Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
15 Sep 2023, 10:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:
"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."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
Answer:
The argument claims that the rating system for the content in electronic games is superficially similar to that of movies. However, this system is self-regulated and is not working as fines for violating the rating system are nominal. Further, it claims that setting up an independent body will resolve this issue, but it fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated.
First, the argument readily assumes that this independent body will be unbiased when it comes to providing ratings for games. In case it turns out to be biased and favours a particular set or an individual electronic games company, then it may not lead to fair play in the market as some games might be rated inappropriately and hence fail to reach the intended audience. For example, a game primarily targeted towards early teens may be labelled as ‘18+’, due to internal bias of the relevant body, and hence fail to garner sales from the particular age group. Hence, the argument needs to mention details to ensure how the independent body will be acting in an unbiased way.
Furthermore, it may be practically difficult to consider what content is regarded as mature across different regions. To illustrate this let’s say that any media with some bloodshed is legally regarded as ‘13+’ in America. Although people with a minimum age of 13 can watch it, it may not be considered appropriate in India, where content with bloodshed is regarded as ‘18+’. This can lead to regional controversies and the argument provides no details to resolve the same.
Finally, by stating that the rating system of games is similar to that of movies, the argument (to some extent) considers that movies are similar to games. Movies are relatively a more passive medium of art, and watching violence in movies may not have the same impact on a person as playing a video game, where they need to be proactive while committing (albeit fictional) acts of violence. Hence, video games might need a stricter rating standard.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed as without apt details it states that setting up an independent body to rate video games and imposing stricter punishments on game developers will solve the issue of them getting away with inappropriate content rating for video games.
"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."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
Answer:
The argument claims that the rating system for the content in electronic games is superficially similar to that of movies. However, this system is self-regulated and is not working as fines for violating the rating system are nominal. Further, it claims that setting up an independent body will resolve this issue, but it fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated.
First, the argument readily assumes that this independent body will be unbiased when it comes to providing ratings for games. In case it turns out to be biased and favours a particular set or an individual electronic games company, then it may not lead to fair play in the market as some games might be rated inappropriately and hence fail to reach the intended audience. For example, a game primarily targeted towards early teens may be labelled as ‘18+’, due to internal bias of the relevant body, and hence fail to garner sales from the particular age group. Hence, the argument needs to mention details to ensure how the independent body will be acting in an unbiased way.
Furthermore, it may be practically difficult to consider what content is regarded as mature across different regions. To illustrate this let’s say that any media with some bloodshed is legally regarded as ‘13+’ in America. Although people with a minimum age of 13 can watch it, it may not be considered appropriate in India, where content with bloodshed is regarded as ‘18+’. This can lead to regional controversies and the argument provides no details to resolve the same.
Finally, by stating that the rating system of games is similar to that of movies, the argument (to some extent) considers that movies are similar to games. Movies are relatively a more passive medium of art, and watching violence in movies may not have the same impact on a person as playing a video game, where they need to be proactive while committing (albeit fictional) acts of violence. Hence, video games might need a stricter rating standard.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed as without apt details it states that setting up an independent body to rate video games and imposing stricter punishments on game developers will solve the issue of them getting away with inappropriate content rating for video games.
16 Sep 2023, 12:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity: 4.5/6
The essay demonstrates a reasonable level of coherence and connectivity. It presents a clear structure with well-defined paragraphs that follow a logical progression of ideas. Transitions between points are generally smooth, but there is room for improvement in connecting ideas more explicitly.
Word Structure: 5/6
The word structure in the essay is strong, with well-constructed sentences and a good range of vocabulary. There are some minor issues with sentence structure and word choice that could be refined for greater clarity and precision.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5/6
The essay's paragraphs are generally well-structured, with clear topic sentences and supporting details. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument and maintains a coherent focus. However, there is a slight inconsistency in paragraph length that could be improved for better balance.
Language and Grammar: 4.5/6
The language and grammar are generally sound, but there are a few grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that affect the essay's overall clarity. Some sentences are overly complex and could be simplified for better readability.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5/6
The essay exhibits a good range of vocabulary and word expression. It effectively conveys the author's ideas and maintains a formal tone. However, there is room for improvement in using more varied and precise vocabulary to enhance the essay's overall quality.
Overall, the essay provides a well-structured analysis of the argument's flaws and assumptions. With some minor improvements in coherence, language, and grammar, it could become an even stronger piece of analytical writing.
Coherence and Connectivity: 4.5/6
The essay demonstrates a reasonable level of coherence and connectivity. It presents a clear structure with well-defined paragraphs that follow a logical progression of ideas. Transitions between points are generally smooth, but there is room for improvement in connecting ideas more explicitly.
Word Structure: 5/6
The word structure in the essay is strong, with well-constructed sentences and a good range of vocabulary. There are some minor issues with sentence structure and word choice that could be refined for greater clarity and precision.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5/6
The essay's paragraphs are generally well-structured, with clear topic sentences and supporting details. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument and maintains a coherent focus. However, there is a slight inconsistency in paragraph length that could be improved for better balance.
Language and Grammar: 4.5/6
The language and grammar are generally sound, but there are a few grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that affect the essay's overall clarity. Some sentences are overly complex and could be simplified for better readability.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5/6
The essay exhibits a good range of vocabulary and word expression. It effectively conveys the author's ideas and maintains a formal tone. However, there is room for improvement in using more varied and precise vocabulary to enhance the essay's overall quality.
Overall, the essay provides a well-structured analysis of the argument's flaws and assumptions. With some minor improvements in coherence, language, and grammar, it could become an even stronger piece of analytical writing.
aapatre
