It boggles my mind that it's already nearly halfway funded.
When will people learn that fire burns?
When will people learn that fire burns?
According to Fig's ToS, paying for rewards doesn't give you any legal standing to demand results either:Areloch said:The investor agreement also strips you of your ability to pull funding, and as near as anyone can tell, you don't really get much more legal standing in regards to the ability to demand success than regular backers.
You're better off taking that $500 and just doing reward tiers that interest you than being an "investor" with their system.
ensouls said:According to Fig's ToS, paying for rewards doesn't give you any legal standing to demand results either:Areloch said:The investor agreement also strips you of your ability to pull funding, and as near as anyone can tell, you don't really get much more legal standing in regards to the ability to demand success than regular backers.
You're better off taking that $500 and just doing reward tiers that interest you than being an "investor" with their system.
"Rewards-based crowdfunding involves the creation of a Campaign by Fig for a game developer (the "Campaign Owner") to raise funds for the Campaign Owner's project through contributions from individuals or entities ("Contributors") in exchange for rewards ("Rewards"). Contributions should be considered a gift or donation rather than a purchase, as Fig can make no assurances that the Campaign Owner will be able to produce the Rewards in a timely fashion or at all. Rewards are not refundable. Fig makes no representations about the quality, morality or legality of any Campaign, Campaign Owner or Reward."
Gross. That's even worse than Kickstarter, whose ToS at least gives backers some legal recourse of their own.
This was the deciding factor for me.. I'll be thrilled if a great game comes out of this in 3 years, but until then forget it.
Yeah, when I was poking around the site and reading the terms, the whole thing had a bit of a skeevy feel to it. Not to say there's actual malicious intent involved, but Tim and Double Fine, and several other 'advisor' developers having direct connection to Fig comes off like a conflict of interest waiting to happen, let alone the worse-than-Kickstarter ToS, where if it bombs, they have no obligation to backers at all.Corey Schaff said:No surprise that Schafer appears to have a vested interest in this particular crowdfunding website. His name, photo, and studio is listed in the About section.ensouls said:Gross. That's even worse than Kickstarter, whose ToS at least gives backers some legal recourse of their own.
This was the deciding factor for me.. I'll be thrilled if a great game comes out of this in 3 years, but until then forget it.
Well, clearly not, because people have already given him $1.5m for some bizarre reason.Kaleion said:Well it's more than a little obvious that Double Fine has pretty much destroyed all consumer trust,
As the title that people have been asking for since Double Fine's introduction, I feel like Psychonauts 2 is the last major project that they can use to garner this much immediate support and turn recent opinion around. So if it's all cards in I hope they can make something genuinely good out of it.K12 said:Hopefully enough people still trust them so that it gets funded and they fully redeem themselves by making it fantastic and punctual. I totally want to play Psychonauts 2.
... I mean I don't trust them enough to give them money but I hope that other people do.
This seems decidedly appropriate.Here Comes Tomorrow said:It boggles my mind that it's already nearly halfway funded.
When will people learn that fire burns?
It's important to note that Pyschonauts came out ten years ago, and everything Tim has made since then has been ranging from painfully average to completely unfinished.SaneAmongInsane said:It's weird to see all the hate for Tim considering how when Pyschonauts came out he was white hot with everyone...
That's kind of been the appeal hasn't it? Every mind in the original game looked and felt different based on the issues and quirks of that particular character. So there's potential for interesting level design as long as there are new characters to explore.SaneAmongInsane said:I really hope it gets made, Pyschonauts was a fun little game/pointclickadventure which I think would do just fine nowadays with the crowd that likes art games like Go Home. Question is, what more can they do with the concept of going into visual representations of people's minds? Aside from just doing more minds? that is just looking at it from an innovative stand point.
Key phrase being "when psychonauts came out". Nobody is disputing the man used to be good at what he did. The fact is, the man can't seem to administer a company worth a damn and works much better when he's just doing games development. I even like some of DF's games(I have a soft spot for the Cave that few people seem to share and really liked Brutal legend despite feeling like it's a tad unfinished) but their track record lately has been pretty lackluster, especially with crowdfunding.SaneAmongInsane said:It's weird to see all the hate for Tim considering how when Pyschonauts came out he was white hot with everyone...
Oohhh yeah, fig just seems like a giant conflict of interest waiting to happen even before you read into its "Worse Than Kickstarter" TOS. Also, jeez, so he's actually doing it now? Tim has finally lost it if he's going to try and pull that kind of bullshit. It's pretty much universally hated when publishers hold sequels to ransom but this is just absurd.ShakerSilver said:I'm slightly interested in the idea of a Psychonauts sequel, but considering the man behind the game and his horrible ability to manage funds, Timmy's going to have to prove he can actually MAKE the game before I'll consider throwing some money his way.
The most worrying part I feel is the site he is crowdfunding on, Fig.co, the platform Tim himself had a hand in making. Looking at its terms of use and the about section, the site does very, very little or nothing at all to protect the investments of "investors" and regular backers. Backers aren't guaranteed their rewards in a timely fashion or at all even, campaign owners can freely extend deadlines at their whim, and there doesn't seem to be any system of penalizing owners who do the previous mentioned. Even sites like Kickstarter make sure to protect backers on a basic level.
Sources:
https://archive.is/oliZW
I wonder how long Tim is going to rely on abusing the goodwill and optimism of his fans before that well dries up. People can only be scammed so many times![]()
![]()
EDIT: I just found out about this piece of news: apparently Tim is holding Brutal Legend 2 hostage and only making it if Psychonauts 2 does well. How many "classics" is Double Fine going to milk to get its money?
https://archive.is/zR63L
I expect he'll be able to do this long after he's dead, somehow. I just got into a 'discussion' elsewhere, where one indivudal stated the following:ShakerSilver said:I wonder how long Tim is going to rely on abusing the goodwill and optimism of his fans before that well dries up. People can only be scammed so many times
For the sake of accuracy - From the Psychonauts 2 Fig page, FAQ section:vallorn said:Also, jeez, so he's actually doing it now? Tim has finally lost it if he's going to try and pull that kind of bullshit. It's pretty much universally hated when publishers hold sequels to ransom but this is just absurd.
Will you ever make Brutal Legends 2?'
We've always said that we wanted to make a sequel to both Psychonauts and Brutal Legends. We can't make any promises but if Psychonauts is a success for us, then perhaps Brutal Legends 2 will be more possible?