-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Psychonauts 2 Announced (Crowdfunding on Fig, PC/PS4/XB1, UE4, $3.3M goal--funded!)
- Thread starter HUELEN10
- Start date
Delusibeta
Banned
The past two Fig campaigns had the vast majority of the funding come from investors. This campaign is the first to attract any noticeable amount of support from the general public.
I think we are going to see a 50/50 split here, which is good and keeps the funding consistent. I don't think we will really be seeing any dead zones in the funding process for this like we see on Kickstarter just for the fact its fans and investors.
More_Badass
Member
I believe the FIG founders said all their next crowdfunding campaigns will be through FIG. So expect something from Harmonix, inXile, or Obsidian
Gingerbread Fetus
Neo Member
As a huge fan of New Vegas I would really love to see a campaign from Obsidian. I'm still working on getting though Pillars of Eternity. Maybe after finals. ;n;
DXLelouch153
Banned
If it keeps on pace with about $100k per day, this will be funded fast. Checking the total of people who have donated and invested and it seems like going through fig was a REALLY good idea, a lot of investors which should keep this going at a steady pace.
fun fact:
the average per normal backer is about $80
The average per investor is about $1200
Making the overall average per person about $150
Arguably we'll need about 15-20k more people to back to hit the goal. Should be doable but may take most of the time limit.
More_Badass
Member
Yup, found the info from the Polygon article
DXLelouch153
Banned
you underestimate the thirst for more Psychonauts my friend
I dunno! The current average of $80 per person is actually very high for kickstarters. DFA had almost 30k people on board after the first day, and this project seems like 30k will be its target for the end of the campaign. The point being: the investor numbers are currently skewing everything.. and while i think they'll make it, it wont be as easy at it might look.
I know, but there were investment caps which prevented some people from investing. Now that everyone who wants to invest through Fig can, I'm curious if it means there will be less interest for the next AA scale game.
HellBlazer
Member
Do investors still get billed as soon as the campaign ends? Or is there some binding contract that forces them to go through with it, at least? I'm not sure how that works, since they need to wait until January to finalize things if they're unaccredited investors (more are, I would assume). I'm just worried that many might not have read in detail what it means to be an investor, and decide to pull out because "uh I didn't think it was so complicated, screw this." I hope there are safeguards so that the campaign is not endangered due to this.
CecilRousso
Member
I think a lot of people won't have read up on it, and I think that the goal for the campaign is set quite high to compensate a bit for that.
Unaccredited investors aren't allowed yet, so they can't be billed. The campaign is asking for reservations for unaccredited investors so that they can be charged once the legal process for them is finalized in Q1 of next year.
NoFaceNico
Member
Bingo. That's the problem I always had with Fig, lumping in the investors skews the figures. So having your Fig campaign make its first million isn't as meaningful as a pure Kickstarter campaign where you know all the backers are passionate about the game and not taking their first stab at investments.
You also made another good point previously, the average "investor" is only giving $1200. So on average each accredited investor is buying 2 shares. My theory is that the majority of people who are investing are ignoring the accredited investor requirement and just hoping it won't matter or that it's just as simple as click-accepting terms and conditions. I'm expecting that investments figure to go down substantially when the campaign is over. I suspect Fig won't even care about not being able to take their money because the goal is to make the campaign seem more successful while it's live.
Edit: question- are the "reservations" for unaccredited investors figured into the current totals?
HellBlazer
Member
Well maybe it can count as a deposit for the reservation? I don't know. But if there's nothing to force them to pay when the time comes, hmm... that seems pretty worrying, if like half the money is coming from investors.
Also a good question, though I would assume so.
Ultimadrago
Member
Nice!
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
A swamp full of flying bugs? no thank you
Tatsumi Oga
Banned
A shame this needs crowdfunding though. This basically means no publisher had faith in it?
Publishers don't have faith in a lot of things
CecilRousso
Member
Part that, but it probably also means that Double Fine wants to keep control of the title. After they got the rights back to Psychonauts 1, they have made quite a lot of money by selling it on Steam, Humble and GOG.
Just play Valley of Defilement in Demon's Souls and be done with it.
Tatsumi Oga
Banned
True.
Ah yes, that makes a lot of sense then. I never played the first one myself but i heard from friends that it was a pretty awesome game. So it's good to see they want to make another one. Plus a new platformer for these systems is something i can always appreciate.
Is it good? The investments are basically loans. Seems like df would prefer 100% regular backing because all they have to give back is a finished game and some tshirts
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Does Notch have anything to do with this?
Ultimadrago
Member
Not really, but he went for the 10k tier.
CecilRousso
Member
The first deadline was mistake. A fig developer said that some bug had orginally set it wrong.
And sadly I've seen a few groups already start calling this a scam because of that :/
CecilRousso
Member
But that's mostly just funny. It's actually quite hillarious to see how little some people understand that word.
But they're pretty nice by only calling it a scam. I saw tweets from two morons calling for a kickstarter to kill Tim Schafer. That's more sad then funny.
Ultimadrago
Member
I hadn't seen this until today
His writing in the first is some of the best in the "goofy" category I've ever had tbe pleasure of enjoying in a game ever (and I've played a lot, etc).
I really hope he can bring her home again.
phantomspiker
Member
I hadn't seen this until today
I'm so happy that he is on board with this!
TerryLee81
Member
Will this have the longest credits ever?
DICKS AHOY
Banned
I don't think it's a great look having the date change (I hadn't heard the 'bug fix' excuse either yet), but I also haven't seen a coherent reason for how that makes it a scam yet. Is a fundraiser without a set time-limit in general considered a scam because it can end whenever the organizers feel like it? Though I also saw people call Indivisible hitting the extension on Indiegogo 'cheating the system' so I think a lot of people want to be cynical of crowdfunding by default while simultaneously having no clue of how the system works beyond it funding games/people they don't like.
Even if Psychonauts 2 barely makes money, I think DF just owes the percentage that investor went in for of the game's profits rather than the amount they originally invested.
I thought the investments were more meant to be 'you get a certain share of the game's profits' rather than outright loaning money to Double-Fine?
Even if Psychonauts 2 barely makes money, I think DF just owes the percentage that investor went in for of the game's profits rather than the amount they originally invested.
i dont buy the "it was a bug" thing, and thats embarrassing they even said that. The original time was the amount of days DFA had. Just like the goal was the amount DFA made.
I also dont think its of big consequence to the campaign and its not a big deal by itself. But a bug? no no. Silly. At least pretend it was a typo.
NoFaceNico
Member
Of course it's not a loan in any sense of the word. But there is a point to be made that Fig passes a burden onto the game developer that might make using their service more trouble than it was worth. Fig gets 5% of the game's profits in perpetuity just for hosting the game on their site and I think that's pretty outrageous. People complain about Kickstarter taking their fee off the top of what's earned, but at least they don't take 5% for the life of the product.
I see your point and I don't buy Fig's explanation either, but I don't see the extra days making any difference in this campaign. It's clear that it did make a difference to Indivisible, but that project was unique because the team was extremely involved and worked very hard throughout their campaign, so the extra days were put to good use. With Psychonauts 2 they only gave one update today just to say they're 50% there. I really think everyone who would be interested in Psychonauts knows or will know about the campaign before it's over regardless of the extension.
Pretty much all the kickstarter-funded games have credits you can scoll/move across super fast manually.
Ultimadrago
Member
MrCunningham
Member
Yeah, I had some doubts about Fig. But it seems like pretty smooth sailing so far. This Fig concept is pretty interesting to me, the idea that you could either be a backer or a investor is an interesting twist. Is Fig going to act as a publisher?