| theprof00 said: The national endowment for the arts doesn't fund ping-pong players because the ping pong players that deserve recognition get recognition and funding from corporations. The grants are for making educational games. And yet they pick an example like CoD from which to frame the argument. Fox is just spin, baby, spin. Kids love video games. Sorry, bald man. Video games that can teach is a good idea. I learned tons of historical leaders names, landmarks, places, vocabulary and grammar from Civilization II, as well as planning, and other important skills. |
The U.S Army CONTRACTED ATARI to convert Battlezone over to be a simulator of one of their vehicles, to train soldiers. The US Army built America's Army, and another program, to interested Teens in a life in the military. I also believe I saw a promo, where the U.S military was giving away commercial videogames, FPS and RTS titles, to interested teens in them I believe.
So, should there be a ban on the military doing this? Does anyone think ANY videogame companies, out of the goodness of their heart, are doing anything free for the department of defense? I want to hear those who are against videogame projects funded by the government, for educational purposes in schools, explain why what the U.S military did was ok. I keep hearing how we need to change the way education works, and get it up to date. Exactly HOW is not using the medium of computer software, going to help here?
