It should come as no surprise that commercial war games are cheaper and more user-friendly than the cumbersome systems designed by defense contractors. From Successful War Games Combine Both Civilian and Military Traits :
Commercial war-game designers can provide realistic and user-friendly simulations far more cheaply than the military’s own multi-million-dollar systems, some experts argue. Yet, developers and operators of big-ticket simulation systems counter that off-the-shelf games lack the official testing and validation needed for accurate models.
[...]
Proponents say that surviving in the Darwinian consumer game market has given commercial designers several advantages over simulations produced by the military and large defense contractors. For one, they are definitely cheaper. Designer John Tiller said he spent about eight months and less than $100,000 to design the first of his Panzer Campaign series of operational-level war games, which retail for about $50. The Defense Department’s JWARS (Joint Warfare System) theater-level model, developed by CACI and AT&T, already has cost $30 million to $60 million.
Here’s the big difference though:
Many say user-friendliness and accessibility is where commercial games have their real edge. One example is TacOps, a Windows-based, platoon-level game capable of running on antiquated 300-Megahertz PCs. Designed by a retired Marine major, I.L. Holdridge, TacOps has been modified into a training tool used by the Marines, the Canadian and New Zealand militaries, the Army’s Command and General Staff College and the Armor School at Fort Knox, Ky.The Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) has never sanctioned TacOps. The 16th Cavalry at Fort Knox obtained a license of TacOpsCav — a militarized version of the commercial game — for free, and unlimited distribution for military training purposes.
“I can teach someone to be user-capable with TacOps in a half-hour. It takes them a day to become a talented user, and they like the game so much that they take it home,” said Maj. Michael Muller, a Marine Corps armor officer who is currently an instructor at the Armor Captain’s Career Course at Fort Knox.
Muller contrasted the TacOps learning process with the three days of JANUS training for Armor School students.
Designed 30 years ago to model nuclear effects, the ubiquitous JANUS has been upgraded steadily into the Army’s primary ground combat game.
Muller said that instead of waiting weeks for the base simulation center to schedule and design a JANUS scenario, he can use TacOpsCAV to construct an exercise for six students in a matter of minutes. “Maybe you’re illustrating a point, and it’s not driving home. So you stop for 10 minutes and create a TacOps scenario. Then, you have them fight it out. You can run a small scenario with a dozen guys and five or six computers, and do a company-level scenario in less than two hours.”
Designed to be used by multiple computers linked to a host PC, and including features such as thermal sights and unit doctrine, TacOps is realistic enough to be a legitimate training tool, Muller said. “It’s ultimately not as realistic as JANUS, but what does it cost to run TacOps? Nothing.”
JANUS requires $2 million per year for maintenance, upgrades and the salaries of the operators at base simulation centers, according to the National Simulation Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.
I may have to pick up TacOps4.