General background / context (fact/premise)
Quote:
Traditionally, video game manufacturers have been most strongly influenced by serious video gamers.
Supporting evidence (premise)
Quote:
Because devoted gamers have historically purchased the majority of video games, companies react to the desires of this market segment.
Description of current strategy (intermediate conclusion / observation)
Quote:
Normally, devoted gamers crave speed and action; thus, most manufacturers continue to produce games with faster chips and flashier graphics.
Author’s judgment / claim (main conclusion)
Quote:
Unfortunately, faster chips and flashier graphics are no longer in the industry’s best interest.
Supporting reason/situation change (premise for main conclusion)
Quote:
The devoted gaming market is deeply stagnant, and it won’t soon expand.
Recommendation
Quote:
To infuse new life into the video game market, manufacturers must simplify the functionality of their games.
Expected outcome / benefit (premise supporting recommendation)
Quote:
By doing so, current non-gamers will be attracted to join the ranks of video game fans.
If you break down the passage as you read it into components, you'll easily understand what role each line is playing and what role the boldface play in the argument.
B1: Intermediate conclusion that the author doesn't support, argues against it
B2: Evidence/Premise supporting the main conclusion
Following POE:
(A) The first is a situation that the author believes to be true =>
Nope, first is against author's argument/recommendation => eliminate A
(B) The first is a situation that the author argues should not continue; the second provides evidence that supports the author’s position.
This looks good, aligned with how we've mapped the passage. Keep.
(C) The first is a statement of fact that contradicts the author’s position =>
sounds good, read on, the second is the author’s position =>
Tricky, but this isn't author's position, the line preceding it is, this is a premise supporting the author's position => Eliminate
(D) The first is a statement of fact that supports the author’s position=>
First doesn't support the author's position, rather goes against it => eliminate
(E) The first is a prediction that the author believes should not hold in this case=>
alright sounds good, the second is an assumption that weighs against the author’s position =>
Nope, second is actually supporting author's position => eliminate
Answer: (B)