Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

America's Army Cost Taxpayers $32.8 Million

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 112 comments

Your tax dollars at work.

U.S. Army projects cost money, usually lots of money. And if you're a U.S. taxpayer, that's your money.

America's Army, the free to play shooter that is ultimately a recruiting tool for the Army, is funded by tax dollars. GameSpot uncovered through a Freedom of Information Act request just how many dollars the project has commanded over the years.

Note that the original America's Army for PC launched in 2002, but investments and development started in 2000.

America's Army year-by-year budget summary

2000--$3,500,000

2001--$5,600,000

2002--$1,862,985

2003--$2,600,000

2004--$3,866,482

2005--$1,288,552

2006--$4,050,748

2007--$2,788,137

2008--$3,887,450

2009--$3,395,702

In total, that adds up to $32.8 million over the last decade. Do you think that it was money well spent? Why or why not?

Follow us on Twitter for more tech news and exclusive updates here.

Display 112 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 22 Hide
    Annisman , December 11, 2009 1:26 AM
    Considering Obama and Co. Just spent Trillions of dollars in his first term, and inflated the deficate and our currency beyond belief, not to mention the 787 billion dollar 'stimulus' bill that has not only stopped job creation, but has put us in even more debt I think 30 million dollars for a game I enjoy is actually worth it.

    Hey guess where the money that is being returned to us from the banks that we helped bail out is going.... back to you and me ? Oh, no it's being spent by our government on more entitlement programs.

    Spend our way out of debt? Hmmm that just doesnt sound right.
  • 11 Hide
    Efrayim , December 11, 2009 1:00 AM
    It was a fun game but sometimes the aiming was screwed up.
  • 11 Hide
    superprelude , December 11, 2009 1:01 AM
    I think they can pay IW 5 million to mod MW2 into realistic game for the army. But who cares? I am no American.
Other Comments
  • 11 Hide
    Efrayim , December 11, 2009 1:00 AM
    It was a fun game but sometimes the aiming was screwed up.
  • 10 Hide
    coonday , December 11, 2009 1:00 AM
    At least the money spent on America's Army was something everyone had access too. Besides, it was only 2-3 million dollars spent every year. If you really want to look at wasteful spending take a look at what the current stimulus package is giving money to. http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=2274
  • 11 Hide
    superprelude , December 11, 2009 1:01 AM
    I think they can pay IW 5 million to mod MW2 into realistic game for the army. But who cares? I am no American.
  • 10 Hide
    metalfellow , December 11, 2009 1:02 AM
    Governments will continue to justify any spending if it suits their ultimate goal. I have played it briefly, didn't really captivate, if anything they should of just backed BF2 for recruiting, better game imo.
  • 2 Hide
    kavic , December 11, 2009 1:04 AM
    um can I have a refund? LOL The game was great until the last year or two. Now its just full of a bunch of kids with power trips that get you banned from most servers if you kill them or hop.
  • 22 Hide
    Annisman , December 11, 2009 1:26 AM
    Considering Obama and Co. Just spent Trillions of dollars in his first term, and inflated the deficate and our currency beyond belief, not to mention the 787 billion dollar 'stimulus' bill that has not only stopped job creation, but has put us in even more debt I think 30 million dollars for a game I enjoy is actually worth it.

    Hey guess where the money that is being returned to us from the banks that we helped bail out is going.... back to you and me ? Oh, no it's being spent by our government on more entitlement programs.

    Spend our way out of debt? Hmmm that just doesnt sound right.
  • 2 Hide
    korsen , December 11, 2009 1:27 AM
    I played that for a while. Fun on co-op. Lame when people team kill though. Someone did that to me for a few rounds so I shot him in the face every round till I was banned.
  • 10 Hide
    sundm001 , December 11, 2009 1:31 AM
    I was conceived as a way to popularize the US Army. And someone correct me if I am wrong but does not that money come from their recruiting budget? It is not an added expenditure and considering the cost for retaining and recruiting the amount of people needed to staff an army it is just a small amount considered when they have a budget in the billions. I would say go on. If people enjoy the game and it serves its designed purpose, it looks like they have a winning combination.
  • 4 Hide
    sundm001 , December 11, 2009 1:33 AM
    sundm001I was conceived .

    Sorry I meant "IT"
  • 2 Hide
    rembo666 , December 11, 2009 1:34 AM
    It's a good (and cheap) recruiting tool. $3.5 million a year is a drop in the Army's recruiting bucket. Certainly cheaper than the TV commercials.
  • 11 Hide
    Honis , December 11, 2009 1:36 AM
    Context with other recruiting tool costs:

    Navy/Marines Blue Angles F-18A/B: $18 million a piece plus maintenance. They have 10 demonstration planes (A) and 2 double seat (B).
    Air Force Thunderbird's F-16C/D: $18.8 million a piece. Six demonstration (Cs) and 2 double seat (D).
    Army Americas Army video game: Between $2 and $4 million annual cost. Total cost YTD: 32.8 million.

    You see, the Army is saving us tax payers on its advertising compared to the other branches. You can argue the effectiveness of advertising using a video game verse a spectacular air demonstration but when it comes to price, the Army has gone the cheaper route.
  • 8 Hide
    astrodudepsu , December 11, 2009 1:36 AM
    I'm going with annisman on this one, with all the cash the US government has spent during the Bush and now Obama administrations this doesn't even register on the radar.
  • 4 Hide
    BladeVenom , December 11, 2009 1:40 AM
    The cost is about what one Superbowl add per year would cost. From that perspective it was promotional bargain for recruiting.
  • -9 Hide
    BladeVenom , December 11, 2009 1:40 AM
    The cost is about what one Superbowl add per year would cost. From that perspective it was promotional bargain for recruiting.
  • 0 Hide
    JohnnyLucky , December 11, 2009 1:54 AM
    Well, as other have correctly pointed out, the cost is definitely very small compared to other military expenditures. It's even very small compared to the annual recuriting budget. What I would like to know is what did the Army get in return? What was the benefit?
  • 0 Hide
    yang , December 11, 2009 1:55 AM
    wonder why AA 3 previous developers say they were underfunded when obviously they were given more than enough. Still I agree with everyone, that price is very reasonable for such an effective recruiting tool. Then again I hated the latest installment since it first got released
  • 0 Hide
    tleavit , December 11, 2009 2:40 AM
    We dump 750 billion a year into military, 3 million for this game inst even a drop in the bucket. remember that next time you complain about 80 billion a year to cover every man women and child in this country with health care.
  • 1 Hide
    FoShizzleDizzle , December 11, 2009 2:45 AM
    I think its value as an educational tool for learning things about the military is almost equal to its value as a recruiting tool. I really enjoyed America's Army: Special Forces and spent hundreds of hours on it. That said they really screwed up the game on AA3. Bunch of retards developed that version. Not surprised the day of release they were all fired.
Display more comments