not only that, but the crowdfunded gaming scene has its share of failures.
star citizen - 300 million, still no real game just a broken tech demo. once they stop paying the bills on their servers…whole thing is gone and people are out 1000s they threw at it. they’re still crowd funding. game is also in alpha for…6+ years.
system shock remake - started with unity engine, scope was pretty well set. dev team gets too cocky, engine change to UE4, increase in scope, updates becoming scarce, backer populace up in arms over wtf is going on. dev team goes on a 1 year leave to bring the game’s scope back to where it was (and i believe revert back to unity)
mighty no. 9 - game was not as good as it was promised, was pretty bad in the end. inafune was not only making this game but i think he was working on RE:Core at the same time. it showed that his energy was split, he infamously said “at least backers got something”. GG
this is why im skeptical of crowd funding in general. its not only just the idea of players not understanding how much it takes in the year of our lord 2019 to really make a well made product. it costs big money, and when something isnt crowd funded well over 7 figures it is going to show and they’re going to cry about it.
you have the potential of an underwhelming product, and you also have the potential outcome of a dev team going off the rails. it can be to milk more backers of their money for a game that’ll never launch cough chris roberts family and friends *cough, or they just lose control and increase scope way beyond what was pitched to backers thus requiring more funding, but also leads to a project’s collapse or hiatus like system shock’s remake.
the idea can be good, but it really really needs to be well done. igarashi pulled it off quite well with bloodstained, its a successful game though the switch version does have its issues. however people need to consider the 9 hells he had to go through in order for it to work and we get a game in our hands that was more or less AAA quality.