Games Shape Conflict
Video games are among the dominant cultural and cognitive substrates for the next generation of military and civilian leaders. These leaders will have spent their formative years mastering real-time strategy games, squad-based shooters, and competitive multiplayer environments. These shared formative experiences are now diffusing through the world’s military institutions. Their narratives, reward structures, and tactical logics will inevitably shape how tomorrow’s warfighters perceive conflict, solve problems, and make decisions under pressure. DARC believes that understanding these influences is essential to understanding how future conflicts may unfold.
In addition, or perhaps as a consequence of this upbringing, DARC is struck by how emerging battlefield platforms, from hardware to software, increasingly resemble the interfaces and control schemas of video games. The proliferation of drones, autonomous munitions, cyber warfare, and warfighter wearables has created a battlefield that, in many respects, looks remarkably like popular video games, both in terms of gameplay, environments, and story elements. If, to turn a phrase, “the medium is the meta,” then a deep understanding of how strategic dynamics played out in the world of e-sports and competitive videogaming may give us clues to the dominant strategies of future conflict. Increasingly, it seems we may now be looking towards fighting the real-world versions of conflicts simulated decades ago.
Topics of Interest
We are receptive to a wide range of potential research and analysis on this topic. Some areas of initial interest are listed below:
-
Generational Change: Discuss how early exposure to specific titles, reward systems, and plots might influence the decision-making and tactical skills of the next generation of military and civilian leaders worldwide. Could the evolution of the games industry over the past two decades have generational impacts in terms of cultural references, communication, and strategy? Does a military leadership cohort that played Zerg in their youth fundamentally differ from one that played Terran?
-
Gaming Meta and Warfare: Are there strategies and tactical innovations from the world of e-sports that are particularly relevant for the defense problems that America faces today? What cheating or min-maxing tactics might be relevant in this context? Is Taiwan best defended by some variant of a “lurker drop” approach? What does GOATS Comp tell us about competition with Russia? Is Iran fundamentally a Captain Falcon v. Pikachu situation?
-
User Interfaces: Examine how gaming platforms from the 2000s (e.g., RTS interfaces, FPS HUDS) and controllers are mirrored in modern military software and hardware. Discuss implications for efficiency, accessibility, and human error in operations, with specific relation to the optimal use of these interfaces based on their use in video games.
-
Prediction Markets: can the potential to bet on real-life front-lines enhance understanding of conflicts via crowd-sourced predictions or exacerbate them by gamifying human suffering? Are we recreating bloodsports, or is this the resurrection of gentlemanly warfare? How will prediction markets be used by military forces in the field to shape conflict and generate situational awareness?
We are seeking proposals submitted via this form no later than June 26, 2026, with drafts being completed by July 24, 2026.
Honoraria will be $2,000 for a piece of approximately 2,000 to 4,000 words in length, though additional budget is available for more extensive work. Please reach out to contact@defenseanalyses.org or via DM @defenseanalyses with any questions.
