Talk:Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs

Contested deletion

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is a page for accurate information about an upcoming sequel to "Amnesia: The Dark Descent," which is an award winning title that already has a an established Wikipedia page. To delete this on the grounds of not being "important" is ridiculous. — 198.51.243.3 (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because <replace these words with your reason>. — 128.143.47.231 (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because the content on the page is relevant and correct, and will become more and more substantial as details of the game are slowly released during the development period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.219.132 (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because the game just recently got released from only a few sources all true though, but just give it some time and it will be sited correctly, blah blah blah Just dont delete it alright. — 131.156.226.227 (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it's the sequel to an award winning game by a well established company? Seriously, who's dumb idea was this?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.11.3.243 (talk) 01:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because the game is real and important but not realeased i think it should be kept as a page because of this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.253.12.84 (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is an article over a new game. Not a single person or anything or animal. — 192.173.37.124 (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is informing and factual, which any wiki article should be, and is a valid source of information for followers of the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.94.156 (talk) 07:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow

All these IPs are jumping out the woodworks to protect this article. Surely they aren't sockpuppets or meatpuppets..... Dennis Brown (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

AfD

I'm impressed. Meatpuppeting on a global scale. Well, I removed the speedy delete tag and sent it to AfD so the entire Wikipedia community can discuss it. Dennis Brown (talk) 01:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Closeted pleasure

Unless there's a reference for the assertion that the main character masturbates in the closet, this should probably be reverted to the last edit. Not being a wikipedian, I'm not sure how to do this, but if someone else would...? 50.68.44.163 (talk) 06:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done - some months ago. - M0rphzone (talk) 08:35, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 May 2013

Please, change release date to "Q3/Q4 of 2013", it's even written in the article below, that Frictional games won't make it in Q2 2013, not even on 1st June, as it is written in the article. 4everMan (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Nothing else needs to be changed at the moment. The latest official word, as referenced in the main article, was from Jens of Frictional Games, as follows: "We know we will not make Q2 (2013), we also know when the game will be ready for launch. We have not set the exact day yet. You can however make good use of the weather outside this summer and look forward to gaming with the piggies as the summer comes to an end.". So given the last few words it looks like an August release at the earliest. There is no official mention of Q4.--Gaunt (talk) 15:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Release date

The current official release date/period is Q2 2013 as stated by Frictional Games on their own web site: http://www.frictionalgames.com/site/node/126 ; will those who insist on trying to change this to 31st May, 3rd June, etc please cease and desist UNLESS you can provide a valid, official reference supporting your stated date which either appears on Frictional Games' official web site or thechineseroom's official web site and as cited by a staff member of Frictional Games or thechineseroom. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaunt (talk • contribs) 14:00, 27 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Today Jens Nilsson, co-director of Frictional Games, posted a message on the Frictional Games forum stating that the game will likely not see the light of day until the end of the summer:

http://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/thread-21385-post-234672.html#pid234672

I'm not sure if that means Q3 or Q4, but he specifically says the game won't be released in Q2. PCLM (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer to that post from Jens, useful to see an update from him - as a result of this I've now updated the release date to '2013' (that at least seems certain!) and have updated the production info section with a quote from Jens that the game will not be released Q2 2013 after all.--Gaunt (talk) 18:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Cheers Gaunt. I also wanted to mention that there's a sticky thread on the Frictional Games forum which may be of use to those maintaining this article. It's got sourced information and a fairly hefty collection of articles and interviews from gaming websites listed at the bottom from which further info may be gleamed if needed. Here's the link:

http://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/thread-21294-post-226828.html PCLM (talk) 10:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

List reference style

I recently changed the referencing style to list-defined references. Do you guys like it, or should it be changed back? This referencing style saves us both space in the article and time. --Markhoris (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Reception section lacks information

When I read through the review section I get the impression that this should be one of the best horror games of the last few years. But the ratings say that it's between 6/10 and 8/10. So there must be some points of criticism, but the only thing mentioned in the article is that it has no real screamers. Surely, there must be something, though. --178.27.252.170 (talk) 19:08, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Reception needs work

I highly disagree with the portrayal of the 'reception' section.

While it has gained mixed to positive reviews professionally, it must be noted that the game has also received strong criticisms from many areas of the playerbase due to the severe changes made to the series which, as many people say, 'is not fitting for an "Amnesia" game'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.198.30 (talk) 10:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I realise this comment is 2 years old, but in case anyone reviews the article in future - it's daft, and there's no reason to go looking for these uncited "areas of the playerbase". Before Pigs, there was only one Amnesia game, so there could not be any betrayal of what constitutes "an Amnesia game" unless they gave you a double-barrelled shotgun. The current summary seems fair to me.

What he means was that some people were disappointed with the game being a bit easier than the first. But if you want to faff around with tinderboxes again that badly you can play the first one. --87.224.68.42 (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)