The truth behind FPS- Are they really military trainers?

[Tonimata]

It is a question that's been niggling my mind for a while (specially every time I get a succesful kill in an FPS), and since me being the kind of person that takes something positive out of most experiences in life, specially videogaming, I came to the realisation that there is not much positive you can draw out of a game where you fight and kill other people. I mean, imagine you did exactly the same thing you do in FPS, and for the same reason (to have some fun(or to get to the last level of multiplayer ranking if you're extremely determined)) but in real life. You'd go around the street, shooting people who look funny at you, and you'd do it for fun! And you might even be good at it too! I think this is mainly what FPS is derivating into: basic notions military training for the young ages. What are your ideas?

 

[KSarty]

NO!! Being good at an fps does not grant you any skill or even basic knowledge of a real firearm, nor does it teach any real world combat tactics.

 

[Axolotl]

I don't remember when circle-strafing, shotty-sniper, rocket jumping and T-baging became battlefield tactics.

Whilst some games (ArmA) your argument, holds some weight most FPS's merely train you to know what to expect from a Hollywood action film.

 

[nova18]

Sir No Sir!

NO!! Being good at an fps does not grant you any skill or even basic knowledge of a real firearm, nor does it teach any real world combat tactics.

Agreed.
Although I learned combat tactics to apply in clan matches, the game gives you no real knowledge that can make you into a killer. Maybe learning weapon names and how they perform would make you a better soldier, but you could learn that from the net.

 

[Max Lazer]

Always keep in mind that most modern shooters are being made to make pathetic losers who cannot aim straight or understand basic tactics happy. Why do you think Call of Duty hypocritically touts its realistic graphics while s#%!ing on the laws of physics and human anatomy?

 

[Spleeni]

Depends, if you're playing America's Army, then hell yes.

Really anything else, hell no.

 

[Tonimata]

Thank God, I thought for a moment we were all victim of some American plot to transform us all into mini soldiers!

 

[Skalman]

I have a feeling this is a "do-games-turn-kids-into-killers?" -thread in disguise...

Also you won't learn anything about the military and war, although maybe you could develop some basic of basic understanding of tactics.
But you'd probably learn more from a few paintball matches or reading on wikipedia.

So no, I don't think so.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Are you kidding? Your comparison for multiplayer would be nothing like walking around shooting people. How naive are you? If it was supposed to be multiplayer it would be in an arena with lots of people shooting eachother, everyone would accept the risks and understand what would happen. And you aren't going to learn anything militaristic from an FPS apart maybe from reloading the gun. Do you know anything about gaming at all?

 

[slackbheep]

You're getting about the same level of training out of watching S.W.A.T with Samuel L. Jackson.

 

[RedDiablo]

No. I'm pretty sure you can't regenerate your health after getting shot by a RPG-7. You're better off just going to the Range to know about real guns or just research them.

 

[Tonimata]

Are you kidding? Your comparison for multiplayer would be nothing like walking around shooting people. How naive are you? If it was supposed to be multiplayer it would be in an arena with lots of people shooting eachother, everyone would accept the risks and understand what would happen. And you aren't going to learn anything militaristic from an FPS apart maybe from reloading the gun. Do you know anything about gaming at all?

Obviously not as much as you :

 

[LornMind]

I adore FPS's and while the notion of a good airsoft fight is appealing, an actual firefight is not. A game that has you use a gun and aim down it sights using a controller is entirely different than actually using the gun.

Additionally, I've been called by the military several times over the past few weeks. I've always declined. Yeah, you get a gun. But yeah, you can get killed to if you're shipped off.

Training simulation? Not unless it says it on the box. And comes with a gun.

And is done in real life.

With blanks. Or bullets.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Pointing and firing a gun is a very different from swishing your mouse around and left clicking. Actual recoil control, aiming, pulling a real trigger, dealing with the noise...

 

[Hawgh]

I have learned the coveted ability of pointing the shooty end of the gun at stuff that moves.

This has caused the local barracks to hire me for some seminars, it can sometimes take soldiers several years to obtain my level of specialist skills. I could not have done this without a few rounds of rousing FPS play.

 

[olicon]

I have done plenty of FPS-ing, and a bit of paintball (which even then isn't nearly as serious as real world military condition), and I can tell you that only a little bit of the skill in pc games can cross over to the real world. They are VERY important ones though.

Truth is you won't be better at aiming, you won't be better or more efficient at killing just by playing games. What it helps with is that the games put yourself in the situation for you to rehearse in. See a grenade bouncing in real life would be like a poor dear starring at the headlight of an 18-wheeler. You just don't know what to do! But if you have played lots of games before, you have been through the situation and knows there are 3 things you can do: jump away, throw it back, or jump on top of it in a glorious death in hope of protecting your friends.
And one might not think it is important, but gamers might pick up a habit of looking around more than other people, since it is a common strategy in games. That might save your life, since you see more of the surroundings.
Not that these things aren't taught to soldiers already anyway--you just have prior exposure to it. And besides, it's a hell of a lot easier to "simulate" the experience in computers than sending you out with 200 other people to train, and not to mention a ton cheaper too.

 

[Benj17]

It'd be funny to see someone go into a battlefield enviroment get shot and start looking for a medic button

the notion "What?! I has no respawn Point" comes to mind

but to be fair i see where your coming from, especially when games are trying to add realism, but i would never really call "Call of Duty" a battlefield simulation training, tis just a bit of fun

 

[wowcrendor]

Depends, if you're playing America's Army, then hell yes.

Really anything else, hell no.

True. America's Army is still just a recruiting device though.

 

[Gamer137]

I play plenty of shooters, but I doubt I even have the strength to even hold an assault rifle for very long, or even reload, properly aim, perform maintanince, etc. Games don't actually teach you these things or build up your body to do them. Games are not any kind of military training, or shooting simulaters for school shootings and such.

The only thing they can possibly due is serve as some kind of lying drug, meaning you addict some VERY mentaly disables people to the idea that if they die, they will respawn or get healed, and will survive combat. It can only serve to make soldiers less scared, but that is still stretching the concept beyond critical max.