Player Protests U.S. War Losses with Army's Own Recruiting Game

[gamepolitics]

Comments

[never_wakeup]

Really interesting. Largely, people use games (and increasingly, online ones) as a place to shape new contexts, or form their own (often pretended) notions of what things like (in this case) the military, being a soldier, fighting a war, and having fun mean. DeLappe's actions seem like they would disrupt each of these things, at least...that seems his intention; to bridge the gap between two different realities, and cause players to associate their "play" actions with events in the real world.

I'd be reallllly curious to hear what the game's developers would say about something like this. I'm guessing it doesn't violate any TOA's or anything, but I wonder if they'd say that DeLappe has a "right" to express himself this way. Some might consider it abuse of the game's system or just annoying, but it definitely seems like a new way of getting your point across, to say the least.

[persephoneflame]

The game was developed by the US Army as a recruiting tool, using funds generated by taxes.

[never_wakeup]

I understand this. I mean to say that there were creative minds behind the game that put a great amount of work into designing, crafting, and polishing America's Army -- literally the people who developed the title. I'd be curious to hear what their response would be.

[nedlum]

... I thought you couldn't respawn in America's Army. Did they change that, then?

[gamepolitics]

you're right. I should have worded that better. As I recall with AA, you respawn when the match restarts

fixing.

[finaleve]

Either way, he'd have to wait til his soldier is back in action.

Not supporting the troops

[grimm24]

If this jerk really cared about the men and women serving our country in Iraq then maybe he wouldnt support politicians who denied a bill that would provide soldiers with body armor and armor for Humves?!?

That is what pisses me off about people who say they support the troops. When you support assholes like John Kerry your actually against the troops because they are against these bills that provide more protection for the men and women in uniform.:(

Re: Not supporting the troops

[never_wakeup]

Am I missing something? Where does it say that DeLappe necessarily supports the politicians you mentioned? I think you're over-simplifying things a little.

Re: Not supporting the troops

[grimm24]

It dosent, im just saying that politicians who dont support the war effort are truly against the troops.

Re: Not supporting the troops

[exis]

There was a lot of pork attached to the version of the bill that Kerry voted against. It's a common political strategy: attach a lot of excess crap to a bill that funds something important, and then decry people for denying people like soldiers important funding even though they're voting against the bill because it's a *bad bill*.

Kerry voted in favor of the funding when the bill was more palatable, but he didn't get time to explain his reasoning in-depth, because all you get on TV are little sound bites. "I voted against it before I voted for it" or whatever dumbass thing he said.

So if you want to complain about people not supporting the troops, blame the people who added all those extra riders to one version of the bill, knowing that it would make it so bad that people couldn't vote for it. Or perhaps just blame both sides. They all play the same game.

P.S. I support the troops, I want them to receive the best funding and protection possible. I do not, however, support this war, and I want us out as soon as possible.

[king_parliament]

It's a curious use of the game, this time placing commentary in a computer game in service of a virtual streetcorner and sandbox rather than a general vessel for a particular point to be made. I support it, even if I do find it a little shady and likely unwelcome among the people who are there just to enjoy a few rounds of AA.

I'm most curious of all of the responses by gamers in matches with DeLappe. I'd really like to see some of the logs from the game chat strings.

GP: Think you could get ahold of a few?

There's a part of me that thinks that most of what he's trying to point out will go over most of the people he plays with, tho. Though on the flip-side, the IQ of the average AA player seems to be a bit higher than with CS, but that's just my experience.

[bishop186]

To be perfectly honest, I'd votekick him out of the match because he's not playing the game. I'm there to play a game and have some fun, and some ass not playing the game and just sitting there and typing names is detracting from that fun. That's like having an abortion rally at Disneyland.

Sure, I understand that he's trying to protest the war, yadda yadda, but let's do it somewhere else, okay? If I want to see a protest, I'll go to a courthouse or watch the evening news. The last place I want to see a protest is in my favorite FPS.

[king_parliament]

*nods* Good point, but I think it all ends up depending on the patience and political standing of the gamers involved. Like I said, it's a soapbox, and people rarely like folks standing on corners and yelling things they don't want to hear on a Saturday evening out with their family or friends.

Gaming is an escape in the most basic observation, and where politics and gaming meet should be subject to criticism of format. Single-player commentary I understand, and maybe even in an MMO or two, if the circumstances make enough sense (being that MMOs rely on social interration for the bulk of their use.)

But with an FPS? I think that might be pushing it. I don't think I'd kick him, but I most certainly would not welcome it.

[no_relation]

"Hmm, lovely Saturday afternoon, I think we'll walk down to the Capitol and watch the protests. We'll make a picnic!"

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. The protest that's seen only by those that want to see it is pointless and counterproductive. If I was there playing the game, I'd probably votekick him too, but don't insist on protests being only where you can't see them because you don't want people harshing your buzz.

[finaleve]

I can accpet the fact that this guy is getting a point across, but how will this prevail in anyway? If anything, he should send a emails to every single person within the US with a list of the names, because not everyone plays games, but everyone checks their email.