Simulation Across the Spectrum: The Island of Entertainment Simulations
Article by: Julia Loughran  (loughran@thoughtlink.com) In her first column, Julia Loughran introduced the analogy of many simulation "islands" and the SISO community as just one of them. With this installment in her Simulation Across the Spectrum series, Julia Loughran tours the hugely competitive, multi-billion dollar "island" of entertainment simulations. To survive on this island, companies must compete for the consumer’s dollar by trying to develop the best of genre game with the fastest simulation engines, the coolest graphics, and the most compelling storylines. This has stretched both the art and technology of entertainment simulations to the limit, revolutionizing the industry while providing invaluable insights to both SISO and the DoD. Grab your passport and get ready to have some fun. History of Computer-based Entertainment Systems In the early 1970s, Nolan Bushnell (one of the founders of Atari) created the first video game, "Pong." Pong used no simulation per se, consisting of two users controlling computer-generated paddles that bounced a square "ball" back and forth while each player tried to score a goal. The game’s sound was limited to two beeps to indicate when the rectangles made contact with the ball. Although Pong was simplistic, it was revolutionary, a pioneer in the area of computer-based gaming. Post-Pong, early entertainment simulations included arcade-type games in which a single user could enter a virtual environment driving a racecar, maneuvering a motorcycle, or combating a virtual enemy. In the early 80s, advances in the microprocessor and gaming art led to the creation of more varied, and more realistic three-dimensional (3D) games for home video use. These games, some of which remain popular today, were played on home video console systems. Atari and Nintendo were among the most successful early manufacturers. Even as the video game market was making advances, game developers were discovering consumer interest in single-user strategy games. One of the more popular strategy games was, and still is, SimCity, by MAXiS, http://www.simcity.com/home.shtml. SimCity allows users to create and control worlds of their own creation. The game engine produces outcomes based on decisions made by the user. One of the simulation’s underlying rules is that if the city creator fails to create a sports stadium, the citizens may become dissatisfied and riot. (Sounds a bit like Washington D.C.’s attempt to acquire a major league baseball team.) MAXiS recently released an enhanced version of SimCity called SimCity 3000 and there are plans to release a game called The Sims in which players will control the inhabitants of their computer-generated cities. Action adventure games always have been popular and advances in computing power have enhanced their graphics and realism. One of the more popular action games is ID software’s Doom, http://www.idsoftware.com/, first released in 1993. Doom incorporates the traditional blood, gore, and shoot-em’-up characteristics long popular in the entertainment industry. Doom is significant because it revolutionized the entertainment world by introducing user game-editing tools. The Doom Editor Utilities (DEU) allowed users to create their own game modifications, leading in turn to many user-developed enhancements. One of these versions included Marine Corps Doom in which monsters and dungeons of the original Doom were replaced with soldiers carrying attack rifles. In addition to advances in computing power, networked computing, particularly the Internet has altered dramatically the landscape of entertainment simulations. Networked computing allows play by multiple participants, enhancing the games’ interactive nature and ability to compete against human opponents. Multi-user play has improved both strategy and action adventure games while enhancing another popular genre known as role-playing games in which users select a character and control that character in the game world. This control usually includes interactions either with other networked human players, or artificial intelligence characters controlled by the game. Role-playing games arose from multi-user dungeons (MUDs), now known as "multi-user domains". The first MUD was developed in 1978 when Troy Trubshaw and Richard Bartle created a networked multi-user version of the single-user adventure game 'Dungeon', and allowed users to communicate with, cooperate with, or fight against each other for points. (http://www.kuleuven.ac.be/iccp/iccp4/MUD/history.html) Electronic Art’s Ultima Online (UO) is an internationally popular adventure role-playing game released in 1997, http://www.ea.com/corporate/pressreleases/ultimaplayers.html. In UO’s virtual world Britannia™, up to 20,000 players assume roles and can interact simultaneously with both real and virtual characters over the Internet. On average, 12,500 people are in UO at any given time, spending approximately 20 hours weekly. One of UO’s unique features is that there is no pre-determined path. This allows users to move freely, driving the game’s play.   Linking Entertainment and Defense By examining the history of defense-related simulations one recognizes the entertainment industry parallels. Single-user simulations have evolved into multi-user networked simulations and tactical-level simulations have migrated to a more sophisticated operational and strategic focus. The very same computing advances that have improved the commercial gaming worlds graphics, model sophistication, and enhanced artificial intelligence, also have significantly impacted the military simulation community. In 1996, the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office (DMSO), http://www.dmso.mil/, asked the National Research Council’s Computer Science and Telecommunications Board to evaluate how DoD and the entertainment industry might work together to leverage investments in modeling and simulation. The results of this study are summarized online at http://bob.nap.edu/readingroom/books/modeling/. The report found significant challenges to linking these two communities resulting primarily from differences in their cultures, business models, and client bases. Whereas military simulation developers have only one customer (DoD) and that customer generally owns the finished product, the entertainment industry encompasses innumerable, varied consumers for whom they must develop proprietary products in order to maintain a competitive edge. In some cases, two games developed within the same company compete against each other. In other words, the entertainment industry is not interested in developing a set of standards allowing one company’s game to interact with another’s. DoD, on the other hand, is very interested in this interoperability as evidenced by its High Level Architecture (HLA), http://hla.dmso.mil/hla/. The annual "Connections" conference sponsored by the Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell Air Force Base (Montgomery AL) links entertainment and defense simulation communities, "increasing the defense utility of all conflict simulations by facilitating their evolution toward greater comprehensives and accessibility." http://www.cadre.maxwell.af.mil/wargame/connections/admin/connections99_info.html. "Connections" encourages defense and commercial wargame communities to learn from each other. Usually held in late February, Connections brings together military leaders and commercial game developers. Military’s Need for Low-Cost Simulations Whether the military will ever use games developed by major entertainment producers remains to be seen. Cultural barriers may be too great. However, the military has begun to recognize and investigate the utility of low-cost games for training, analysis, and acquisition. The Marine Corps has led the way in evaluating the merits of low-cost simulations. In 1995, General Krulak, Commandant of the Marine Corps, directed all Marines to participate in daily decision-making exercises. The Marine Corps’ Modeling and Simulation Office (MCMSMO) subsequently conducted a study to assess benefits of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) wargames: http://WWW.TEDIV.USMC.MIL/dlb/milthink/catalog/title.html. This study precipitated the development of Marine Corps Doom. The Marine Corps continues to investigate low-cost approaches to training, however, although Marine Corps Doom was highly publicized, it is not a training success story. It was never part of an officially sponsored training program and therefore not part of the Marine’s training plan. The key developers of Marine Corps Doom left the Marines and the software was never supported or widely fielded. Using funds from the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program, the Marines are developing another low-cost, computer-based game. This tactical decision-making simulation game is called Marine Expeditionary Unit 2000 (MEU). The player is a Marine officer coordinating activities of a MEU by selecting units, issuing orders, and monitoring the progress of his forces. MEU 2000 is being developed by MAK Technologies, http://www.mak.com. MAK’s development of DIS tools, particularly DIS-Lite, has made it a major player in the dual-use military/entertainment simulation marketplace. The Navy - the Marine Corps’ parent service –is interested in developing low-cost approaches. The Chief of Naval Education and Training recently launched the Micro-Simulator Systems for Immersive Learning Environments (MiSSILE) initiative: "to rapidly identify and apply commercial PC gaming and simulation technology to the development of warfare skills and tactical thinking....The underlying theme for the MiSSILE project is to apply the products and economics of PC gaming and simulation to military training. The intent is to minimize costs by avoiding new software development, and non-recurring systems engineering as a result of using hardware and software that is already widely available and supported, off-the-shelf." (MiSSILE project brochure) This project will evaluate games that enhance surface and undersea warfare tactical thinking and will explore the use of flight simulation programs for tactics development, situational awareness, and mission planning for undergraduate pilot training and initial rotary wing training. The Army is entering the low-cost simulation arena by evaluating the utility of SPEARHEAD II, a low-cost, dual-use entertainment-based game. This M1 Abrams Army tank simulation wargame, co-developed by MAK Technologies, http://www.mak.com, and Zombie®, http://www.zombie.com, and published by Interactive Magic, http://www.imagicgames.com/spearhead/ is based on DIS technology and is available commercially. STRICOM is considering its effectiveness as a pre-training tool for the Close Combat Tactical Trainer (CCTT) simulators. MAK Technologies is developing an HLA-compliant version of the game. The Air Force recently awarded an SBIR to California-based Hexagon Interactive, http://www.umahexagon.com/hexagon/hexagon_int.html, a company that traditionally has served an entertainment arena clientele. Under this SBIR, Hexagon will develop its board game, Cyberwar XXI, into an interactive computer simulation focusing on information warfare, including simulating the weapon systems used in asymmetric and Operations Other Than War (OOTW) situations. The game includes an artificial intelligence (AI) engine to simulate behavioral and decision-making processes of individuals (commanders) and populations (military units) under stress. Low-cost simulations also are being considered in the Joint arena. U.S. Atlantic Command’s Joint Experimentation Lab, J9, recently expressed interest, and in 1998, DARPA commissioned a study to identify applications for commercial gaming and collaboration technologies to Joint Task Force Staff Training. The author’s ThoughtLink, Inc. conducted this study which is available at http://www.thoughtlink.com. Larry Willis, DARPA Program Manager for the Advanced Simulation Technology Thrust (ASTT) Program, http://www.astt.com, currently is co-sponsoring ThoughtLink Inc.’s examination of this low-cost approach in the context of interagency training for complex contingency operations. Need for Evaluation As low-cost simulation approaches become more prevalent, there will be an increasing need to evaluate their effectiveness. A 1997 DoD Inspector General’s Audit Report on the readiness impact of training simulations and devices concluded that military departments have not demonstrated the effectiveness of large-scale computer simulations. Assessing the training effectiveness of simulations large and small will require more effort on the part of the simulation community. Summary As military funding, available personnel, time, and other resources decrease, lower-fidelity simulations will offer new opportunities. Computer-based games might offer new and varied solutions to distance learning applications while providing an opportunity for sustainment training between large-scale exercises. Although this article has focused on the use of games for education and training, commercial-fidelity games may benefit analysis and acquisition communities as well by providing low-cost alternatives for "gaming" ideas, as well as providing a new forum for brainstorming. The application of low-cost simulations to military problems and issues is a most dynamic field. Stay tuned for future developments on this simulation island. Author Bio: Julia Loughran is President of ThoughtLink, Inc., which provides consulting services and research in a variety of technology application areas; specializing in data analysis, data visualization, and collaborative technologies. Ms. Loughran has extensive expertise in distributed interactive simulation (DIS) and has spoken at a variety of conferences on innovative ideas for collaboration and training in virtual environments and approaches for analyzing large, complex data sets. She is currently conducting research for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA).
Close