Gamification in the British Army: A Soldier’s Perspective (2010–2017)

Written By Ryan Hayden

Between 2010 and 2017, I served in the British Army during a period when digital innovation was beginning to impact military training, albeit in limited ways. While defense research and media often touted the rise of gamification, my experience reflected a more grounded reality. The most notable examples were a digital range used briefly during Army selection and once at Army Training Centre Pirbright while I was in the Territorial Army, a live exercise in Canada with laser-based tank training, tactical simulations using a version of ARMA at Bovington Camp, and a digital gunnery trainer modeled on the Challenger 2 tank during my time with the Queen’s Royal Hussars. These moments offered glimpses of what gamified training could be, but they were exceptions rather than standard practice.

What We Had: Digital Range, ARMA Simulations, and Tank Gunnery Trainers

My first exposure to gamified training came during Army selection, where I briefly used a digital range system. Later, while serving in the Territorial Army, I used it once more at the Army Training Centre Pirbright. The system simulated live-fire scenarios using laser-equipped weapons and projected targets, allowing soldiers to practice marksmanship and reaction drills without expending live ammunition. While useful, it was limited, more like a high-tech shooting gallery than a dynamic simulation. It was not a regular part of our training cycle, and many soldiers never used it.

During Phase 2 training at Bovington Camp, we used a version of the military simulation game ARMA for tactical training. This allowed us to rehearse vehicle movements and battlefield coordination in a digital environment. It was one of the few times we engaged with a game-like system that encouraged decision-making and teamwork in a simulated combat scenario.

When I trained as a gunner in the Queen’s Royal Hussars, I used a digital gunnery simulator designed to replicate the interior of a Challenger 2 tank. The system allowed me to sit in a mock turret and operate a virtual gun system, practicing target acquisition and firing drills. It was immersive and practical, offering a safe and cost-effective way to build muscle memory and confidence before live-fire exercises.

A similarly immersive experience came during a live exercise in Canada, where we trained with tanks using laser-based systems before transitioning to live fire. These setups enabled us to simulate combat engagements with real vehicles, digitally tracking hits and misses. It was a critical phase in the training cycle, helping us rehearse tactics, refine coordination, and build confidence before the real rounds flew.

Why Gamification Was Rare

Despite these examples, gamification was not widely adopted during my service. Several factors contributed to this:

  • Budget constraints: The Strategic Defence and Security Review (2010) led to restructuring and cuts that deprioritized experimental training technologies.

  • Cultural resistance: Leadership often viewed video games and simulations as unserious or ineffective compared to traditional field exercises.

  • Infrastructure gaps: Many units lacked the hardware, connectivity, or space to implement advanced simulation systems.

  • Operational tempo: With deployments to Afghanistan and elsewhere, training focused on immediate readiness, not innovation.

What Research Was Saying

While gamification was rare in practice, academic and defense research was already advocating its potential. Curry, Price, and Sabin (2015) documented the adaptation of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) video games for tactical education in the UK military between 2002 and 2012. These included first-person shooters and strategy games used in controlled environments for decision-making and situational awareness. As they noted, “games-based training has become a significant part of the training cycle for many parts of the British Army” (p. 8).

More recently, the British Army has adopted advanced virtual reality platforms, such as DVS2, developed by Bohemia Interactive Simulations. This £7.2 million system enables immersive training across terrains and scenarios, including parachuting, jet piloting, and humanitarian missions (UK Ministry of Defence, 2022).

The Interim Combined Arms Virtual Simulation – Deployed (ICAVS D) also allows troops to rehearse missions using gaming PCs and scalable virtual environments. It supports up to 55 trainees and is used for mission rehearsal, capability development, and tactical experimentation (Forces News, 2025). The Royal Signals have even tested ICAVS D using Xbox and PlayStation controllers, VR headsets, and steering wheels to simulate driving and combat scenarios (British Army, 2023).

What Could Have Been

Looking back, gamified tools could have enhanced our training in many ways:

  • Tactical simulations for convoy operations, urban warfare, and rules of engagement

  • Decision-making games to improve leadership development and mission planning

  • Multiplayer strategy platforms for inter-unit collaboration and communication

Instead, most of our learning came from live exercises, classroom briefings, and experience in the field.

What is Happening Now

Since 2017, the British Army has made significant strides in simulation and virtual training. Platforms like DVS2 and ICAVS D now allow soldiers to train in virtual environments across diverse terrains (UK Ministry of Defence, 2022; Forces News, 2025). Cranfield University offers courses in war gaming and combat modeling, teaching analytical techniques such as Monte Carlo simulations and synthetic battlefield environments (Cranfield University, n.d.). These tools are helping modern soldiers rehearse missions, develop capabilities, and experiment tactically in ways that were unavailable during my service.

Conclusion

Gamification in the British Army from 2010 to 2017 was more promise than practice. For many of us, the digital range at Pirbright, the ARMA-based tactical training at Bovington, the Challenger 2 gunnery simulator, and laser-based tank exercises in Canada were the only glimpses of what technology could offer. Today’s recruits may train in virtual war zones and strategize through simulations, but back then, we trained the old-fashioned way: boots on the ground, rounds down range, and lessons learned through sweat and repetition.

References

 

Ryan Hayden
Previous

Then vs. Now: Graphics Evolution in Gaming (2000s vs. 2020s)
Next

Gaming in the Classroom: A Scholarly Perspective with Personal Reflection