Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Playing games together is a good way to build closer relationships.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. Be sure to use your own words. Do not use memorized examples.
As technology advanced, many children these days spend most of their time playing games with their friends. While some might say that this helps children to make new friends easily, it can lead to unexpected outcomes in some cases. The possible negative outcomes will be elaborated in more detail below.
First of all, while playing games could be a great ice breaker when making a new friend, it does not help in building a close relationship. In order for two individuals to become well-acknowledged with each other, heart-to-heart conversation and constant events of building each other's trust is needed. However, spending most of the time playing games would prevent such factors from happening. Because conversing with one another requires multiple abilities such as social and empathy skills, it could be perceived as a much harder process than simply playing gamees. This leads children to choosing playing games rather than getting to know their friends, ending up becoming simple game partners instead of a close friend.
Second, multiple studies have proven that games have several negative effects on children's social skills, inhibiting them from honing social abilities and leading to lack of confidence in making friends. For example, children who play violent games tend to be more aggressive to other individuals, hurting other classmates when they feel like they are being pressured to act in ways they do not wish to. This may cause other children to slowly avoid the aggressive child, leading him/her in lack of opportunities to improve social skills. As they grow, they would become less and less confident in making friends, making it harder for them to build a close relationship with other individuals.
Last but not least, children are unable to put a line between reality and fantasy because they are not fully developed in distinguishing rights and wrongs. For example, there was one happening in South Korea where a teenager killed one of his friends after playing a video game for half a day. After long hours of playing an RPG game where they constantly killed each other to expand their territories, they had gotten into a fight. After several quarrels, one teenager brought a knife from the kitchen and killed his friend due to uncontrollable aggressiveness and believing that his friend would resurrect after death because players in games usually do so. The murder had happened because he still thought that he was the fantasy world instead of reality. Eventually the teenager was arrested for murder, but he still thinks to this day that his friend would resurrect one day, not knowing that this happens only in the fantasy world.
To sum up, playing games could be a great way to break the ice between two individuals. However, because it has negative consequences, this should not be used to make close friends.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 601, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to play'.
Suggestion: to play
...gamees. This leads children to choosing playing games rather than getting to know their...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, second, so, still, well, while, for example, such as, first of all, in some cases, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 43.0788530466 95% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2383.0 1977.66487455 120% => OK
No of words: 468.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09188034188 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63619711151 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 212.727598566 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519230769231 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 704.7 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.51792114695 227% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.1427697172 48.9658058833 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.15 100.406767564 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4 20.6045352989 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1 5.45110844103 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.119481298065 0.236089414692 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0410391040915 0.076458572812 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0337021487261 0.0737576698707 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0800023811961 0.150856017488 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0392486689599 0.0645574589148 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 11.7677419355 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 58.1214874552 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.01818996416 98% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 86.8835125448 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.