Battle Ground Simulations

A newly issued U.S. Army field manual has put people on notice: Video games are serious training tools. In its first revision since 9/11, the U.S. Army field manual for Training and Full Spectrum Operations mentions gaming 32 times, describing it as as a key ingredient in replicating “an actual operational environment.”

Released in December 2008, the new doctrine is another reminder of how gaming is rapidly redefining military recruitment and training.

The push to use games as a recruiting tool dates back to 2002, when the Army released “America’s Army” — a free, downloadable video game that gave people a virtual peak into soldiering. Since then, the game has registered 9.7 million regular users worldwide, and military leaders suggest that a third of the cadets entering the Army’s West Point academy have played the first-person shooter game. It has also been praised as a cheaper alternative to television ads, which may not reach the targeted audience: 14- to 16-year-olds.

The same year that America’s Army was released, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) launched a new program to revolutionize the use of experimental training in the military and take advantage of the technological advances in the computer-gaming industry. The project helped generate DARWARS Ambush, a multiplayer, first-person shooter game that since 2006 has taught thousands of troops about convoy operations, including how to react to and anticipate ambushes and improvised explosive devices.

This year, the military is spending millions more to upgrade the game with a modified version of Virtual Battlespace 2 (VBS2), known as “Game After Ambush.” The new version more accurately replicates what today’s soldiers encounter on the battlefield, and gives trainers more tools to edit missions, increase difficulty and run after-action reviews.

The military also relies on tactical language and cultural training tools — such as Tactical Iraqi and Tactical Pashto — to help familiarize troops with cultures and languages they will encounter in the Middle East. These programs immerse troops in a 3-D, interactive environment that simulates real life, teaching culturally sensitive communication that could benefit them in the field.

The United States is not the only country plugging into virtual reality. Gaming is being embraced by combat leaders in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is also developing a tailor-made version of VBS2 for tactical training needs of member countries.

Critics, including antiwar groups and some researchers, accuse the military of preying on a generation of adolescents, raised on video games that blur the brutal reality of war. These groups often ask: If soldiers treat a game like war, what happens if they start treating war like a game?

U.S. military officials portray gaming as simply a cost-effective way to attract talent, and a proven platform for rehearsing missions, building leadership skills and developing teamwork. However, despite their confidence in the Defense Department’s multibillion-dollar investment, the impact of gaming is still unknown — and the military knows it.

“The only piece that is not there is some extensive study that shows numbers to prove it,” says Col. Gary Stephens, a product manager in the office responsible for developing, acquiring and fielding cutting-edge training and testing devices for the U.S. military.

Given all the complex variables that go into successful recruiting, training and performance on the battlefield, such a definitive study would be difficult to design.

Still, Stephens is confident that gaming works, and his claims got a boost from a 2007 study by the Canadian Armour School that found gaming proved successful when it was incorporated into an officers’ training course. In the study, the class with the most game-based simulations mixed in with live training performed much better in the course.

Col. Casey Wardynski, one of the creator’s of America’s Army, points to a 2007 study from Rochester University that showed that certain cognitive skills, useful in operational conditions, were improved by a few hours of daily gaming over the course of a month.

Others are more skeptical.

A 2008 report from the Congressional Research Office said that virtual reality games allow training missions to be repeated numerous times, without the risk of injury or wear and tear on military equipment. But the report also mentioned shortcomings, such as comfortable gaming environments that minimize the impact of real world conditions such as fatigue, stress and physical discomfort.

Wardynski says that while there “is still a need for a science-based study,” there is already enough anecdotal evidence of gaming’s success to justify its expanded use.

The Pentagon apparently agrees.

Last summer, the Army opened a controversial 14,500 square foot Army Experience Center at a mall in suburban Philadelphia, sparking recent protests in which seven people were arrested. The $12-million, taxpayer-funded “virtual education” facility is supposed to give anyone over the age of 13 years old a sneak peak into military life. Visitors can fly a simulated Black Hawk helicopter, shoot M-16s aboard an Army Humvee and play America’s Army — which will soon be upgraded to include authentic weapons.

In December, the Army also announced approval of roughly $50 million for a “games in training” program that will keep an eye on industry trends to identify technology that can be used for military training. The Army also freed up funding to help field Game After Ambush at least a year ahead of schedule, Stephens said.

By September, the Army is scheduled to have 70 Game After Ambush systems in 53 military locations across the globe — including Germany, Italy and South Korea.

The funding is a direct result of the Army’s decision in April 2008 to institutionalize its use of gaming technology, Stephens said. Before that, the Army used games informally and had never established a sustained program for the acquisition and use of games. Now, like other training devices, funding requests for gaming can be part of the line-item fiscal year budget.

“The army realized gaming technology really did have a place in training,” Stephens says. “It was a technology we need.”

Seth McLaughlin is a Washington-based journalist.

The Army is shelling out nearly $18 million for a new training simulator game that will allow soldiers to drive virtual vehicles, fire virtual weapons and pilot virtual unmanned aerial vehicles in combat situations.

The contract for “Game After Ambush” was awarded late last month to software developers Laser Shot, of Texas, Bohemia Interactive, of the Czech Republic, and Australia-based Calytrix Technologies.

The new simulator — a modification of the commercial “Virtual Battle Space 2″ — will replace the Army’s official video game “DARWARS Ambush,” which the service uses to train soldiers for combat.

Since 2006, the Army’s Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation, or PEO STRI, has fielded more than 3,000 copies of “DARWARS Ambush” to the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard and Homeland Defense Department, according to spokeswoman Kristen Dooley McCullough.

In an e-mail, McCullough said the contract included $10.7 million awarded on Dec. 19, with another $7 million in options.

PEO STRI officials said earlier the new game will replicate what soldiers encounter on today’s battlefield — from fighting in urban terrain and convoy operations to reacting to contact and ambush operations.

The game will be able to interact with the Army’s battle command systems used by soldiers in the real world to track equipment as well as enemy and friendly forces. It also will include tools that will allow the Army to modify terrain, scenarios and missions, officials said.

The Army plans to field 70 gaming systems in 53 locations in the United States, Germany, Italy and South Korea between February and September 2009, according to Leslie Duvow, project director for gaming at PEO STRI.

“Each system will consist of 52 computers with ancillary equipment including steering wheels, headsets and mice,” she said.

Soldiers will be able to drive virtual vehicles, fire virtual weapons, pilot virtual unmanned aerial vehicles and do “most anything a soldier does” in a virtual battle space as large as 100 kilometers by 100 kilometers, Duvow said.

Laser Shot’s “Tactical Weapon Simulator” and Calytrix’s “LVC Game” will be added to the VBS2 software to tailor the game to the Army’s needs.

The Texas firm is the prime contractor for the production, fielding, training, software updates, technical support, and Web portal, in support of the game, according to a Laser Shot news release.

“Our company has extensive experience in supporting training for the soldiers of the U.S. Army, as do our partners Bohemia Interactive and Calytrix,” said Christopher Chambers, Laser Shot’s president.

The Army already uses VBS2 for convoy training alongside several other games at the Joint Multinational Simulation Center at Grafenwöhr.

The game has a strong reputation as a flexible, interactive, three-dimensional tactical training and mission rehearsal tool, according to Bohemia chief executive Pete Morrison. Bohemia sells a range of military-themed titles such as “Operation Flashpoint” and “ArmA: Armed Assault” for PCs.

“VBS2 is, without a doubt, the best military-grade game-based simulation on the market today,” he said.

The PEO STRI contract provides for fielding and training for “Game After Ambush” and associated tasks for one year, with an option to extend the program for four more years, the Laser Shot press statement said.

By Seth Robson, Stars and Stripes

“There’s been a huge change in the way we prepare for war, and the soldiers we’re training now are the children of the digital age who grew up with GameBoys,” says retired Rear Adm. Fred Lewis, a 33-year U.S. Navy veteran

The military simulation and virtual training market has seen dramatic growth in the last decade and it is expected to grow steadily over the next ten years. Increasing concerns over training costs, time and risk of life have forced military forces around the world to adapt technologies such as computer-based simulators and computer wargames in military training. Most importantly, simulation and virtual training have so far proved to be not only cost-effective but also an effective way to train military staff in a wide range of activities. Those functions range from weapons training to flying and even medical training. Both combat and non-combat applications for military simulations and gaming technologies with increase significantly during the period 2008-2018.

This is the video game generation of soldiers. ” ‘Ctrl+Alt+Del,’ ” the U.S. Army noted in a recent study, “is as basic as ‘ABC.’ ” And computer simulations — as military officials prefer to call them — have transformed the way the United States military fights wars, as well as soldiers’ ways of killing.

“The technology in games has facilitated a revolution in the art of warfare,” says David Bartlett, the former chief of operations at the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, a high-level office within the Defense Department and the focal point for computer-generated training at the Pentagon. “When the time came for him” — meaning Swales — “to fire his weapon, he was ready to do that. And capable of doing that. His experience leading up to that time, through on-the-ground training and playing ‘Halo’ and whatever else, enabled him to execute. His situation awareness was up. He knew what he had to do. He had done it before — or something like it up to that point.”

Virtual Training Technology, largely train soldiers how to coordinate complicated missions. Think of it as a sort of military “EverQuest” that can be played by multiple people in multiple places at the same time.

“Of course, it’s not a game. The feel of the actual weapon was more of an adrenaline rush than the feel of the controller, but you’re practically doing the same thing: trying to kill the other person. The goal is the same. That’s the similarity. The goal is to survive.”  says Trevino, 20, recalling his first shot at a human enemy.

Here is VBS2, this is the latest version of a military grade simulation, the US Army just paid for a simulated exercise called DARWARS and payed about $17.7 million in USD (see the link).  I feel that $20.00 a copy is a relatively fair price to pay to play the commercial version of this.

Compare that with Armed Assault, the commercial game for the PC, with modifications that are available and you will see that there isn’t much difference in the trainee or player’s experience.

Much of the equipment and features in the newest Military Sim are available for us in the private realm as well.  While there are limitations in the back end of the public version that are not in the military grade version, many of these have been overcome through dedicated members of the community that have created such great add-ons or modifications as ACE (Advanced Combat Environment), BLND HMMWVs, the CH M1Abrams and T72 Pack and a thousand others.

An M1 Abrams by CH

The in depth and careful modeling makes this a vehicle for intense immersion in many types of scenarios. Be they small unit patrolling techniques or immediate action drills, ArmA is a powerful engine and tool in its own right.