argument147--四月“无名”小组第25次作业

gryffinheartUID: 196303

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."

Merely based on the unfounded assumptions and dubious evidence, the arguer draw the conclusion that Whirlwind video game sales is about to increase in the next few months. Upon a recent survey indicating that players favor the games with the lifelike graphics which need highly advanced computers the argument maintain that the newly-introduced games along with an extensive advertising campaign can turn the trend of declining into the dramatically increasing. However, When closely examining the argument one can easily find its several crucial logical flaws.

To begin with, the arguer fail to justify the statistical validity of the survey conducted to aim the market. There is no information about the scale and methodology used in the survey thus the accuracy and credibility is quite questionable. If the number of the respondents are too small or the samples are not chosen randomly, the respondents can not therefore represent the overall video game players. Moreover, if the survey provide too limited options for the takers, the result may not reflect what those players really preferred.

In addition, the reasons for the declines during the past two months remain unclear. Given this circumstance, it is doubtful whether the new campaign will take effect. Perhaps it is the other factors that cause the lost of past such as the qualities of the products, failed control of the distribution lines, and poor management.  Besides the ability of the advertising agency may not be sufficient to accompany the challenging task, especially if it is the same agency that in charge of the former unsuccessful advertising. Unless ruling out these potential factors, the campaign may achieve nothing in the end.

Furthermore, even if the strategy works well, it can hardly guarantee that the sales will increase. The arguer fails to take the other competitors and the whole economic background of the video game industry into account. If the other video game company introduce their bestseller product or greatly reduce their games' price at the same time, the potential customer may be attracted to other choices. Or when the whole video game industry is at the bottom recently, all companies can hardly make tremendous profit. Either of the situation above will definitely lead to the failure of the campaign.

Finally, given all the assumptions that the argument rest, it is unlikely that Whirlwind can improve its sales in a couple of months. The new products need time to win the approve of video game fans and media. And the market is ever changing so the sales may fluctuate in the short period of time.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence and assumption the arguer provides fail to lend strong support to what arguer asserts. To strengthen it, the arguer should offer the convincing evidence to show that the new game will be popular among the video players. Moreover, in order to make the argument sound, the causal relationship between the success of the campaign and the increase of the profits.