BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Gaming Company

Expert replies
by GmatKiss » Sun May 06, 2012 2:32 am
The Action-Packed Gaming Company, based on the success of the previous season's video game featuring the character Sam Li, of the popular Fist of Awe series of martial arts movies, developed for the current season a similar martial arts game featuring a new character who is also a martial arts master. The new game had improved 3-D graphics, enhanced multiplayer capability, and dozens of new martial arts moves developed by real-life masters. However, marketing surveys showed that teenagers were uninterested in this new game, and the game sold very poorly.

The passage implies that an explanation for the failure of the new game is based on doubt regarding which of the following assumptions?

Teenagers make purchasing decisions based on the technological merits of video games, not the name recognition of the games' main characters.

Buyers of video games prefer to purchase games based on popular movies.

The Fist of Awe series of movies was extremely popular with teenagers who regularly purchase video games.

Technological improvement from one video game to the next does not guarantee a corresponding increase in sales.

The successful video game may have benefited from advertising associated with the Fist of Awe movies, a benefit the failed video game did not have.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by confuse mind » Sun May 06, 2012 4:22 am
My opinion - A
Join the discussion

by Birottam Dutta » Sun May 06, 2012 10:39 am
The correct answer will be the one which makes a questionable assumption that since the new game is better, it should sell more. this assumption is made in the statement A.

So, A is the correct choice. All others are inappropriate.
Join the discussion

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Sun May 06, 2012 1:16 pm
Here's what I had to say in another thread on this question:
The stimulus is actually about the game that followed Sam Li's game. This new game also had a martial arts master, but we don't know if the new character is from a movie franchise or not.

The question stem is awkward, but I believe it's asking for an assumption in the original argument that would be challenged by an explanation of the game's failure. The explanation is not given, so we are trying to identify something around which we could build our own explanation. To me, the stimulus points out the reasons why the new game should have been successful, but the marketing surveys show that it was not.

Choice A works because technological merits are given as the main benefits of the new game. The company assumes that the advancements are enough to sell the new game because that's what teenagers want. if that's not true, then the failure makes sense.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Join the discussion

by ihatemaths » Mon May 07, 2012 4:41 am
the question stem confuses me .
Are they asking us to find a point on which the "Game developers might have gone wrong , so the product or the game failed" ? I totally lost my way in the answers
Join the discussion

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Mon May 07, 2012 7:57 am
is OA E??
Join the discussion