Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31981697-20170722123329/@comment-32182236-20171025125407

Actually, we don't know that. The announcer only said there was a video, nothing about the video being the actual award. Besides, take another look at the credits. The team that worked on this video was HUGE. (Either that or the credits are a lie, and the video's not a reliable source.)

I'm actually here to argue it WASN'T, and this was no fact. Even things that seem obvious can be wrong, such as classical mechanics. (Yes, it's wrong-Objects CAN be in two places at the same time, as long as they are not observed. Quantum Mechanics gets rid of very basic assumptions that seem obvious.)

Toby did NOT make a fully playable, standalone game. If we take out everything Toby didn't do, Undertale wouldn't be a full game. Therefore, Toby did not make a full game. It's just like with the Halloween Hack-Techically, it can be considered a game of its own, but ONLY take what Toby did, and it's not a game-All you have is music and maps-No characters (Those were in Earthbound), no battle system (Also in Earthbound), ect...

Let me say it again, saying "he made a whole game" implies that this "someone" made some whole game.

And I argue he DID NOT (Only if the game in question is Undertale. I'm aware of the loophole that the dog simply made a game other than Undertale, the narrator wasn't specific after all: this loophole is actually my argument.) He only made a fraction of a game. If we take away everything Toby didn't program, we no longer have a game. Therefore, Toby did not make a WHOLE game. What he did make was a fraction of a game, that two other programmers added on more fractions, that when combined, make a whole. But Toby did not make a whole.

And that's what "a" means-We don't know which game. "Indefinite" means "not specific"-We're not specific about the game. Same thing if it's new and we're just hearing of it for the first time, which is the case here. The same can also be said when we're first describing the kind of said object. "That was a great movie." "A" fits here too, we learn the dog made a FULL game, and not just part of a game. The dog didn't make a fraction of a game, he didn't make 90% of a game, he made 100% of a game:A full-fledged game.

"The" is what we call a "definite" article, which means "specific":It's used when we're talking about something which is already known. We're not, hence the use of "a". "A" is indeed correct here. Here's my source: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/540/01/

"The narrator doesn't know what game it is, and so he uses the word "a"."

Correct.

"Well, why isn't this the reason? It's almost as if the narrator is surprised."

Of COURSE the narrator seems surprised, what are the odds of accidentally creating a WHOLE game? The whole was used to specify it was a WHOLE game, not a fraction of it, like the Halloween Hack, a demo, or only making HALF of the game and letting his fellow programmers do the other half.

"The only two pieces of information that this line is giving us is that we don't know what this game is, but we know . It doesn't say whether he did it alone, or if he had any help, it simply just doesn't mention that."

To the first sentence, that is correct. To the second sentence, if he only made part of it, we can't say that HE made it-We need to stop pretending he designed the full game. (Yes, I used "the" here, because we both know I'm talking about Undertale here.) 90% of a game is not a whole game. Toby made part of a game. The dog made a whole game by accident. The dog making a full game is a direct piece of information we can get from, well.. That he made a full game. If he made a whole game, then he made a whole game. There's a reason why we say that Nintendo makes games and not that Shigeru Miyamoto makes games. He makes PARTS of games. (We do say he created Mario, but we mean the character, not the games, and that part is true-He did design the character himself.)

Let's end this post (not necessarily conversation), with an analogy. Let's say we're given a quantity, but not directly-We're told it's a double-digit integer. Well, now we know, just from that, that the number is somewhere from 10-99. We're not told directly this, but it's something we can logically deduce, those are the only double-digit integers-So a number like, say, 173 wouldn't fit the information we're given. Same thing here-We can deduce the dog made a game all by himself, because otherwise, he'd have only made part of a game, it doesn't fit the information we're given.