LSAT 148 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: In the earliest video games, the player typically…

QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption

CONCLUSION: New games are often less compelling because of their technical sophistication.

REASONING: It is hard for players to identify with characters they control in modern games.

ANALYSIS: On sufficient assumption questions, you have to connect the evidence to the conclusion. You “fill the gap” between premises and reasoning.

Often, on complicated questions, diagrams are useful to fill the gap. But I don’t feel they’re useful here. This question isn’t complicated, it’s just long.

The conclusion says modern games are less compelling. But none of the evidence says what makes a game compelling. All we know about games is the statement the evidence leads to: it is harder to identify with characters in modern games.

So you have to fill the gap with this premise:

Hard to identify ➞ less compelling

___________

1. The evidence says that in new games you often control a detailed figure. The conclusion is only referring to these games.
   So it doesn’t matter whether there are still some games with less sophisticated characters. This answer has zero impact on the argument.
2. This weakens the argument. We’re trying to show that older games were more compelling than newer games. (i.e. newer games are less compelling)
3. All this really says is “there are other factors in making a game compelling apart from technical sophistication”. That doesn’t help show that technical sophistication makes games less compelling.
4. CORRECT. We know that modern, technically sophisticated characters are difficult to identify with. This answer proves that games are therefore less compelling. 
5. This reverses the right answer. This tells us what happens if we already know a game is less compelling. But that’s what we’re trying to prove!