Developers owe real soldiers for these war games.

Some of these games like call of duty series, BF series, etc. should at least offer a discount for soldiers, since it's technically a game based on what they do. Or offer free games to soldiers overseas fighting.

Or are they benefiting the military by creating young pseudo soldiers that might actually enlist / be commissioned. That's a crazy thought. How many macho gamers actually enlist to do the real thing after playing the game. I hope they realize that there is no re-spawning in Afghanistan.

Just seems like with any other professional organization, you have to pay royalties to use their name, symbols, etc. Why not the same concept with war games. For instance, if you use the 82nd Airborne in your game, you should donate a free game to each soldier in the 82nd.

 

Because it is a government entity -- public domain.

BTW it is a video game. Not real life.

 

Well, America's Army is government funded and somewhat used as a recruiting tool. Better than a free game, donate a portion of the profits.

 

When companies create DRM that won't even allow soldiers to play games they've bought and paid for, I see little hope of them ever getting anything for free, despite the service they do for our country.

 

I believe that Electronic Arts paid a 'licensing' fee to Jane's Information Group so they could place the Jane's name on several flight/combat simulators produced in the 90's. There are other combat-based games/sims that paid companies/individuals for the use of their logo and/or expertise (Ace Combat series pays licensing fees to the manufacturer of the aircraft used in the games, and Silent Hunter 2 paid a German U-Boat captain for technical consultation, and Larry Bond was paid for the Harpoon series of computer games).

And while I agree that CoD, BF, etc are based on the soldiers' profession, I would add that they are very, very, very loosely based on the soldiers' profession. I was Navy so I have little knowledge of actual ground-based warfare, but from discussions with friends in the Marines and several WW2/Korean/Vietnam vets, I don't think actual combat resembles the games very much. I could be wrong.

And for those of us in the U.S., may the upcoming Memorial Day provide all of us time to reflect on the service and sacrifice of millions of men and women who have worn the uniform. I guess free software would be nice, but, in the end, it seems paltry...sincere appreciation and respect would probably mean a lot more.

 

While I sincerely believe that the actual soldiers deserve respect and appreciation for what they do (not even going into the political driving forces behind them that I may or may not even agree with), game companies having to give free games to soldiers is like every archaeologist getting a free DVD of Indiana Jones, or doctors getting free copies of medical tv shows. I mean, where does it end?

 

History is public domain, like someone previously said. Most games are not based on actual events, they are just scenarios created for entertainment. Also, thanks to free speech (at least in the US) the developers can deviate as much as they want from actual events and even offend people.

I will say that it's nice for companies to create donations like to the Medal of Honor foundation and Activision with it's little thing for disabled veterans. Problem is they love to talk about what they do, but it never turns out to be much in terms of what they could be donating. If I felt any genuine honesty from them, they wouldn't be announcing it via press releases and if they were, these companies would be encouraging gamers and common people to donate/volunteer too, and not just by purchasing their products. It amazes me how willingly board members lay off people in order to save their precious salaries when the company they run isn't doing so hot, yet still make millions a year, and probably acquire the donation money from resources outside their own pockets. To me it's the right thing for the wrong reason. I find it dishonest.

 

They don't owe anyone, even if there's no real soldiers or real wars, fictional war/soldiers could always be created.

 

In my country, I thought soldiers were supposed to fight for freedom...

 

I don't think game developers owe soldiers anything. It doesn't even seem possible to compensate them in some cases. Take for instance a game about Napoleon or a general from ancient Greece. To whom would the game developer offer a discount to? People who have been dead for a long time? To the people living in modern day France or Greece?

kingtz put it nicely I think.

 

I have a hard time believing, if these war games were really based on actual combat that people would want to play them. There is a reason why soldiers suffer from so much mental anguish that haunt them for the rest of their lives. I'm sure I am not alone on these forums who know soldiers who have committed suicide as they could no longer cope. And I'm sure most you know US government isn't even doing a fraction of what we should be to help them to recover, and lead happy healthy lives after their service.

So while I think we should honor soldiers, I think it's pretty naive to believe these games are based on real combat. They are entertaining; not traumatic.

Even the guns in games like BC2 are not based on reality.

What do you think happens when you get shot by a M95? This is rifle uses .50 cal armor piercing rounds. Yet in the game you need multiple shots to kill someone often.

So for me games like BC2 are pure entertainment. No different than me using an M14 or modified AK-47, Scar in Killing Floor to kill science gone wrong creatures.

 

Game developers owe nothing to these soldiers at all.

 

Only if I get to play HalfLife and BioShock for free because I'm a scientist and I work with plasmids.

 

unless u got sniper headshot skillz

 

I bet your plasmids don't discharge electricity.

 

No, but my crowbar can bust open crates

 

Hey, I am with you in this request!!

 

Hear, hear! Free games should be a mandatory perk to offset the pains of cloning.

 

Maybe they should make FPS games more realistic so that they don't glorify war. For example, if you get shot and die, that's it. Game over. Your money down the drain and the files corrupt them selves and never re-install properly again.

Did the Army use video games as a recruiting tool? America's Army? They caught a lot of flak for it too, rightly so.

 

And it ended up being incredibly successful in terms of players. For actual recruitment, I imagine not as much as the Army would hope.

 

I don't know about that. These companies don't give back.... BC2 for example...the ranking system, uniform, and some of the weapons are army based. And let's face it, without some realism in these games, they wouldn't sell. I would like to see these companies giving considerable donations to soldiers overseas. Remember when some battalions couldn't afford flak vests / armored vests. Imagine if one of these companies took initiative and made some kind of donation. Seems to me that you only invite bad company if you can't go beyond the call of duty and donate...especially if your whole game franchise is based on what soldiers do...IMO *points finger at Activision and EA*

 

And I think that gaming companies should give back to the science community. HalfLife 2 for example - the physics engine, the characters, the labcoats, and the HEV suit are science based. And let's face it, without some realistic physics in these games, they wouldn't sell. I would like to see these companies giving considerable donations to academic labs and grad student fellowships. Remember, some labs can't afford sterile pipet tips, and some grad students can't afford good beer. Imagine if one of these companies took the initiative and issued some kind of grant. If your whole game franchise capitalizes on the results of the hard work of the many men and women dedicating their lives to research that will improve the human condition, it's the least you can do to support them.

(Not meant to be mean, please don't be mad at me for this post!)

 

Plumbers, pizza-men, doctors, tennis players, racecar drivers, astronauts, and golfers all should get compensation because of the numerous Mario games featuring their occupations.

 

... There was a pizza-based Mario game?

Or was it pizza-man-based?

 

so scuba divers should get discounts for Bioshock and Physics PhD's get discounts for Half-Life....

 

And those who like to play God in real life should get a discount for Sims.

 

Scientists are not putting their life on the line on a daily basis...neither tennis players, scuba divers, or grad students...etc.

 

Though, you're ascribing an arbitrary nobility to soldiers based on patriotic considerations. The "enemy" soldiers featured in these games as a veiled or actual representation of soldiers of other nationalities are no less deserving of compensation.

Neither does drawing the arbitrary distinction of being in harm's way make someone more deserving.

Developers only owe those who had an actual contribution in the production of the product. Sometimes they consult with military personnel for their expertise. Sometimes they consult intelligence gathering entities for specifications. Sometimes they consult armament manufacturers for authenticity's sake. These are the individuals or entities that are deserving of compensation as their contributions serve to enhance the game.

Real life soldiers haven't contributed anything towards the game in a real sense. Only in a philosophical sense. For without their sacrifice we likely wouldn't be able to enjoy playing the games we do or even have the freedom to have a conversation such as this.