|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
26 May 2015, 01:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi All,
I am planning to set for the GMAT on June 15th. Since I have less than a month to go and I am a non-native English speaker, I was wondering whether I can get feedback on the writing sample below.
The Topic:
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self-regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
The Writing Sample:
The argument that the electronic gaming industry needs an independent body to determine the appropriateness of the content developed and distributed omits key elements without which the argument fails to give us a clear understanding of what the author is trying to substantiate. The opening sentence gives some heads up or background information about the rating system for both the electronic games and the movie industry in terms of similarity. This, however, is not enough to buy into the idea that an independent body, instead of a self-regulated on, implementing the regulations would yield the desired outcomes; the argument, as a whole, is also a far cry from convincing the readers with the validity of the author’s claim.
Among the most glaring flaws in the argument flow of reasoning are presented in drawing similarity between to different industries, using vague language i.e. The electronic game rating system is not working and assuming that gaming entities are knowingly violating the rating system. First, the information in the opening sentence about how similar the rating system for movies is to that for electronic games does little in showing whether this system is efficient or not, or whether these two industries are compatible and hence it would be logical to have the same/similar rating system. Second, it is rather vague or unclear what the argument means when it describes the game rating system as one that does not work or is ineffective, and does this mean the rating system is actually working or doing the trick in the movie industry unlike the gaming one. The argument gave no information as to what are the desired outcomes from implementing regulations or rating systems on each of those industry; it just assumes that the desired outcome is the same and accordingly the system by which they are rated should be the same. Third, the argument’s conclusion that a third party instead of a self-regulating body is the only way of rendering the system effective is rather presumptuous. The argument fails by way of giving examples or providing statistics of how the system is regulated and implemented in the movie industry and how this could be used in the electronic gaming one, how the efficiency of the system is measured, in what ways could this regulation be effective in the electronic gaming industry and most importantly how the system could salvage the harmful outcomes of the lack of a third party regulating the rating system or the presence of a weak rating system.
Because the argument left a lot of points open to discussion without giving us a reason to actually believe that the recommendation for a third party regulation body would achieve inherently different and more fruitful results than the self-regulating one, the argument is weak and not convincing.
All feedback is highly appreciated.
I am planning to set for the GMAT on June 15th. Since I have less than a month to go and I am a non-native English speaker, I was wondering whether I can get feedback on the writing sample below.
The Topic:
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self-regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
The Writing Sample:
The argument that the electronic gaming industry needs an independent body to determine the appropriateness of the content developed and distributed omits key elements without which the argument fails to give us a clear understanding of what the author is trying to substantiate. The opening sentence gives some heads up or background information about the rating system for both the electronic games and the movie industry in terms of similarity. This, however, is not enough to buy into the idea that an independent body, instead of a self-regulated on, implementing the regulations would yield the desired outcomes; the argument, as a whole, is also a far cry from convincing the readers with the validity of the author’s claim.
Among the most glaring flaws in the argument flow of reasoning are presented in drawing similarity between to different industries, using vague language i.e. The electronic game rating system is not working and assuming that gaming entities are knowingly violating the rating system. First, the information in the opening sentence about how similar the rating system for movies is to that for electronic games does little in showing whether this system is efficient or not, or whether these two industries are compatible and hence it would be logical to have the same/similar rating system. Second, it is rather vague or unclear what the argument means when it describes the game rating system as one that does not work or is ineffective, and does this mean the rating system is actually working or doing the trick in the movie industry unlike the gaming one. The argument gave no information as to what are the desired outcomes from implementing regulations or rating systems on each of those industry; it just assumes that the desired outcome is the same and accordingly the system by which they are rated should be the same. Third, the argument’s conclusion that a third party instead of a self-regulating body is the only way of rendering the system effective is rather presumptuous. The argument fails by way of giving examples or providing statistics of how the system is regulated and implemented in the movie industry and how this could be used in the electronic gaming one, how the efficiency of the system is measured, in what ways could this regulation be effective in the electronic gaming industry and most importantly how the system could salvage the harmful outcomes of the lack of a third party regulating the rating system or the presence of a weak rating system.
Because the argument left a lot of points open to discussion without giving us a reason to actually believe that the recommendation for a third party regulation body would achieve inherently different and more fruitful results than the self-regulating one, the argument is weak and not convincing.
All feedback is highly appreciated.
Moderators:
188 posts
