GMAT Essays (AWA)

Rating system in video game industry has become a hot topic for discussion. Adults, including parents, vehemently voice their opinion that the current system is flawed does little or nothing to accurately rate the video games. Recent studies have suggested that many parents seem to think that the video games that they purchase for their children have more violence and are more graphic for kids to watch them. In the preceding statement, the author claims that having an independent body to oversee the gaming industry and companies which violate the system would help make the rating system better. The author also goes on to say that stopping the company from releasing a game for the next two years would prohibit the companies from violating the regulatory system. Though the author may have some merit, he or she presents the reader with poorly constructed argument with questionable premises. The conclusion is also flawed and the author makes assumptions which are not convincing, thus weakening the argument.

The primary reason is that the author states that independent bodies would provide accurate rating. Most of these bodies rely on advertising revenues to support themselves which tend to make them biased towards certain companies. The author does not explicate who these independent bodies would be. If these third party companies consist of representatives from the gaming companies, then the ratings would surely tend to favor the companies themselves. Though establishing a regulatory committee to oversee the ratings is a good idea, the author should present with more evidence as to how the committee be represented.

The author makes several questionable assumptions and builds his argument based on those. The secondary reason is that he or she assumes that prohibiting the video game manufacturing companies for two years to release another game will stop the companies from violating the rating standards. But many of the companies might license the games to other companies and still be able to substantially make profit from the sales. And if true, this would substantially weaken the author's conclusion.

Though the author presents a weak argument based on flawed premises and assumptions, there is certainly merit to some of the ideas he or she presents. For example, the independent body that oversees the rating system should not have any vested interests in the gaming industry which could be a potential conflict of interests. There should be considerable increase in the fines that could damage a company's reputation to an extent that would significantly reduce the overall profits. Not only the company which violates the standards be prohibited from making or releasing another game, but all the licenses of that game should be confiscated.

In sum, the author brings an argument that really gets the attention of many with his argument. But since he provides a conclusion which is based on weak premises and assumptions, it falls apart. Making some changes and strengthening his premises will get more support for the conclusion.