Argument147【METTLE小组】第2次作业

supernihuiUID: 2329313

     In this argument, the arguer recommends that the sales of Whirlwind video games will increase dramatically due to video-game players’ interests in lifelike graphics games. This recommendation is based on the fact that people around 10 to 25 years old are mostly likely to play video games. Meanwhile, to further justify this claim, the arguer points out that the players in the survey are willing to play those games lifelike graphics. Furthermore, this company has the superior technology which the games most needed. At first glance, this argument seems very specific and convincing. A careful examination of it, however, would reveal how groundless it is.
     
     In the first place, the argument is based on the gratuitous assumption that people around 10 to 25 are most likely to play video games. There is no accurate fact or warrant to reach this unconvincing conclusion. Maybe 10-25 years old players couldn't afford as they are most likely to be students. The advertisement targets people aged varied from 10 to 25 while the survey is not.
     
     In the second place, it's a bit ridiculous that they will buy the video games for they consider lifelike graphics as most important. As we know, a game contains varies of characteristics including excitement, theme, scenario and so on. If the game is deficient of ideas, no matter how excellent it's up-to-date technique, it will not sell well. And the arguer even fails to substantiate to tell us the crucial assumption that what skill the WC Company has. If this company is excellent in exploiting games full of scenarios which seemed contradicted with what the players request for, then the sales cannot transcended.  The mere fact that the WC has the skill maybe fit for the need of 10-25 for lifelike graphic games is insufficient evidence to make a conclusion that the sales of WC Company will increase dramatically.
     
     To sum up, the argument is not well reasoning and lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lead to strong support to what the argument maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to prove the games WC company manufacture will satisfy the most eagerly to play lifelike graphics games meets. Additionally, it would be essential for the arguer to make an effective and representative survey to support this argument.



[ 本帖最后由 supernihui 于 2007-6-9 16:16 编辑 ]

holacolaUID: 2313791

In this argument, the arguer recommends that the sales of Whirlwind video games will increase dramatically due to video-game players’ interests in lifelike graphics games. This recommendation is based on the fact that people around 10 to 25 years old are mostly likely to play video games. Meanwhile, to further justify this claim, the arguer points out that the players in the survey are willing to play those games lifelike graphics. Furthermore, this company has the superior technology which the games most needed. At first glance, this argument seems very specific and convincing. A careful examination of it, however, would reveal how groundless it is.          In the first place, the argument is based on the gratuitous assumption that people around 10 to 25 are most likely to play video games.【好句子】 There is no accurate fact or warrant to reach this unconvincing conclusion. Maybe 10-25 years old players couldn't afford as they are most likely to be students. The advertisement targets people aged varied from 10 to 25 while the survey is not.          In the second place, it's a bit ridiculous that they will buy the video games for they consider lifelike graphics as most important. As we know, a game contains varies of characteristics including excitement, theme, scenario and so on.【好句子】 If the game is deficient of ideas, no matter how excellent it's up-to-date technique, it will not sell well. And the arguer even fails to substantiate to tell us the crucial assumption that what skill the WC Company has. If this company is excellent in exploiting games full of scenarios which seemed contradicted with what the players request for, then the sales cannot transcended.  The mere fact that the WC has the skill maybe fit for the need of 10-25 for lifelike graphic games is insufficient evidence to make a conclusion that the sales of WC Company will increase dramatically.          To sum up, the argument is not well reasoning and lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lead to strong support to what the argument maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to prove the games WC company manufacture will satisfy the most eagerly to play lifelike graphics games meets. Additionally, it would be essential for the arguer to make an effective and representative survey to support this argument.


总体的感觉是，我猜，是不是写完了issue放松了？
明显的有松懈，弱点有点心意，但是攻击不太够。;d: