...And a child will lead them.
Wargames is a classic despite some truly cringe worthy film making and acting ham but still we fondly return to the film. There is something resonant about the film something that sticks with people who (especially gamers) see this soft sci-fi version of Enders Game and that's because we have been living in Wargames for decades now.
Technology is the backbone of warfare, World War 2 mechanized war and advanced the art of killing with mobile infantry, tanks and atomic weaponry. Twentieth century warfare was all about engaging your enemy in rural and urban environments and engaging in close quarters combat. Warfare since it's inception has been a physical affair but with the advent of computers and their radical evolution in the twenty first century is changing the face of warfare and thusly a new breed of soldier and commander is arising.
Video games especially real time strategy games have made entire generations of children into fledgling military commanders. First person shooters especially ones with co-operative play and headset communication can teach basic unit tactics like door breaching and infiltration. Hypothetically if a young adult or child who often plays real time strategy games logs into their favorite game and plays it believing it is just a game but thousands of miles away that child is actually commanding forces in decisive combat situations but without the pressure of life or death, that player depending on skill level could perhaps develop new asymmetric warfare tactics not rooted in centuries of warfare training because they are simply having fun. Mind you video game technology is not yet that advanced but things like remote drones armed with hellfire missiles do strike at targets half a world away while being piloted from safely inside U.S. borders, operators watch from a camera mounted in the drone assess their targets and strike much in the fashion one would play any jet fighting video game.
This distancing of the soldier from the act of killing makes the soldier calm, rational and most importantly not dead. A drone operator flies a sortie in the afternoon, pops off for lunch then flies another strike mission over Pakistan or surveillance over the U.S ( yes drones are legal in American airspace, yes it`s creepy). Wargames illustrates the gameification of warfare, W.O.P.R runs millions of simulations before realizing that nuclear war is a zero sum game, but imagine if W.O.P.R ran a ground invasion with each unit and soldier able to receive and transmit data back to the machine so it could calculate the most optimal solutions for victory. W.O.P.R would be much like the video game player, objective, focused and removed from problematic moral issues like acceptable losses.
Despite being a brutally efficient system the child general or the digital general both lack ethics. Situations arise in war that carry great ethical weight and a system removed from consequence would not blink in the face of nerve gassing children or slaughtering civilians. War is tricky, nuclear war doubly so.
But I think I would make a pretty good fighter pilot, hook me up to W.O.P.R with a PlayStation controller boot up an A-10 Thunderbolt close air support fighter and let me at it.
I've watched my friends play video games countless times - I am not a player myself but watching the games in action can be just as entertaining. Watching them play first person shooters, such as the one that you discuss, I have often wondered how realistic it truly is. And even sometimes, if they were to be put in a real life situation such as the one played out in the video game, how would they truly handle the situation? Taking away the comfort of the couch, your pals, snack food and a couple of drinks, would the player be just as capable? I often answer myself with of course not. But, you have brought up another concept. The idea that the player could control a real life situation without the fear of death could be quite effective and at the same time terrifying. This is something that Wargames does address. The opening scene shows what a computer can not do, something that you also address, experience moral conflict. The W.O.P.R, while a brilliant machine was not able to fully comprehend the damage. It simply listed the deaths as a number, not the damage that it would truly have. For this reason I wonder, would a video game controlled war, even though it is controlled by a human, have the same issues? If you put a player in a real life situation without fear, the idea of consequences I am afraid that they may experience some lack of morality just as a computer would.
ReplyDeleteInteresting points you have made here. Hypothetically it makes perfect sense but the more I think about it the more problems arise. The main point I see you are making is the detachment argument that if not knowing they are controlling actual actions then higher strategic actions would come out. But I disagree, I think the detachment not only hinders the pressure of the performance, it also takes away the finality of failure. In war, failing means death, in a game there only is a short respawn time penalty. A mistake is just points off, where a mistake with an actual drone could cause civilian lives. I think that the pressure needs to be there in highly tactical situations to force the operator not to make highly dangerous moves. Maybe thats what you want though, risk takers with no remorse. Anyways, kids will grow up to be better fighters because of video games, it is inevitable.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting concept, that video games are helping children to be better fighters in war. I agree with the points that Rob made. When someone plays a video game, there is a sense of detachment, you may be virtually killing someone and virtually being hurt, but you're not physically experiencing any of it. I also agree that it takes away any type of consequence. In the opening of the film, the older man is not able to turn his key from just a command, he tries to call someone to have some person to person contact because he wants to be reassured that he is doing the right thing. Replacing him with a computer takes that away. But is that a good thing? If video games cause you to be more desensitized and you don't feel the consequences of your actions, that does make someone a better fighter. I think that's a concept that's alarming, being a better fighter is someone that has less "human" qualities.
ReplyDeleteI found it really interesting what you said about video games basically training children to be soldiers. Kids can learn the lingo and certain skills from war-type video games. Games are no longer just for fun anymore. They can teach players valuable skills, even if it’s just hand/eye coordination for the clumsy uncoordinated people. For those more advanced who already have that skill down pat, kids can learn some of the other things you mentioned like basic unit tactics. However, what’s really interesting is that most people learn these things without actually knowing it. They think they are just playing a game and the next thing they know they have the basic knowledge that could turn them into soldiers. In addition, with technology becoming more and more advanced it has the potential to make soldiers more effective. All of this can start with a child wanting the latest video game; it’s fascinating. Technology and video games have come a long way over the years and I can’t even imagine what it’s going to turn into in the next few years.
ReplyDeleteReally, really strong original analysis here. I love the comparison to Enders Game--there's a real resonance there I hadn't thought of. Though arguably David's character, a bored and spoiled high school hacker, isn't at all in the same situation as the highly-trained and deliberately militarized Ender. The situation of technological distancing is much the same though. What's missing in this, sadly, is any reference to the reading. You could have used it to explicitly make the connection currently lacking in your argument, between video games, the shift that began in the 80s when the Internet ceased to be an almost purely military and research space to a recreational frontier. There's a lot to say about that, and you're uniquely positioned to say it. Also, great discussion everybody.
ReplyDelete