The Action-Packed Gaming Company, based on the success of the previous

The Action-Packed Gaming Company, based on the success of the previous season’s video game featuring the character Sam Li, of the popular Fist of Awe series of martial arts movies, developed for the current season a similar martial arts game featuring a new character who is also a martial arts master. The new game had improved 3-D graphics, enhanced multiplayer capability, and dozens of new martial arts moves developed by real-life masters. However, marketing surveys showed that teenagers were uninterested in this new game, and the game sold very poorly.

The passage implies that an explanation for the failure of the new game is based on doubt regarding which of the following assumptions?

A) Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games’ main characters.

B) Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies.

C) The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games.

D) Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales.

E) The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have.

Read the question stem first: The passage implies that an explanation for the failure of the new game is based on doubt regarding which of the following assumptions?
double take... what!!!
Now break it down
The passage implies that - According to the passage
an explanation for the failure of the new game is based on - The passage has explained that a game failed. The reason is based on...
doubt regarding which of the following assumptions - Which of the assumptions fell through... failed to realize...

Ok, put it all together. The passage says that the new game failed. The reason is that an assumption (probably made by the game makers) did not realize. What is that assumption?

So we are looking for [highlight]an assumption[/highlight] that fell through and led to the failure of the game.

Now, we break down the stimulus:
[highlight]The Action-Packed Gaming Company[/highlight], based on the success of the previous season’s video game featuring the character Sam Li, of the popular Fist of Awe series of martial arts movies, [highlight]developed for the current season a similar martial arts game featuring a new character[/highlight] who is also a martial arts master.
Gist - APGC developed a martial arts game featuring a new character. This game was based on success of previous season's game featuring popular Sam Li.

[highlight]The new game had improved 3-D graphics,[/highlight] enhanced multiplayer capability, and dozens of new martial arts moves developed by real-life masters.
However, marketing surveys showed that teenagers were uninterested in this new game, and the game sold very poorly.

Right! So they made the game under some assumptions and one of them failed to realize. We are looking for that assumption.


A) Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games’ main characters.
The game makers did assume this. They chose a new character for their game as opposed to Sam Li who was already very popular. And they made this game technologically advanced because they assumed that teenagers will appreciate it. But apparently, this assumption failed since teenagers were not interested in this game.

B) Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies. - They did not assume this while making their new game. It was not based on popular movie character.

C) The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games. - This was not an assumption they made while making this year's game. It is irrelevant to our discussion of the failure of this year's game.

D) Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales. - The game makers did not assume this. They made it technologically advanced probably because they actually believed that technological improvement DOES bring in greater success.

E) The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have. - Again not an assumption the new game makers had in mind that failed them.

Answer (A).
_________________

Hi sameerdrana,

The question stem is really wired. I spent almost 2 mins trying to classify the question type. I guess its a mix of assumption and resolve the paradox question. Here is my take on the question:

There is no main conclusion in the argument I think!

Premise: Company X, released a martial arts game featuring the character Sam Li, of the popular Fist of Awe series of martial arts movies.

Premise: Company X, released a new game this season with better graphics & other better features but the character of the new game is different.

Premise: marketing surveys showed that teenagers were uninterested in this new game, and the game sold very poorly.

Paradox: The new game is better feature wise than the older version yet it sold poorly.

The question asks us to find a assumption which company X made but did not worked out to be true. Thus find out an assumption made by company X, negating which will explain the new game's poor sale.

A) Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games’ main characters.
This must be the correct option since the new game was better in every aspect except the name of the character. If contrary to the company X's assumption teenagers made their decision on the name of the character then this explains the poor sales of new game.

B) Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies.
This assumption was made by company but negating it wont explain poor sales of the new game. It actually suggest that the new game should have sold better

C) The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games.

This might be one of the assumptions made by company X but this was not the assumption on which the new game's character was based on. It is only related to 1st game

D) Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales.
This option actually states an assumption opposite to the one made by company X

E) The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have.
This is not an assumption. This is a mere fact and does not concern success / failure on the new game.

The verbiage in the stimulus is fine. It can definitely appear in actual GMAT. You need to omit the unnecessary and focus on the main points. The question stem is definitely a little twisted for my liking, though, not unseen. It can appear at higher levels (as pointed out by whiplash2411) I will break down the question once it has been discussed.
_________________

I think it will depend on your status at the time. Let me explain:

Neck to neck run: If in Verbal, you race with time and pretty much take about 2 mins per question, there is no point spending much time on it. If in first 30 secs, you are unable to understand the question, you should guess and move on to the next question. You can better use the time you saved in another question that you understand well. Else, you will probably put another 30 sec- 1 min in deciphering it. By the time you are done with the stimulus and ready to go to options, 2 mins might already be up and you will need another 2 mins at least to answer it. Then again, the answer may or may not be correct. Not worth it.

On the other hand, if you are on the 30th question say, and you still have 25 minutes remaining, by all means give it your best shot. Of course, you shouldn't put more than 3-4 mins but you can afford to put that much time into it.

If you have reached a level in the test where the software is giving you high level questions, it is not by chance. It is because you did well in previous questions. The software doesn't give you a 700 level question because you answered a 500 level one correctly. It gives you 700 level question after you do well in 600 level ones. The point is, if you reached the question, it is worth a fair shot even if at first it looks troublesome, but only in case you have time to spare. Else dump it within the first 30 secs and use the time you save in some other question. 'It's not quitting, it's strategy.' Brian has explained this in detail in his excellent blog post:
https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2010/10/gmat-tip-of-week-punting-for-field/
_________________

Hi sameer,

If you see this kind of a question in the CAT be very sure that you are well on your way to a 700+ score ( unless something terrible happened to you in your quants section). Also be sure that you will not get much time time to analyze in detail. It is trying to confuse us by complex wording. If you dont get after reading it 1 or 2 times then it is wiser to move on I guess!! We dont want to end up with an unfinished section under any circumstances

The key to untangling this problem is understanding what is meant by the question: "The passage implies that an explanation for the failure of the new game is based on doubt regarding which of the following assumptions?" I think this is bad writing - it's the kind of writing you're often asked to fix in a Sentence Correction question. The sentence is written in a passive voice and it is entirely unclear who is making the "assumption" mentioned. So I think the question is open to interpretation, but I think what they mean to ask is: "The passage suggests that the Action-Packed Gaming company's new game was not successful because the company incorrectly assumed which of the following?"

So we need to find an answer choice which describes something the company assumed would ensure its game was a success, but which the passage suggests was an incorrect assumption to make. The company made a new game which was technically superior to the previous Sam Li game, and yet the game did not sell. The company assumed a better product would sell better, but clearly consumers weren't interested in the better game. They wanted the game based on the movie. So A is the best answer here - the company was wrong to assume that teenagers would buy the game that had greater 'technological merits'.
_________________

Hi,

Let's first understand the argument:

Understanding the argument:

1. Action Packed (AP) gaming company developed a game last season, which featured the character Sam Li, which is a popular character.

2. AP has developed a new but similar game for this season. This new game features a new character.

3. The new game is better in a number of parameters than the old game: improved 3-D graphics, enhanced multi-player capability, and dozens of new martial arts

4. However, marketing surveys showed that teenagers were uninterested in this new game, and the game sold very poorly.

So, we are given an anomaly. While the new game is better at a number of parameters than the old game, the new game still fared poorly.

Pre-thinking:

The question stem asks us to find an explanation for the given anomaly. How can we explain this? One way is that there must be some difference between the new game and the old game, which led to the poor performance of the new game. Another way could be that the general preferences of the teenagers have changed.

Let's look at the option statements. However, kindly note that the we need to find a statement such that doubting it explain the given anomaly. Thus, we'll negate the option statements given and see if that explains the anomaly.

Analysis of Answer Choices:

(A)Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games’ main characters. - Let's negate this.

Negation: Teenagers make purchasing decisions based not on the technological merits of video games, but on the name recognition of the games’ main characters

Is there a difference between the name recognition of the main characters of the two games? The answer is Yes. The new game didn't have a popular character unlike old game. This explain the low sales of new game. Therefore, this option is correct.


(B)Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies. - Negating this:

Negation: Buyers of video games do not prefer to purchase games based on popular movies

This means that old game (based on a character of movie) should not have sold much better than new movie. This negation actually goes against the argument, rather than explaining it. Therefore, Incorrect.

(C)The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games. - We can see that negating this will also make it against the argument. Therefore, incorrect.

(D)Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales. - Negating this will again imply that the sales of new game should have been higher than old game. This is against the argument. Therefore, incorrect.

(E)The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have. - This option explains the anamoly as it is. Obviously, when we negate it, we'll land up with something that does not serve our purpose.

Hope this helps

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

Conclusion: The new game did sell well.
Support: The first game was based on a popular character from a movie, and the game was a success. Based on this success, the company developed a new game with Tech improvements, but with a different character.

Whoa ! The question STEM is so difficult to follow and infer from.
But if you analyse it patiently all it is asking is the FAULTY ASSUMPTION made by the Gaming Company.
From there-on, it is fairly easy.

(A) Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games’ main characters.
Correct
Since we are asked to think of the ASSUMPTION that the company made in developing the new game, and that assumption could help us for reasoning the failure, this choice makes a perfect fit.
The Company did assume that the Teenager made their purchasing decisions based on Tech merits and not the Characters. Else they would not have dropped the Famous character and developed the New game with Tech merits etc.

(B) Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies.
Incorrect
If this were the assumption, then it makes no sense for the Gaming Company to drop the Popular character in its New Game.

(C) The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games.
Incorrect
Though this is a reasonable assumption behind the development of First Game, this has nothing to do with our conclusion about the New Game. So by far, this option is Irrelevant.

(D) Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales.
Incorrect
The company did not assume that the sales would increase. And we are not mentioned anything about increase in sales in our argument. The only concern is that the New game failed. If anything the Company would have assumed the opposite -> Tech improvement would guarantee success

(E) The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have.
Incorrect
Again Irrelevant. We are more focused on the failure New game. Not interested in what role Advertisement played with the game.

I took close to 2 minutes to understand the STEM, but could have done better.

The argument can be summarized as follows:

A video game based on a popular movie character was successful with teenagers.
A company attempted to replicate this success with a similar game that had better technology, and a similar but unknown character.
The new game was a failure with teenagers.

It may be helpful to anticipate the argument’s conclusion – that movie character Sam Li was a crucial factor in the first game’s success – before proceeding to the question.

The question asks us for the statement that is unlikely to be true – that is, the statement that is an assumption that, if untrue, would support an explanation for the new game’s failure.

A. This statement directly contradicts the facts of the passage. Teenagers preferred the less technologically advanced game featuring Sam Li to the more technologically advanced game featuring an unknown character. Therefore, doubt regarding the statement in answer choice A supports an explanation for the failure of the new game. Answer choice A is correct.

B. This statement is supported by the facts of the passage. Incorrect.

C. This statement supports the implied conclusion of the passage that Sam Li was a more important factor than improved technology. Incorrect.

D. This statement is supported by the facts of the passage. Incorrect.

E. This statement supports the implied conclusion of the passage that Sam Li was a more important factor than improved technology. Incorrect.

The answer is A.

OE:

The argument can be summarized as follows:

A video game based on a popular movie character was successful with teenagers.
A company attempted to replicate this success with a similar game that had better technology, and a similar but unknown character.
The new game was a failure with teenagers.

It may be helpful to anticipate the argument’s conclusion – that movie character Sam Li was a crucial factor in the first game’s success – before proceeding to the question.

The question asks us for the statement that is unlikely to be true – that is, the statement that is an assumption that, if untrue, would support an explanation for the new game’s failure.

A. This statement directly contradicts the facts of the passage. Teenagers preferred the less technologically advanced game featuring Sam Li to the more technologically advanced game featuring an unknown character. Therefore, doubt regarding the statement in answer choice A supports an explanation for the failure of the new game. Answer choice A is correct.

B. This statement is supported by the facts of the passage. Incorrect.

C. This statement supports the implied conclusion of the passage that Sam Li was a more important factor than improved technology. Incorrect.

D. This statement is supported by the facts of the passage. Incorrect.

E. This statement supports the implied conclusion of the passage that Sam Li was a more important factor than improved technology. Incorrect.

The answer is A.

I'm not super clear on this question. Didn't both popular character and technical merit reflected in the firm's strategy? If this is the case ? How can they blame failure on one of them. I didn't see that they actually more focused on the character.