I’m generally against crowdfunding a game like KI, which is owned and published by a company that is decidedly not indie or cash-strapped. Apart from the (to me anyway) inherently problematic nature of the model with respect to a large corporation, there’s also this:
Generally speaking, gamers have ■■■■■■ ideas about how much things cost to make. Indivisible, Lab Zero’s (of Skullgirls fame) newest title, raised just over $2M during its crowdfunding phase. Being extremely generous and assuming the company pockets fully half of that amount, that still makes an indie-developed 2D action-RPG (a decidedly ambitious one to be sure, with gorgeous sprite work and a number of guests they likely paid royalties to use) a one million dollar undertaking. The rough numbers the KI devs threw out to estimate the cost of a character ($100,000) and a stage $75,000) in an existing engine are pretty high, with bare-bones Season 1 coming in at a $1.4M price tag before adding in any networking functionality, UI, or single player content. The title was free to play and MS gave it 3 seasons so obviously there’s a market and opportunity here, but frankly I’d prefer not to have to foot the bill up front as a consumer. MS has sufficient money to invest in their IP’s.
I’d give them a C. The Shago fund was handled well, but there was considerable confusion and a notable lack of communication with regards to the tournament fund. It did all eventually get spent (Yami had a breakdown somewhere a while back), but there was a definite period where it almost looked like MS just pocketed the money and ran. I imagine a hypothetical crowdfunding for a full game would be handled much better than that, but I agree it highlights another unnecessary (to me anyway) issue that arises from the model. Let the devs focus on making the best game they can - I don’t need them babysitting the community to make sure all the backers are happy and sufficiently informed.