Agument147 Hamming小组冲刺篇 第一次真实模拟,不算成功也不算很失败,嘎嘎!

ScorpionSkyUID: 2273954

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 317          TIME: 上午 12:30:00          DATE: 2007-1-22

The argument seems logic at first glance, but close examination (security scrutiny) reveals that it suffers from several vital flaws which rendered it unconvincing. The arguer concluded that Whirlwind video games' sales will be noted increase in the following months, because a survey indicated that video-game players inclined to favorite games which have vivid graphics and the highest up-to-date computers. He also mentioned an advertising campaign upon the youth, in the age of 10-25 years old. But he indeed ignored other alternatives and misunderstood his real situation.

The survey is not sound to be an evidence that enough to pleasure the Whirlwind managers. More often than not, game players inclined to (prefer to) say (express) that they love games, which provide lifelike graphics and require the most up-to-date computers, because nearly all people (every person), even if the one who merely played several times computer games, will know the benefits of vivid image and well-equipment computers. Whereas, this simple matter does not indicate that most those people will become the consumers of Whirlwind. It is entirely possible that they just answered with polite (for good manners).

In addition, that advertising campaign directed at the people 10 to 25 years old is also unconvincing. Admittedly, we could not deny the fact that, those young people actually love computer game very well, but the arguer fails to consider other situation. In common sense, those youth usually have little money of themselves, and their parents not very likely to support them for playing games. Therefore, they also could not become the most part of consumers of Whirlwind.

Finally, the arguer severely without consider the other game companies, which might introduced those video games the same as Whirlwind. Perhaps certain competitors have more advantages to Whirlwind. For instance, they have advanced technologies and lower prices. Or perhaps, they already have taken the beneficial positions in that they were the victors in the competitions with Whirlwind in the past two years. If the arguer insist in that Whirlwind has overwhelmed these emulants, he had better to provide more concrete evidence for illustration. Otherwise, Whirlwind still needs to pay their no effort on improvement in order to hold a larger portion of video game markets.

In sum, the argument seems well-presented, but not well-reasoning. To strength its conclusion, the arguer needs to provide more evidence to illustrate those potential consumers really focus on the youth and those people who expressed prefer games along with lively pictures and the advanced computers. The arguer also needs to consider other companies' information in order to make clear that Whirlwind's concrete situation in markets.  

ScorpionSkyUID: 2273954

The argument seems reasonable at first glance, but careful examination will find that there are several places are logical flawed. The arguer seems falsely to believe that the games plays' expression will eventually lead them to become the consumers of Whirlwind. The arguer also believes that the 10-25 age-group is the most potential consumers of their new games. However, he or she has severely ignored other significant factors and the other concrete market conditions, such as other video games competitors.

To begin with, the survey above is not a sound evidence to pleasure the Whirlwind managers. Consider, maybe a few years ago, a similar survey optionally upon a group of video game plays would produce the same result as the survey above. More often than not, game plays are inclined to express their expectations that computer games had best to provide the lifelike graphics and require the most up-to-date computers, because almost everyone, even if the one who only played computer games several times, will know that the better vivid image and well-equipment computers the more exciting they bringing. Therefore, this survey does not indicate that most those plays will become the consumers of Whirlwind.

In addition, the advertising campaign directed at the 10-25 age-group is also not convincing. Admittedly, we can not deny the fact that most young people usually love computer games, yet the arguer fails to consider other factors. First, one would to wonder that whether the survey above is established upon the 10-25 age-group. If not so, there is no reason to believe that the young people will be the most potential consumers, and the advertisement should to adjust its direction. Second, even if the responders are those young people, their economic conditions may not allow them to purchase expensive high-ranking computer, there is also no reason to show that their parents will support them to play games. Consequently, a more survey about the 10-25 age-group purchasing power is a better way for the arguer to make clear his advertisement direction.

Finally, the arguer obviously considers without the other competitors, which might have introduced the same video games as Whirlwind. Perhaps certain competitors have more advantages to Whirlwind, such as advanced service and lower prices. Or perhaps, they have already held the favorable market positions since they were the victors in the competitions with Whirlwind in the last two years. Thereby, Whirlwind still needs to spare their no effort on improvement in order to hold a larger portion of video game markets.

In sum, the argument is not well reasoning as it stands. To strengthen its conclusion, the arguer needs to provide more evidence to illustrate those potential consumers really focus on the youth and those people in the survey. The arguer also needs to consider other competitors in order to make clear that Whirlwind's concrete position in its market.