a mod team, fine, but if the mod team does wind up going some where and you get kicked out ... that's your problem.

Simply just doing work to no end isn't going to mean that a mod team will succeed. The company structure etc are required, especially if you are paying people, or they are paying you.

At the end of the day, some mod teams will still work because people in the teams are old enough / mature enough to handle the situation that arises from game development because they've already been there and done that. However, we can see that the age range of those who mod games can be very young too...

I still think that lot of people still don't have a clue what software-development costs even when it is done in a 'perfect' environment.
Fully agreed. People just don't know, and can you blame them? I mean, the entry barrier is so low for game development in that anyone is allowed to attempt to make them anyways. It all back fires when they suddenly realize that there are all these rules and formalities that have to occur.
 

Zur

surrealistic mad cow
Jul 8, 2002
11,708
8
38
48
So I take it that what you mean is, it doesn't require a AA to make people want to fit in the Army?

How many players have you seen with a combination of words containing marine, navy, seal, sniper, trooper, etc ?