Army invades the mall with video game recruitment station

[Achilles]

Story

 

That's the latest come-on from the U.S. Army, which continues to refine its approach toward engaging teens and twentysomethings. Having seen amazing success with recruiting thanks to its America's Army home computer game, the military is now taking the pitch to the mall. Specifically, to the Franklin Mills shopping center in Philadelphia, where it has set up 60 gaming PCs, 19 Xbox 360s, plush couches, and "rock music" for potential recruits to enjoy.

 

There's even a real Humvee that players can shoot from installed as part of a 15-foot-high projected battle simulation and an Apache helicopter simulator that recruits can fly.

 

Not sure whether I want to take the "gee, remember when young people were lured into the military by the promise of an education? I wonder what it says about us that we're resorting to free video games?" tack or the "well, if we can't beat al-qaeda, we might as well adopt their recruiting tactics" route. Thoughts or suggestions?

[jrrtoken]

Old news; The military has been doing this for years, but this is just another trick up their sleeves.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas_army

[Achilles]

I knew about the games, but the article makes it sound as though the arcade in the mall thing is new.

[Web Rider]

Yes because teaching kids that there's always a reset button to life is a great way to make new soldiers.

[JediAthos]

I would think that it is up to parents to ensure their children know the difference between a game and reality.

 

I'm not saying I like what the Army is doing, but as was mentioned it really isn't a new tactic. The America's Army game has been around for a long time, and having been in the military myself I would recommend that anyone considering joining do their homework and make sure they understand what it's really about before they sign the paperwork.

 

I largely knew what I was getting into when I joined, and I hope that no one relies on a video game to show them what the Army is like.

[jawathehutt]

If anything, AA taught me that in basic training the drill instructor will glitch up forcing you to rejoin(reinstall) the military(game), then glitch up in a later point, eventually wasting a number of hours in your life and causing you to give up in frustration.

[Sabretooth]

Heh, if anything I can commend the Army for keeping up with the times and current crowd mentality. Video game simulations and guns are going to get you more recruits than a "promise of honour and valour" and all those "be a man" campaigns.

[Darth Avlectus]

I would think that it is up to parents to ensure their children know the difference between a game and reality.

And where VG's are the proxy for the parents who are largely unavailable or self absorbed? (for the record I agree, but I want to see your thoughts regarding the proxy factor if you don't mind)

 

I'm not saying I like what the Army is doing, but as was mentioned it really isn't a new tactic. The America's Army game has been around for a long time, and having been in the military myself I would recommend that anyone considering joining do their homework and make sure they understand what it's really about before they sign the paperwork.

 

I largely knew what I was getting into when I joined, and I hope that no one relies on a video game to show them what the Army is like.

Yeah, really. Well, I always had people like you around all telling me the same thing. So thank you for doing a service to the public or at least to young people trying to decide what to do with their lives.

 

Yeah, they tried flat out lying to me. Appealing to me on my technical talents to be a radio tech...then my neighbor who was a marine back in 'nam said, "the radio guy is who gets shot at first so you don't call for backup when in trouble" I thought it was a little odd, anyway, how a guy was being all coo with me, a guy who would ordinarily call me mountain trash.

 

Definitely do your homework and fully understand *before* signing anything.

 

I have a buddy in the army right now. He keeps getting roped in for another 2 years. He chose to be, of all things, a mortician. They screwed up paperwork and record the first time his term was ending. The second time the got him in a financial thing with fees he'd be paying for years. Morticians, no real danger, but due to being less expendable, usually end up having a good 10 years about.

 

Yeah the military's game just keeps evolving. Now it's going after youth in a trendy fashion. Nothing new, basically.

[JediAthos]

@GTA: as to the parents that really aren't parents...I don't know...maybe those are the kids who could benefit most from the positive things the military offers. (discipline, professional training etc...) I'm not trying to sound like a recruiter, but my time in the Navy helped me get the the job I have now and it was because I did have training, and I had discipline and a work ethic. I don't know what else to say to your scenario really, the children of those parents deserve better, but nobody is perfect I suppose. (For the record parents like that irritate the hell out of me.)

 

I think I can honestly say my recruiter never told me a bold faced lie. The only thing I didn't like that he did was try to get me put in the nuclear program (probably because he got a bonus if he did I'm sure) which I wanted no part of because I suck at math and science and that's basically all it was. I'm thankful I ended up in the non-nuclear Navy.

[DeadYorick]

Wow. It is amazing how things change so quickly. Lets hope other organizations don't try the same thing (specifically more dangerous ones like cults)

[True_Avery]

Well, you gotta make going off and dying for your country seem like a great idea now that the patriot well has gone dry. Less people seem to be signing up now that we have the 30,000 injured veterans, the lackluster injured vet care, and the multiple tours with mid-tour extension after extension.

 

I admire their balls.

 

I'll still never forgive the Army for coming to my High School multiple times during the height of the conflict and advertising the Army as a meal ticket and free college education, completely glazing over the fact that signing up now gets you a tour in the middle east. I understand why he sugar coated it with a cherry on top, but if there is anything I find more insulting... it is dishonesty. Not even lies. Just complete dishonesty towards everyone in the room.

 

The recruiters and the videos, pictures, power points they showed the multiple times they were there. The "If you sign up, you're a real American" and "Those that served are better than those pesky civilians" attitude that stagnated from them like a rotting corpse. The little change in tone whenever they spoke about those "civilians", like being one was like spitting on the flag.

 

Turned me off to the military entirely, and I come from a heavily military family. I can understand the need for recruits, and the opportunity the military gives...

 

But, I'll never forgive them for that stunt. This little bribing stunt isn't much better, but at least its in a public setting instead of a 9th to 12th grade computer class.

 

Plus, they wouldn't let me in even if I wanted in anyway.

 

And before someone points it out: yes, I do have an irrational dislike of the military.

[JediAthos]

I couldn't agree with you more about the veteran care. The VA is a mess, and I hope that Pres. Elect Obama will do something about it because the VA seems unwilling to change themselves but that is a different topic

 

To be honest Avery, I don't blame you based on your account of their recruiting tactics. Even having been in the military I don't approve of stuff like that. I think it's ridiculous, and to the best of my knowledge not all recruiters are like that. Now, on the other hand I didn't join in wartime either. I joined in '97 when, though they were having recruiting problems, there probably wasn't as much pressure on the recruiters as there is now.

 

It's a perfect example of why I would highly recommend that anyone considering joining talk to someone BESIDES the recruiter before they make their decision. I realize that not everyone has that luxury, but with the internet these days it's a more viable option. I certainly wouldn't have an issue telling my tales about my experience.

[Jae Onasi]

Well, if a civilian company was being this successful recruiting people via video games, we'd probably be admiring their creativity and out-of-the-box thinking. Regardless of how you feel about the military, the recruitment program itself is apparently quite successful.

 

In regards to the military--if it's not in writing, it never happened. Your recruiter may say a lot of things (they are not allowed to lie to recruit, but that doesn't mean things don't get shaded a certain way), but if what he/she says is not in your contract, don't sign it until they put it in the contract, or you're ok with the differences.

 

Yes, the education programs are also still in effect, and if you want to serve in the military and can't afford college, it can help you out quite a bit.

[Achilles]

Well, if a civilian company was being this successful recruiting people via video games, we'd probably be admiring their creativity and out-of-the-box thinking.

Recruiting them for what? Killing other people? No, I'm sure my criticisms would remain.

[Jae Onasi]

Recruiting them for what? Killing other people? No, I'm sure my criticisms would remain.

 

Police departments? SWAT teams? Like it or not, they do have to kill people sometimes in the course of their duties.

[Achilles]

Police departments? SWAT teams? Like it or not, they do have to kill people sometimes in the course of their duties.

Do the police/SWAT games emphasize/glorify killing? Then yeah, my criticism is the same.

 

"Join up and shoot ****, beeotch!"

 

To your earlier point, if business schools started releasing simulation games to encourage enrollment in management programs or if medical schools started making RPGs to help influence potential doctors, etc, that would be one thing and I would congratulate that kind of innovation. But that isn't what we're talking about here, is it?

[TKA-001]

I clicked on this thread expecting it to be some wacky story about the US Army literally invading a mall for some reason.

[Jae Onasi]

Do the police/SWAT games emphasize/glorify killing?

I hope not, but I've not played any police/SWAT games so I'm not qualified to answer that. The closest I've come is playing the CSI games.

 

"Join up and shoot ****, beeotch!"

 

To your earlier point, if business schools started releasing simulation games to encourage enrollment in management programs or if medical schools started making RPGs to help influence potential doctors, etc, that would be one thing and I would congratulate that kind of innovation. But that isn't what we're talking about here, is it?

Your OP only asks for very broad, non-specific 'thoughts' on this and did not ask if it was appropriate for the military to do this. All I was saying was that the program is apparently effective from a recruitment standpoint and the opinion that we'd admire it if it were in any industry except the military. I never made commentary on whether it's right for the military to do this. If they are evaluating their target audience to determine the most effective marketing strategies and then utilizing that information for recruitment and it's successful, that technique is no different than any other company evaluating their target customers and devising a marketing strategy to best reach them.

 

If the military is intentionally deceiving people with this recruiting tactic, then I have serious problems with that, and I'm not too excited about glorifying extreme violence anyway (whether or not it's for military recruitment). The flip side of that is if someone plays the game and decides that killing pixels is distasteful, they've learned something important about their desire to enlist.

 

Business simulation games? I think a game called "Read reams of profit statements and go to endless meetings to discuss prevention of EEOC suits!!!!" would probably drive people away.

[Achilles]

I clicked on this thread expecting it to be some wacky story about the US Army literally invading a mall for some reason.

 

Your OP only asks for very broad, non-specific 'thoughts' on this and did not ask if it was appropriate for the military to do this.

Actually, I was asking which of those two responses should be the one I should adopt.

 

All I was saying was that the program is apparently effective from a recruitment standpoint and the opinion that we'd admire it if it were in any industry except the military.

And in my opinion not everyone would share that admiration.

 

I never made commentary on whether it's right for the military to do this. If they are evaluating their target audience to determine the most effective marketing strategies and then utilizing that information for recruitment and it's successful, that technique is no different than any other company evaluating their target customers and devising a marketing strategy to best reach them.

Joe Camel.

 

If the military is intentionally deceiving people with this recruiting tactic, then I have serious problems with that, and I'm not too excited about glorifying extreme violence anyway (whether or not it's for military recruitment).

I guess that depends on whether or not we consider glorifying violence for young people as being intentionally deceptive.

 

Business simulation games? I think a game called "Read reams of profit statements and go to endless meetings to discuss prevention of EEOC suits!!!!" would probably drive people away.

Yes, if we let people who grossly oversimplified business program games which fit those erroneous stereotypes, then I don't imagine very many people would be interested in playing.

[Jae Onasi]

Actually, I was asking which of those two responses should be the one I should adopt.

Why would I ever tell you what response you should adopt?

And in my opinion not everyone would share that admiration.

And I said 'if it were any other industry'.

Joe Camel.

Obviously I also should have added "any other industry except the tobacco industry".... And any other industry that contributes to health-destructive behavior like smoking, just to cover any future things you might bring up. Joe Camel was a very effective marketing tool as well, though I don't like what they were marketing. I wouldn't have been surprised to see a Joe Camel game if the tobacco industry were allowed to do it. I think we can agree that using a very effective advertising scheme to sell something that contributes to an average earlier morbidity and mortality is not in a consumer's best interest.

I guess that depends on whether or not we consider glorifying violence for young people as being intentionally deceptive.

Nope, they aren't really connected, I probably should have added a paragraph break there for clarification of the separation. I just noted I'm not fond of overly violent games in general, whether it's the Army or a game producer.

 

Yes, if we let people who grossly oversimplified business program games which fit those erroneous stereotypes, then I don't imagine very many people would be interested in playing.

I've had to testify at an EEOC suit and might end up getting called into another if it ever goes to court, even though I'm not directly involved in either case. There's no way to make HR problems 'fun', though if anyone could, you'd probably be the one who could figure it out.

[Achilles]

And I said 'if it were any other industry'.

Yeah, I heard you the first time. I believe I responded that your assertion wasn't true on the basis that I would feel the same way about any industry for which shooting/killing people would be an occupational hazard.

 

Obviously I also should have added "any other industry except the tobacco industry"....

And police/SWAT? Glad to see that you've decided generalizing was a bad idea.

 

Nope, they aren't really connected, I probably should have added a paragraph break there for clarification of the separation.

Maniputlative then? You don't see anything wrong at all with something that helps to ease the transition from shooting pixel on a screen to shoot people in a battlefield?

 

I've had to testify at an EEOC suit and might end up getting called into another if it ever goes to court, even though I'm not directly involved in either case. There's no way to make HR problems 'fun', though if anyone could, you'd probably be the one who could figure it out.

Yeah, I guess some people see the "problem solving" aspect in things and find it challenging and/or rewarding regardless of whether it's boring old "working with people" or not.

 

Of course I think people used to find the law pretty dry as well, yet I'm pretty sure there's some flavor of Law & Order on every moment of every day.

[Darth Avlectus]

Don't get me wrong, I am proud of the military. It's just that I don't see that dragging things out is in the best interests of their troops or their people. While I appreciate our military, our specific topic here is, however, about recruitment and recruitment tactics (unless I'm mistaken). Since I have a sour outlook on this, I will sound unappreciative of our military. That's not true. I support the troops.

 

The military, you have to admire their candor and their wit. They have some pretty innovative ways of recruitment. They evolve over time. Very effective. Now branching out to video games. I didn't join because I didn't believe they had my best interests at heart, since in their eyes I held little potential anyway.

@GTA: as to the parents that really aren't parents...I don't know...maybe those are the kids who could benefit most from the positive things the military offers. (discipline, professional training etc...) I'm not trying to sound like a recruiter, but my time in the Navy helped me get the the job I have now and it was because I did have training, and I had discipline and a work ethic. I don't know what else to say to your scenario really, the children of those parents deserve better, but nobody is perfect I suppose. (For the record parents like that irritate the hell out of me.)

Well, you raise a good point which was sort of on my mind. I've known of people who actually say that for all its agony, the military was an improvement over their young lives. Furthermore, yeah it can help find some line of work, etc., I was speaking more on the parents who just can't or don't/won't make time in general. PM me, we should chat on this. If you'd like.

I think I can honestly say my recruiter never told me a bold faced lie. The only thing I didn't like that he did was try to get me put in the nuclear program (probably because he got a bonus if he did I'm sure) which I wanted no part of because I suck at math and science and that's basically all it was. I'm thankful I ended up in the non-nuclear Navy.

Vets I know were told "shaded truths" mixed in with some outright lies as details (from an intentionally uninformed position so you cannot accuse them of *knowingly* lying--effective policy, too). The marine vets I know have all said that they lure you in, telling you something to the effect of "no matter what they'll make sure you can do what you want to do for a career." They didn't say, however:

1) the initial period you'd first do what *they* wanted you to do and wait hand and foot on them (While I don't like that deception, personally, I still see how it is an effective policy for filling quota and in general). Even so it is their decision at their whim. While I don't know anybody whose been completely denied, it gets dragged out more and more depending on what it is you want.

2) You have to qualify on 'their' tests--everyone gets the same tests. The 'consideration' to different learning styles is bull. They have multiple all encompassing tests in different areas. Shading the truth.

3) The guy chatting you up knows a lot in general and can contact "satisfied customers". In reality these people are uninformed as to the specifics. (again, intentionally uninformed, of course)

4) They can override your decisions to suit their needs...You want to be a Laser Engineer? Oh, but your broadcast experience could serve us nicely. (Never mind that half that time was done grudgingly because I'm are one for finishing my commitments and found halfway through I didn't want to do that. Or that it's dishonesty and utter BS and I wished to wash my hands from it.)

<snip>The recruiters and the videos, pictures, power points they showed the multiple times they were there. The "If you sign up, you're a real American" and "Those that served are better than those pesky civilians" attitude that stagnated

You mean emanated, or perhaps wreaking?

from them like a rotting corpse. The little change in tone whenever they spoke about those "civilians", like being one was like spitting on the flag.

Ah. How patronizing-not the best tactic or mentality for recruiting the masses. Can't hide their contempt. Biting the hands of outside civilians who support them. Still, I contribute for the troops because that's who I care for--not the approval of their superiors.

Plus, they wouldn't let me in even if I wanted in anyway. And before someone points it out: yes, I do have an irrational dislike of the military.

Not completely irrational--you found them insulting. However, what makes you think that they don't have some kind of 'need' or 'use' for anybody and everybody they can get?

 

I'll never forget how they initially tried me. Dude waiting in the career corner of my HS library. Takes me in the back room. Though it was a friendly interview with all sorts of materials and no homework done on my past...it felt more like some guilt-tripping interrogation at a police station. Ensuing interviews later on, their intents for me became clearer.

 

I couldn't agree with you more about the veteran care. The VA is a mess, and I hope that Pres. Elect Obama will do something about it because the VA seems unwilling to change themselves but that is a different topic

Start a thread on it. I won't hold my breath on it- but I'd like to see our vets better taken care of.

<snip> It's a perfect example of why I would highly recommend that anyone considering joining talk to someone BESIDES the recruiter before they make their decision. I realize that not everyone has that luxury, but with the internet these days it's a more viable option. I certainly wouldn't have an issue telling my tales about my experience.

I'm glad people like you are around for other people. An honest individual with experience is a valuable asset for decision making.

---

@Jae: Unless you are cynical and view that everything is done because somebody wants something in returned--doesn't matter then 'who' does 'what tactics'. It has been said that the most effective types in the world are also strongly disliked and seen as most distasteful. I agree with you, the tactics make them quite effectively successful, all else aside.

In regards to the military--if it's not in writing, it never happened. Your recruiter may say a lot of things (they are not allowed to lie to recruit, but that doesn't mean things don't get shaded a certain way), but if what he/she says is not in your contract, don't sign it until they put it in the contract, or you're ok with the differences.

***Exactly.***

---

@thread: I would say that anyone considering joining, do your homework on it first from all sorts of people of all backgrounds. You can be sure the military will do their homework on you, the more time that passes and the less successful they have been at recruiting you. You think your record as a minor goes away from everybody's eyes? Maybe to the general population. THEY (military/gov't.) knows *everything* that has ever been reported on you. If you find that it will not do you any good to enlist, I'd suggest staying away; If you find it holds a good future for you after all that research and consideration, then go ahead--just hope you know what you're getting into.

[Jae Onasi]

Yeah, I heard you the first time. I believe I responded that your assertion wasn't true on the basis that I would feel the same way about any industry for which shooting/killing people would be an occupational hazard.

Just making sure you understood my point, because it sounded at first like we weren't connecting on that bit.

Maniputlative then? You don't see anything wrong at all with something that helps to ease the transition from shooting pixel on a screen to shoot people in a battlefield?

As far as extreme violence on video games goes, I'm not thrilled with any of those types of games, and in that respect the military wargames are no better than Rainbow Six, Crysis, or GTA. If you feel all military service is A Bad Thing, then you're going to view this recruiting campaign as manipulative at best and dishonest in general. If you're asking me if this disturbs me, in some ways it does--many high school kids are just not experienced enough in life to recognize when someone's blowing sunshine up their butts, and this takes advantage of that. One can nonetheless grudgingly admire the creative approach without necessarily agreeing with the results. In fact, there might be techniques there that other businesses could learn from, just as businesses can learn from the Joe Camel campaign to market their (hopefully) legitimate products.

 

I'd love to live in a world where we never needed a military at all and would never go to war. I highly doubt I'll ever see that kind of world, unfortunately. We still need people on border patrol, we need people in the Coast Guard to do things like rescue people out of planes that crash-land in the Hudson river, and sometimes we need people to go to war to deal with people like Hitler. There are people who want to do that job and would be good at it, and the military wants to find those folks.

 

Yeah, I guess some people see the "problem solving" aspect in things and find it challenging and/or rewarding regardless of whether it's boring old "working with people" or not.

I love working with people. There are very few patients I just plain don't enjoy because they're complete a-holes to the entire world, like the guy who threatened to beat up his girlfriend in my office because she hadn't sought permission from him to get her eyes dilated--had to call the cops on that one. For every miserable jerk I see, though, there are lots of patients who are just terrific. It's rewarding to find a way to connect with each patient in a way that works best for them so that they understand their eye health and treatment plans better. However, I can honestly say EEOC suits royally suck for everyone involved. Some HR problems are never going to be rewarding--they're going to be situations where the best you can do is minimize damage. Now, if you make a Wall Street (the movie) type game, where you have to use business skills to figure out who's the corrupt company officer, I might go for that.

[Darth Avlectus]

I hope not, but I've not played any police/SWAT games so I'm not qualified to answer that. The closest I've come is playing the CSI games.

Then you should try out TRUE CRIME: STREETS OF LA--a game that is GTA esque, but now is on the side of law enforcement as a rehab'd guy recruited to being a cop.

 

All I was saying was that the program is apparently effective from a recruitment standpoint and the opinion that we'd admire it if it were in any industry except the military. (except tobacco which you clarified later)

I concur. Very effective regardless of taste or anybody's opinion. Thank you for articulation on that point. I'm not sure, though, if there is any effective way to do it without crossing over into being distasteful, dishonest or just flat unethical--be it intentional or not. If there is an altogether 'ethical' way to implement tactics that would also be 'effective', I'm sure we'd all like to know about it. Unfortunately, well...

 

Maniputlative then? You don't see anything wrong at all with something that helps to ease the transition from shooting pixel on a screen to shoot people in a battlefield?

I believe I'm seeing your implicit position on this. I'm just curious if you'd care to clarify this, if you would indulge me so.

 

<snip>

If you feel all military service is A Bad Thing, then you're going to view this recruiting campaign as manipulative at best and dishonest in general. If you're asking me if this disturbs me, in some ways it does--many high school kids are just not experienced enough in life to recognize when someone's blowing sunshine up their butts, and this takes advantage of that. One can nonetheless grudgingly admire the creative approach without necessarily agreeing with the results. In fact, there might be techniques there that other businesses could learn from, just as businesses can learn from the Joe Camel campaign to market their (hopefully) legitimate products.

Well said.

 

I'd love to live in a world where we never needed a military at all and would never go to war. I highly doubt I'll ever see that kind of world, unfortunately.

Not in the rosy picture it is idealized in, anyway.

We still need people on border patrol, we need people in the Coast Guard to do things like rescue people out of planes that crash-land in the Hudson river, and sometimes we need people to go to war to deal with people like Hitler. There are people who want to do that job and would be good at it, and the military wants to find those folks.

Yes indeed. Keeping that in mind, however, the military is now not just government run, but an industry as well. It has its wants and needs. Doesn't mean we necessarily agree with them, though.

[Achilles]

I believe I'm seeing your implicit position on this. I'm just curious if you'd care to clarify this, if you would indulge me so.

I believe that we are largely products of our environment. If young people are enculturated into a society that tolerates a great deal of violence, if that violence is masculinized, and then the government takes advantage of these conditions to recruit young men into military service, then we have a very big, clearly systemic social problem. The sad part is that because we grow up seeing these messages all around us, we're mostly blind to them. Once you learn to see them, you can't help but notice them.

 

Our culture glorifies violence and it really seems to me that the military greases the wheels at every opportunity to take advantage of this.