Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
My personal opinion is (depending on the individual game in question) could make one rethink strategy, risk vs. Reward, and when it's appropriate to do a tactical reload. I liken it to something I've heard of in the martial arts I believe was called "image training ". The idea being if you imagine a situation it will enhance your response in the real world. JUST curious for your opinions.
I am not sure which, if any, video games that offer situations that are situationaly real world enough, situationally enough to count as image training. Most don't take you through enough bootcamp/weapons handling, strategy and tactics, etc, for the player before the player enters the game Most learn the game through trial and error, developing skills along the way that might be great for game play, but not real world. Being as students are primary self taught, they end up learning more about beating the game than beating real life opponents and pick up a considerable number of bad habits long the way that might not be detrimental to the player in the game, but could definitely be in real life.
If video games have no bearing on honing skills of all kinds, please explain the military's continued development of high end multi-million dollar simulators and unmanned drone technology?
Wii, Playstation, etc. games are just that, games. They offer an entertainment experience, not real world.
High end multi-million dollar simulators aren't games. Video games are not written with proper real world parameters, capabilities, etc. Proper firearm training simulators do try to offer real world parameters at least in some regards.
Simulators/video games can be used to generate automated instinctual behavior in a much more controlled and less costly environment. The real measure of benefits to be cleaned, is determined by the scope of the game/simulator itself and how "real" it can be made to be.
Just because something can be done with a product does not mean it is being done with a product. How many truly instructional games with proper real world parameters do you see being made today? I always like it that when my soldier suffers injuries, if not killed, he can actually recover to full strength and capabilities with a first aid kit, food, and water, all during the course of a fire fight.
But alone it does not substitute real shooting and does not build the physical skills and weapon handling skills to prevail in a military firefight.
Actually it does. It's just that you haven't been exposed to a simulator that replicates all of those things.
I have... and I can tell you they are AMAZING to the degree that they can realistically replicate nearly everything you would encounter in real life situations. Everything from weather, recoil, wind, weapon functionality, etc etc. You name it, they can simulate it on an indoor range with pneumatics, or live fire.
I have used the ones that simulate recoil, bullet drop, etc. The exact name is AGSHP, the German version of the EST 2000 used by the U.S. armed forces. I have also operated the controls to cause the malfunctions for the shooters. I had fiendish fun doing so.
Simulators can do a lot more than games, but still have considerable shortcomings. They can simulate just about any parameters you might encounter? No. The can simulate some parameters on a limited scale.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dgDVoNpH2o - I liked the belt change or malfunction clear here. He seems to be missing some real world steps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1-unzvARDE&feature=related
http://cubic.com/Solutions/Defense-...Training-Systems/System-Applications/EST-2000
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tgcAiHI42U&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEu3jx0AisU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uphnzEDGSo
Most of what the training drills on these simulators do is to train they soldiers about handling various types of scenarios from a shooter's perspective of a singular forward field of view with threats never coming from either side or from up much higher than a standing soldier. Soldiers are not running to the location even if the screeen shows a pedestrian change of location. Most of the simulations look like they are teaching the soldiers to engage the enemies primarly from locations without cover and students conduct their fights and never give a second thought to engage from cover. Heck, the students can even be too much on the move either and so most shoot the drills while remaining stationary.
Fight like you train? Then it looks like these soldiers are going to be engaging the moving around and cover-using opposition while they themselves remain upright out in the open and stationary and without bothering to scan the area, forward, sides, and back after they think the fight is over, but at least they will be acoomplished in doing so while enjoying the temperature controlled, dry, dust free, windless air.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJcfAbKqZ4I&feature=related