Makes no sense either from an English language standpoint either. Even though it is multiple players.
You’re using the word wrong. It doesn’t matter if you describe one, or two players. That’s not how the word “multiplayer” is being used within the context of the discussion.
Multiplayer is used to describe the setting that the player is in. And yes, if players are interacting with other players, then even if you single out a single player, we still use the word multiplayer to describe the setting him or her is in because there isn’t just a single player and this isn’t a single player game.
Its like you ignored half the sentence I typed to fit your narrative.
Here, let me break it down for you.
I broke it up so that its easier for you to understand.
If I were to ask you “What do you call a Calf that is thrown into a pack of hungry wolves”, and you answer “Dinner time”, you would be right, even though “Dinner time” is describing the situation as a whole, and is not a description of the Calf.
What youre doing is dishonestly highlighting “What do you call a Calf” as if the rest of the sentence doesnt exist.
Yeah, maybe if you read what you called as “nonsense” you would have a better understanding as to why you are wrong.
Oh, whats that? I set up a scenario where we are talking about a user who is interacting with other players? And not just a single player that is doing nothing and is completely independant of everything else?
If the context of the discussion was simply about a single player, then you would be correct. But the discussion we were having, and the scenario that I brought up, was as follows:
The scenario was a player, with 20 other players logged in simultaneously. I originally made that argument to contrast with Natalies argument of how she considered it cheating for someone to log in 20 characters at the same time, showing how, if you cant differentiate between a player with 20 accounts or 20 players with 1 account each, its stupid to call it cheating in a game that doesnt consider it cheating for players to have as many accounts as they wish.
Maybe you should follow the discussion and the context instead of just looking at the most recent reply and deciding someone was wrong.
No, you and the person you replied to are both misusing the language. You call ‘a calf being thrown’ dinner time, not ‘a calf that is thrown’ dinner time - a calf is ‘dinner’, the scenario is ‘dinner time’. Word choice actually is relevant. Perpetuating @Natalie_Patrovita 's improper use doesn’t make your continued improper usage right, especially in the specific context of someone calling out Natalie for applying an environmental descriptor to a user and then you weirdly hopping to her defense.
No, and an easy demonstration here is combining the two. You could say “A calf that is being thrown” and it would mean the same thing.
If you want to specifically address the calf, and not the general situation, you would probably have to replace the word “A” with “The” to be more specific.
The difference would be, “What do you call X”, and “What do you call the specific X that is in this situation, as”. And while the first statement doesnt necessarily preclude the second, they are not the same thing and there is a difference between them.
And the way we figure out if we are speaking about the statement as a whole, or a specific word/actor/noun/whatever you choose to concentrate on, is for the person who made the statement, to clarify what he was talking about.
I was arguing against her for a different reason, then someone said something else that was wrong, so i replied. I am an equal opportunity debater.
And this is where it goes back to understanding the context of the discussion we were having.