Professor Bolaski
English 100
November 18, 2013
Why Do We Let Video Games Break Our Spirits?
2. An objective claim that the author states is that we let these games fool around with our brain into thinking that we can not beat it. He says that we need to keep calm and just have fun with these games and not get frustrated by the harder levels. He states the game is supposed to be hard because that's what makes it more interesting to play.
3. The people who play the games will make these objections because they have control of their brain. All they have to do is not get to frustrated with it and just have fun. Don't let these difficult video games stress you out and make you feel worthless or not good enough.
4. The rebuttal to this argument is video games are not bad and they are just doing their job. The video games are not at fault. It is all a mental thing, people are letting these games take control of them.
2 comments:
Michael,
You write, "He just showed what video games can do to your brain". How does he implicitly make this claim? Great spot for a concrete example.
You also write, "An objective claim that the author states is that we let these games fool around with our brain into thinking that we can not beat it." How/why is this objective, rather than the author's SUBJECTIVE claim? Are you using the word "objective" because the author uses outside sources? Opinion pieces by nature are and are meant to be subjective.
You use the term "these objections" but don't really clarify what the objections are or how the writer voices them in the piece. Are these objections addressed explicitly?
Lastly, you write, "The rebuttal to this argument is video games are not bad and they are just doing their job" . . . but "not bad" is very general, and I doubt the author phrased rebuttals in this way.
Having read the entire response, I'm going to hazard a guess that you are offering objections and rebuttals that you thought up in response. This all seems too general and vague to have come from the article itself. Clarify if you can: you were to identify a claim, objections, concessions, and rebuttals that the author offers (and again, I'm suggesting that these didn't come from the article itself but are your own responses). I hope this makes sense.
***Be sure to link anything you're referencing/responding to.
***I read the article and found several explicit elements:
Concession: "Even so, I spent the rest of the night dreaming about moving soldiers into cover and sniping grey-headed aliens. This morning I was even thinking about how I could change my tactics when I make another run at Impossible Ironman again tonight." (Here, he admits he still wants to play even as he "was ready to throw [his] keyboard at the wall).
Here's a concession: "Most modern games are balanced to deliver a nice reward after a little bit of effort" . . . and the rebuttal:
" However, some games strike a different balance, offering up insane challenges in order to deliver a greater sense of achievement when we overcome them."
Having read through and easily identified explicit examples, I think you misunderstood the understood the assignment.
Post a Comment