-
agarwalva
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:56 pm
- Location: New york
- Thanked: 9 times
The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Video game rating system one of the contemporary topics is the crux of the argument. The author claimes that an idependent body will help improve the rating system of video games. Though the author's claim may well have merit, he presents a poorly reasoned argument. Based on several questionable premises and assumptions,lacking evidentiary support the argument is flawed and renders invalid
The primary issue with the argument lies in the unsubstantiated premises. The author cites that rating system of movie and video games are similar but ratings for video games arent working. The premises he puts forth is that the system is self resulated and has minimal fines. The author cites no evidence for these premises. The author draws parralel between movie rating system and video game rating systems without enlightining us whether movies are self regulated or controlled by an independent body. he gives no evidence of other similar systems which are regulated by independent body and are better then self regulated systems.
In additon , the author assumes that an independent body will be efficent in regulating rating system. He makes a leap by assuming that the independent body will not be baised. He cites no exmaple as to how levying heavy fines on the gaming comapnines will not be detrimental. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explications of links between independent regulation and improved rating system
We need evidentiary support as to how this idenpendent body will be more fruitful then self regulation. Today there are number of commerce products which have self regulation and are doing just fine. We need concrete examples as to how barring the companies for couple of years will be helpful and that the companies will not have a way around these penalities. Though there are several issues with the argument, he could strengthen his argument signigficantly by adding concrete examples and evidences
In Sum , the authors argument is flawed based on unsupported premises , unsubstantaited assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly wants to change his readers mind on the issue , he would have to largely restructure his argument , fix the flaws , provide evdentiary support and explicate his assumptions. Without these things , his poorly reasoned argument will likely to convince few people
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Video game rating system one of the contemporary topics is the crux of the argument. The author claimes that an idependent body will help improve the rating system of video games. Though the author's claim may well have merit, he presents a poorly reasoned argument. Based on several questionable premises and assumptions,lacking evidentiary support the argument is flawed and renders invalid
The primary issue with the argument lies in the unsubstantiated premises. The author cites that rating system of movie and video games are similar but ratings for video games arent working. The premises he puts forth is that the system is self resulated and has minimal fines. The author cites no evidence for these premises. The author draws parralel between movie rating system and video game rating systems without enlightining us whether movies are self regulated or controlled by an independent body. he gives no evidence of other similar systems which are regulated by independent body and are better then self regulated systems.
In additon , the author assumes that an independent body will be efficent in regulating rating system. He makes a leap by assuming that the independent body will not be baised. He cites no exmaple as to how levying heavy fines on the gaming comapnines will not be detrimental. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explications of links between independent regulation and improved rating system
We need evidentiary support as to how this idenpendent body will be more fruitful then self regulation. Today there are number of commerce products which have self regulation and are doing just fine. We need concrete examples as to how barring the companies for couple of years will be helpful and that the companies will not have a way around these penalities. Though there are several issues with the argument, he could strengthen his argument signigficantly by adding concrete examples and evidences
In Sum , the authors argument is flawed based on unsupported premises , unsubstantaited assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly wants to change his readers mind on the issue , he would have to largely restructure his argument , fix the flaws , provide evdentiary support and explicate his assumptions. Without these things , his poorly reasoned argument will likely to convince few people
