NYPD Considering Videogame-Based Training

[Andy Chalk]

NYPD Considering Videogame-Based Training

The Sean Bell [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/home/home.shtml] in November 2006.

The Tasers [http://www.rand.org/], as well as the purchase of updated simulation software to bolster training programs.

"[The NYPD's] current simulators are very good, but it's pretty old techology," said Rand Senior Fellow Bernard Rostker. Currently, police train at the Rodman's Neck Firing Range [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NYPD_Rodman%27s_Neck_Firing_Range] in the Bronx, a facility that includes a mock village and features computer-generated armed suspects. The Rand Corp. says the system is limited by both a small number of exercises as well as the short amount of time officers have to perform them. Newer technology, on the other hand, would bring the training to the officers via laptop computers, and would allow officers to record their sessions for review at a later time.

Rostker said improvements in game technology could also have a significant impact on the value of the training by inserting more realistic and varied scenarios. "Gaming has gotten a bad reputation because they're all about shoot-em-ups," he said. "But maybe a better way of looking at it is to look at something like the NBA basketball programs. The quality of the figures is very real and the quality of the facial expressions is very real. If you can give a student a lot of scenarios, it changes the nature of the learning experience."

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who has previously criticized "despicable," [http://www.rockstargames.com/iv] and other officials are currently reviewing the report.


Permalink

 

[Synangel]

I am not sure where i stand on the whole idea. For one part, it would be very safe, and could work very very well. but for it to work well it would take a lot of development. On the other side, who is going to design something like this? dosent the military have alot of other better things to spend there money on like you know... saving people, which is what they are all about? i the revaltions of me typing this, i think that it is actually not a good idea. i think it would be alot cheaper to work on non-lethal weapon technology rather then Virtual Training. of course if there was money to spare i think it would be a great idea, but shouldent the military put there money somewhere else?

 

[Anton P. Nym]

This isn't military, it's for the NY police department... and given the report they need to bulk up the training budget. I don't know whether "virtual training", via a laptop-based game, on what is and what isn't a "shoot" situation is the best route to go though.

However, if Commissioner Kelly really does believe that GTA is a murder trainer then this program should be irresistable to him.

-- Steve

 

[Indiscrimi]

Actually, they're talking about the New York Police Department, not the military, which means the budget is even more limited. I think the ability to simulate new scenarios would be invaluable as you have to be able to adapt. And it would be better than inventing new "non-lethal" weaponry as development and production are slow and costly processes.

 

[Singing Gremlin]

I am not sure where i stand on the whole idea. For one part, it would be very safe, and could work very very well. but for it to work well it would take a lot of development. On the other side, who is going to design something like this? dosent the military have alot of other better things to spend there money on like you know... saving people, which is what they are all about? i the revaltions of me typing this, i think that it is actually not a good idea. i think it would be alot cheaper to work on non-lethal weapon technology rather then Virtual Training. of course if there was money to spare i think it would be a great idea, but shouldent the military put there money somewhere else?

I'd say it's important to distinguish between full-blown military and police, here. But the military has loads of virtual training already. Here in the UK, there's a warehouse devoted to effectively playing Armed Assault, with tanks and vehicles modified to show the game world through their sensors. I believe there's also one in Germany, and they have competitive training.

 

[Johnn Johnston]

It seems like a good idea. A sort of on-foot flight simulator, such as the kind the RAF use.

 

[Pyre1million]

Synangel might be confusing this report with the much older one regarding the Marine's specially-ordered version of Doom 2 to help with training (which itself sparked a wellspring of delightful controversy from morons across the United States when it was discovered that lo and behold, one of the Columbine shooters enjoyed violent monster-filled shooting games and, gasp, could program them as well).

I took offense to the "Gaming has gotten a bad reputation because they're all about shoot-em-ups" comment, until I realized it wasn't idiocy but actually was an accurate assessment of the market right now, just as fighting games were so popular for a period in the nineties.

Overall, the pros and cons of this issue come down to subjects that have already been discussed in the 'video game violence' debate:

1.Can a video game be a good training tool? Yes, it can. Anything that has you repeating an action often enough, in realistic enough portrayal, can give you skill with that action. This is why we have flight simulators (as Johnn Johnston said), driving simulators, and other such programs.

But there are problems. With a laptop system, you're most likely looking at a series of scenarios set to play out in a specific way. These scenarios could be randomized, but that's about it. Making a branching pathway system based off of decisions the officer can make would be foolish and unrealistic, and because of that a laptop really can't work.

Such a system couldn't take into account the dozens upon dozens of things that officers actually have to account for in potentially hostile situations: body posture (yep, same for us as for animals), facial expression (your own afecting the potential hostile's responses), or even crazy things like random environmental occurences or sudden situation changes like backup charging in. In all these respects, a laptop-based game would be functionally useless (and anyone who disagrees, try playing Morrowind, Oblivion, Metroid Prime or any similar first-person game to get a very simple idea of what I mean, regarding movement problems alone).

And then there's the problem of 'enemy A.I.'. There is no game anywhere on the market where the enemies behave the way the NYPD would need simulator opponents to behave. For one, the enemies would have to react with a much wider variety of possible responses to an equally wider variety of variables. You'd need to take technology like the Playstation Eye, and program an A.I. "intelligent" enough to respond to all of the above-listed variables and more.

To really get this kind of thing to work, you'd probably need something like a fully immersive arcade-booth-style setup, a light gun modified for weight and recoil, and the aforementioned hyper-advanced A.I. Without these things the training could be viable, sure, but it'd also be woefully incomplete. Still, it could function as an upgrade to existing training measures, which is really all they're looking for it seems...

Given the price tag this kind of project would carry with it, I am tempted to agree that the NYPD should simply look more into non-lethal weapons. Of course there are problems (tasers are only non-lethal MOST of the time, for one), but it's likely to cost far less than the development of the necessary kind of technology. Then again, I'm not aware of everything going on in the industry, so maybe we're closer than I imagine.

Of course, all of this only applies to a simulator that actually needs to distinguish between 'Always have a lethally hostile reaction" and "potentially be talked down". You could improve accuracy a hell of alot with a much simpler setup than this.

 

[Andy Chalk]

The value of training for police forces (and yes, for military forces as well, although that's not what's at issue here) can't be overestimated. Effective training at this level isn't something you do for awhile and then drop: It's a constant, evolving process designed to help a person do the right thing in the right situation. A well-trained police force is going to be infinitely more effective than a bunch of grabasses with a stadium full of less-than-lethal weaponry.

The expense of this program to the NYPD can be mitigated by sharing it with other forces. If an effective training tool can be developed and demonstrated, police forces across the US and probably around the world should be banging down the doors to get it. If the NYPD is making a substantial investment into the development of the technology, they'd be smart to ensure they get some sort of licensing rights as part of the deal to help recoup the expense.

Whether or not such a tool could be developed is a wide open question, of course. But I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think current training practices could be vastly improved - which isn't an indictment of the NYPD's methods so much as it is simply a statement that technology has improved drastically over the past half-decade, and continues to improve at a breakneck pace. Major police forces like the NYPD would be foolish not to take advantage of that.

 

[jadias]

Mod SWAT 4 to acceptable standards (which wouldn't take much work) and give them all a copy. Job done.

 

[Asehujiko]

Rostker said improvements in game technology could also have a significant impact on the value of the training by inserting more realistic and varied scenarios. "Gaming has gotten a bad reputation because they're all about shoot-em-ups," he said. "But maybe a better way of looking at it is to look at something like the NBA basketball programs. The quality of the figures is very real and the quality of the facial expressions is very real. If you can give a student a lot of scenarios, it changes the nature of the learning experience."

I feel sorry for americans if these idiots are the people who should be protecting them from criminals.

Shoot 'em ups are 2d sidescrollers and afaik no longer in production for a very long time already. Then he goes out to praise sports games for their good face rendering technology. Somebody please direct this guy to one of the "seu" games he hates so much called "half life 2".