Capps, the game has "minimal violence," and he further characterizes the game's intent as to demonstrate that military life is about "values" (Viegas De Sa).
Unsurprisingly, however, "America's Army" has attracted its share of criticism, as showing an artificial and one-dimensional picture of military life and particularly of warfare. In the words of one commentator,
If the whole idea is to attract soldiers, why not show the whole life of a soldier, in all its aspects? How about a raid into a recently bombed area of Afghanistan, to separate the bodies of the children from the terrorists? If the Army really wants to attract young recruits through this video game, they should show what has always appealed to young American men: death and destruction. They should say, "In the Army, there are no continues. You only die once" (Viegas De Sa).
Even the more sophisticated training-aid type games have come in for criticism. Commenting on the British training-aid games, the observation was made that using video games as training aids is "kind of like cops watching NYPD Blue to pick up procedural pointers. Which, when you continue to think about it, a lot of cops probably do" (Gomes). This critique may be somewhat misplaced. The process of (for example) aiming and firing a tank gun is well-suited to simulation, far more so than police investigative procedures. It is not fanciful to suppose that video-game type simulations would have a valid role in teaching mechanical procedures, just as flight simulators have a relevant place in pilot training.
The interest of the military in video games not only as a training aid but as a recruiting tool is not surprising. As noted, the military has long supported Hollywood movies that were viewed as giving a positive impression of military life, just as it uses events such as air shows to draw interest from potential recruits. Video gaming is particularly attractive because of its ap...