I see your points, but what I don't understand is how this is only a problem for this campaign and the others much like it. Sure, their investment backers could just drop their support after successful funding but that's just terrible business and would surely cost them more in the long run then to simply keep their word and earn money as a result.
Let's try out this scenario which is growing all too common on Kickstarter for size: I'm an indie developer with no investor in my pocket. I promise a product and get tons of funding. What do I do? Well, I keep delaying my project citing creativity and budget issues to the point where it's delayed to oblivion or never actually comes out at all.
You'd think I'd be punished right? Well wrong, Kickster's regulations allows me to get away scott-free with any issues that may come about after the funding process simply due to the nature behind crowd-sourced funding.
So yes, I agree there's issues to be had with campaigns, however, it's not something that's exclusive to campaigns with a back-pocket investor. There's tons of other campaigns that are outright scams, silly in nature, or simply beyond their scope that recieve all the funding they need and produce nothing as a result.
Basically said, what you're basing your argument on is a fundamental issue with Kickstarter and not a specific campaign.
Do you honestly think Igarashi is a scumbag con artist, or is untrustworthy with money? He was making these ANNUALLY. And they were ALL BELOVED. He made a cool multiplayer online loot grind version of this game for like $15k total. He's proven he's good with a budget before, and is good at this kind of game. So what if a bad person will do a bad thing with a service? What bearing does that have on Bloodstained? He's been completely upfront with us from day one.