Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT141 S2 Q3 Explanation

Some video game makers

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Some video game makers have sold the movie rights for popular games. However, this move is rarely good from a business perspective. After all, StarQuanta sold the movie rights to its popular game Nostroma, but the poorly made film adaptation of the game was hated by critics Nostroma video game, although better than the original, sold poorly.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Conclusion

The author argues that video game makers selling movie rights is rarely a good idea.

Evidence

The entire case is built on one company — StarQuanta — and its experience with one game, Nostroma. The film bombed, the sequels sold poorly.

Evaluate

That's a single data point. To argue that something is "rarely good," you'd want to look at a bunch of cases and see how they generally turn out — not just point to one bad outcome.

It's like saying "Restaurant chains rarely succeed when they expand internationally" and then citing only one chain's failed expansion. Maybe that one chain blew it. Or maybe the next ten chains all succeeded. We can't tell from one case.

Goal

The right answer will say the argument is built on too small a sample — one case generalizing to a rule.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
3.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism in that

Answer choices

  1. Correct85% picked this

    draws a general conclusion on the basis of just one

    Why this is right

    This is the flaw. The conclusion is general — that selling movie rights is rarely a good business move — but the only evidence is one company's bad experience with one game. A single case can't establish what is "rarely" the case across an industry. That's the textbook leap from anecdote to general rule.

    Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  2. Bad Description3% picked this

    infers that a product will be disliked by the public merely from the claim that the product

    This says the argument leaps from "critics disliked it" to "the public disliked it." But the stimulus actually says the film "was hated by critics and the public alike" — it doesn't infer one from the other. So this answer mischaracterizes the structure.

  3. Circular Reasoning2% picked this

    restates as a conclusion a claim earlier presented as evidence for

    The premise (StarQuanta's bad outcome) and the conclusion (selling rights is rarely good) are different claims — one is about a single company, the other is a generalization about all game makers. The conclusion isn't snuck into a premise. The flaw is a small sample, not circularity.

  4. Bad Assumption6% picked this

    takes for granted that products with similar content that are in different media will be

    This says the argument assumes products with similar content in different media will have roughly equal popularity. But the argument doesn't need or use that assumption — it just notes that the film flopped and that game sequels sold poorly afterward. The argument's real flaw is sample size, not an assumption about cross-media popularity equivalence.

  5. Necessary vs. Sufficient3% picked this

    treats a requirement for a product to be popular as something that ensures that a

    This describes a "necessary treated as sufficient" flaw — but the argument isn't about what makes a product popular or what guarantees popularity. It's about whether selling movie rights is generally a good business move, supported by one anecdote. Wrong flaw category entirely.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free