The title makes it sound amazing in a bunch of different and misleading ways, but all the demos look like cheap toys and video games.
The problem with good, accurate simulations in the defense department, is that higher-ups who do not like the results that come out of them will have them killed politically. This is what happened to JWARS. (This is also what happened to the war game where a 3rd rate power sank a US aircraft carrier. http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/3793 )
I recall reading a story where someone kept winning against the US side in a war game, and instead of changing tactics, the guys running the US side just kept adding more and more restrictions to what the opposite team was allowed to do, until they finally lost. (Wish I had a link to the story. [EDIT: jmhobbs has it, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6770236)
Huh, kind of like Ender's Game, except for the loss part.
I just finished watching a documentary about a German "aggressor" squadron that inherited a bunch of Mig-29s through the reunification of Germany. When they take part in exercises, they generally have lots of restrictions placed on them. (To make sure the students can "complete" a full course of scenarios.)
Who would have guessed that a small band of Islamic fundamentalists would
- overstay their (legal) visas
- do some flight training
- hijack commercial aircraft to use as giant suicide bombs
In hindsight, it looks logical, but on Sept 10, 2001, who was thinking of this?
I'm guessing, however, this was not part of mainstream military doctrine or scenario planning.