Dead in Iraq: It's No Game

[Ian David]

By Kathleen Craig| Also by this reporter
02:00 AM Jun, 06, 2006

Joesph DeLappe is careful about typos. In the multiplayer war game America's Army DeLappe can see the soldiers around him advancing, but he doesn't care to join them. Logged in as "Dead_in_Iraq," DeLappe types the names of soldiers killed in Iraq, and the date of their death, into the game's text messaging system, such that the information scrolls across the screen for all users to see. DeLappe's goal is simple: He plans to memorialize the name of every service member killed in Iraq.

An art professor at the University of Nevada, DeLappe is engaged in what he calls online gaming intervention. "By bringing these names into that context it's not only a way of remembering, it's bringing a reality into the fantasy."

But America's Army already has a toehold in the real world. Billed as the "official U.S. Army game," it doubles as a tool for Army recruiters. To a reported 6 million registered users, leveling up means getting into the game's version of Green Berets, and qualifying for "multiplayer missions with units ranging from the elite 82nd Airborne Division to the 75th Ranger Regiment." The training for these virtual missions mirrors the training for real-world military operations.

So how does an online memorial-cum-protest fit into this public gaming space? According to Paul Boyce, a U.S. Army public affairs specialist, "The Army does not limit participation unless there is negative impact on other players' experiences."

More:
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/games/0,71052-0.html?tw=wn_index_9

[unhappycamper]

1. Mr. DeLappe's mission is a worthy one,

and I look forward to a followup "Mission Accomplished" story. Unfortunately, I doubt many of the online community will 'get' it.

In the article. "Richard Smith" said "A dead soldier is not, and should not, be a political icon used to justify beliefs that they may not have shared."

Gee whiz "Richard," don't you think that "we must not let their sacrifices be in vain" is just a tad political?