He got a commitment from our employer to pay his undergrad tuition. But he disappeared one day, probably went home to fight and die. I search for him every now and then but I think he's gone.
I think his naïveté is equal to this policy.
America's Army was actually a pretty respectable FPS at the time and had it's own niche in the gaming community. There was a huge hole in the market in the early 2000s for anything realistic modern warfare related; CounterStrike was pretty much it. Everything else was stuck in the WW2 fad (CoD 1/2, MoH, Red Orchestra, BF1942) or pure fantasy (Doom/Quake/Tribes/Halo etc.)
I miss Tribes
Americas Army was the most intuitive game I ever played.
Sorry to break it for you, but irl you will likely spend a long time in prison first.
https://old.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/1gcp7mt...
The idea of games/communities like MFS and VATSIM providing some sense of real ATC is much less absurd.
It wasn't long back before they fired a bunch of ATC staff and in the very same week saw multiple fatal aircraft crashes.
Forgive me for thinking this administration are only capable of making absurd decisions, particularly in a story like this.
FPS games do teach some skills, how relevant they are for real combat is hard to say, but there is definitely some overlap when it comes to decision making. Just like in real combat, you must be decisive and proactive to win.
On a more practical level, the ideas of cover, sight lines and using corners to your advantage in CQB are all the same.
You know, the former involves physical steering wheels, shifters, pedals, realistic vehicle models, etc.
Meanwhile the latter involves pressing a single button to reload a fire arm and clicking a mouse button to fire.
You have to be pretty dense to think that aiming with a mouse has any resemblance to aiming with sights or a scope or even just pulling the trigger. You know, real guns have recoil.
Meanwhile most high end steering wheels have force feedback that can "fight back".
I was curious about your point and it turns out that the gamer beat the F1 driver but they were both in a VUHL 05 which is a road-legal supercar. It seems like they were on a mountain road track too.
The idea that you “have to” fight is abdicating your moral responsibility. He chose to fight.
Doing that had a major personal cost, but I wasn't willing to fight for a immoral regime. It wasn't Ukraine, and perhaps the calculation in Ukraine would have been different, but the point is that claiming one doesn't have a choice is an excuse, nothing more. What it's really saying is that one isn't willing to pay the price for making a difficult choice.