Argument147 【CSMY作文互改小组】第一次作业求拍

DIDOROSEUID: 2183292

Argument147
The following appeared in an editorial in a business magazine.
"Although the sales of Whirlwind video games have declined over the past two years, a recent survey of video-game players suggests that this sales trend is about to be reversed. The survey asked video-game players what features they thought were most important in a video game. According to the survey, players prefer games that provide lifelike graphics, which require the most up-to-date computers. Whirlwind has just introduced several such games with an extensive advertising campaign directed at people 10 to 25 years old, the age-group most likely to play video games. It follows, then, that the sales of Whirlwind video games are likely to increase dramatically in the next few months."

1, SURVEY
2, 喜欢游戏和买游戏是两回事,不能等同

This author of the editorial concludes that the sales of Whirlwind video game would soon increase. However, the evidences he provided to support the conclusion contains two facets that are questionable. First, the generalizability of the survey is open to question. Second, the author provides no sufficient evidence to support that players are tend to buy Whirlwind video games. I will discuss each of these facets in turn.

First of all, we should consider the reliability of the survey by knowing how the survey was conducted. For example, how many people responded? Were the responders limited to a certain range of age? Was the survey limited in a certain geographic region? Without clear details it is entirely possible that the survey results is unreliable and lack of generalizability. Even if the results of the survey are reliable, its contribution to the conclusion is invalid. For the video games introduced by Whirlwind is targeted at people 10 to 25 years old, but we do not know how many the responders of the survey are those particularly people. Lacking that information, it is highly possible that few of those people would prefer the games that provide lifelike graphics.

Second, the author unfairly assumes people 10 to 25 years old are the potential buyers of Whirlwind video games. The ones who most likely to play video games do not necessarily in turn be likely to buy video games. Perhaps they can not afford to buy one, which is entirely possible for people 10 to 25 years old. Even if they can afford to buy video games, whether they would buy Whirlwind video games are open to question. The simple reason that the games being targeted at people 10 to 25 years old does not mean that it would appeal to them. Probably there are many such kind of games existed in the market now, which might be more attractive than Whirlwind’. If it is the case, no matter how attractive the promotion would be, Whirlwind surly would lose the game. Even if Whirlwind video games are well-designed and attractive compare to other video games, people still would choose to ignore it in the market. For reason that as is mentioned in the editorial, the newly launched games require the most up-to-date computers which might limited to a small number of players. As a result, the majority of players can not run it in their computers. Without role out this possibility, the author can not convince me in this point.

To sum up, the conclusion is unconvincing as it stands. To make it more persuasive, the author should consider the generalizability of the survey, and provide more evidence that people 10 to 25 years old would likely to buy Whirlwind video games. To better evaluate the argument, we need more information regarding the quality of the games produced by Whirlwind.

应该有很多需要修改的地方,这是我第一篇ARGU,希望大家指教
有贴必应!!

thetherUID: 2271890

This author of the editorial concludes that the sales of Whirlwind video game would soon increase. However, the evidences he provided to support the conclusion contains two facets that are questionable. First, the generalizability (普遍性？一般性？好像没这个词我查了金山2006，牛津第四版.换成Generality)of the survey is open to question. Second, the author provides no sufficient evidence to support that players are tend to buy Whirlwind video games. I will discuss each of these facets in turn.（我认为很好的开头，最起码知道你要写一些什么下面）
First of all, we should consider the reliability of the survey by knowing how the survey was conducted. For example, how many people responded? Were the responders limited to a certain range of age? Was the survey limited in a certain geographic region? Without clear details it is entirely possible that the survey results is unreliable and lack of generalizability. Even if the results of the survey are reliable, its contribution to the conclusion is invalid. For the video games introduced by Whirlwind is targeted at people 10 to 25 years old, but we do not know how many the responders of the survey are those particularly people. Lacking that information, it is highly possible that few of those people would prefer the games that provide lifelike graphics.（看到its contribution to the conclusion is invalid这里，我很想知道你的原因是什么，但是你确用了软弱无力的for，我认为是because ,without the information that how many responders engaged in the survey, it is highly possible that few people would prefer the games that provide lifelike graphics，欢迎讨论）
Second（听老师说序数开头+ly好一些，随你了）, the author unfairly assumes （正是文体中把that加上更好，口语中可以省略）people 10 to 25 years old are the potential buyers of Whirlwind video games. The ones who most likely to play video games do not necessarily in turn be likely to buy video games(别扭be，video games－some). Perhaps they can not afford to buy one, which is entirely possible（知道了possible 程度很弱不如换成probable） for people 10 to 25 years old. Even if they can afford to buy video games, whether they would buy Whirlwind video games are open to question（也说，用高级点的词吧，questionable－dubious－doubtfull）. The simple reason that the games being targeted at people 10 to 25 years old does not mean that it would appeal to them. Probably there are many such kind of games existed in the market now, which might be more attractive than Whirlwind’. If it is the case, no matter how attractive the promotion would be, Whirlwind surly would lose the game. Even if Whirlwind video games are well-designed and attractive compare to other video games, people still would choose to ignore it in the market. For reason (小失误变成小写去掉句号)that as is mentioned in the editorial, the newly launched games require the most up-to-date computers which might limited to a small number of players. As a result, the majority of players can not run it in their computers. Without role out this possibility（这句话真好）, the author can not convince me in this point.
To sum up, the conclusion is unconvincing as it stands. To make it more persuasive, the author should consider the generalizability of the survey, and provide more evidence that people 10 to 25 years old would likely to buy Whirlwind video games. To better evaluate the argument, we need more information regarding the quality of the games produced by Whirlwind.
文章内容和结构不讨论了，我也说不好还没到那层次，只是挑上几个刺儿，还不知道对不，相互学习吧！！

DIDOROSEUID: 2183292

This author of the editorial concludes that the sales of Whirlwind video game would soon increase. However, the evidences he provided to support the conclusion contains two facets that are questionable. First, the generalizability (我也是在范文看到的觉得比较简单表达了调查能不能代表大众意思的含义)of the survey is open to question. Second, the author provides no sufficient evidence to support that players are tend to buy Whirlwind video games. I will discuss each of these facets in turn.（也是范文里的，觉得比较适合自己）
First of all, we should consider the reliability of the survey by knowing how the survey was conducted. For example, how many people responded? Were the responders limited to a certain range of age? Was the survey limited in a certain geographic region? Without clear details it is entirely possible that the survey results is unreliable and lack of generalizability. Even if the results of the survey are reliable, its contribution to the conclusion is invalid. Because the video games introduced by Whirlwind is targeted at people 10 to 25 years old, but we do not know how many the responders of the survey are those particularly people. Lacking that information, it is highly possible that few of those people would prefer the games that provide lifelike graphics.（好的我会少用FOR）
Secondly（我也喜欢加LY的）, the author unfairly assumes that people 10 to 25 years old are the potential buyers of Whirlwind video games. The ones who most likely to play video games do not necessarily in turn be likely to buy video games(别扭be，video games－some). Perhaps they can not afford to buy one, which is entirely possible（就是弱所以加上了ENTIRELY） for people 10 to 25 years old. Even if they can afford to buy video games, whether they would buy Whirlwind video games are doubtful（谢谢！我词汇很需要加强questionable－dubious－doubtfull）. The simple reason that the games being targeted at people 10 to 25 years old does not mean that it would appeal to them. Probably there are many such kind of games existed in the market now, which might be more attractive than Whirlwind’. If it is the case, no matter how attractive the promotion would be, Whirlwind surly would lose the game. Even if Whirlwind video games are well-designed and attractive compare to other video games, people still would choose to ignore it in the market. For reason (小失误变成小写去掉句号)that as is mentioned in the editorial, the newly launched games require the most up-to-date computers which might limited to a small number of players. As a result, the majority of players can not run it in their computers. Without role out this possibility, the author can not convince me in this point.
To sum up, the conclusion is unconvincing as it stands. To make it more persuasive, the author should consider the generalizability of the survey, and provide more evidence that people 10 to 25 years old would likely to buy Whirlwind video games. To better evaluate the argument, we need more information regarding the quality of the games produced by Whirlwind.
谢谢TT，继续互勉了