Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Discussion about the upcoming Wasteland 3!

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

User avatar
VitaminK
Novice
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2012, 9:29 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by VitaminK » September 29th, 2016, 10:41 am

It has come to my attention that a dearly loved series is going up on FIG.

I'm not sure if inXile has been following the news or not but I'm posting this here for all fans of Wasteland and all inXile games. Make your own decision, hopefully it is not too late to pull from FIG, I honestly think they could raise the money after the success of W2 without FIG or KS but that is for another thread.

Videos:
I Skewed Fig And So Can You!
NEWS: Dumb Decisions at Fig and Water is Wet

Website:
The Big Issue with Fig.co

Please respond below if you support the change of funding away from fig! (or if you think it should be kept?)



-Update-
Newest news post on polygon concerning fig and Wasteland 3 here.

-Update-
It now appears fig may be in the clear for Wasteland 3.
SEC Qualified
Last edited by VitaminK on October 1st, 2016, 12:17 pm, edited 7 times in total.
inXile fanboy, Wasteland survivor
Follow me on twitch.tv and see me get owned or once in awhile have a good run!

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3504
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by SagaDC » September 29th, 2016, 11:15 am

Very interesting articles and videos, but I don't find them particularly alarming. Yes, there are some risks involved with using Fig, but it's still a relatively new service that's just finding it's footing in the modern market.

But, that said, there are just as many risks involved with other Crowdfunding websites like Indiegogo or Kickstarter. I've backed dozens of projects through Kickstarters, and plenty of them delivered compromised or outright incomplete products that weren't even close to the original product that was promised. Some of them just tanked completely, and even managed to avoid having to provide refunds despite having no product to offer.

cadriese
Novice
Posts: 42
Joined: October 15th, 2015, 9:04 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by cadriese » September 29th, 2016, 11:24 am

https://twitter.com/Inxile_Ent/status/7 ... 9374372868

Don't see why they wouldn't offer Paypal as an alternative again.

User avatar
VitaminK
Novice
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2012, 9:29 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by VitaminK » September 29th, 2016, 12:27 pm

My thoughts exactly cadriese. I'm just hoping they consider and hear out their player/customer base like they have in the past. Recently I've seen more and more things just get swept under the rug.

I'm not saying FIG will fail but I think there are much better options for inXile than taking a risk with FIG. Why take a risk like that when there are better options? inXile we are here to support the games you made and the games we love!
inXile fanboy, Wasteland survivor
Follow me on twitch.tv and see me get owned or once in awhile have a good run!

IHaveHugeNick
Master
Posts: 1200
Joined: September 23rd, 2014, 7:31 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by IHaveHugeNick » September 29th, 2016, 2:25 pm

I don't see why they wouldn't add PayPal, but it will probably pop up after the campaign.

That said, I don't understand how is Fig risky, exactly? If anything, Fig is less risky because Brian Fargo is on Fig's board,
Two rite whiff care is quite a feet of witch won should be proud.

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3504
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by SagaDC » September 29th, 2016, 2:57 pm

IHaveHugeNick wrote:I don't see why they wouldn't add PayPal, but it will probably pop up after the campaign.
This seems very likely.
IHaveHugeNick wrote:That said, I don't understand how is Fig risky, exactly? If anything, Fig is less risky because Brian Fargo is on Fig's board,
I glanced through a few videos and articles, and for the most part a big part of the risk seems to revolve around the SEC "holding" the investment-based pledges for an indeterminate amount of time (five months?). Until those funds are greenlit by the SEC, the investors could theoretically withdraw the funds, thus reducing the total amount of funding back below the "successfully funded" amount and theoretically leaving the developer in a bad spot.

But in the case of Wasteland 3, InXile already has several million dollars set aside to start development with, so they're not entirely reliant on the funds from the crowdfunding campaign. The SEC also seems to have officially approved Fig's business model as of this week, with Psychonauts 2 setting the precedent, so investments made through Fig will theoretically be handled much more quickly for games like Wasteland 3.

IHaveHugeNick
Master
Posts: 1200
Joined: September 23rd, 2014, 7:31 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by IHaveHugeNick » September 29th, 2016, 4:04 pm

SagaDC wrote:
IHaveHugeNick wrote:That said, I don't understand how is Fig risky, exactly? If anything, Fig is less risky because Brian Fargo is on Fig's board,
I glanced through a few videos and articles, and for the most part a big part of the risk seems to revolve around the SEC "holding" the investment-based pledges for an indeterminate amount of time (five months?). Until those funds are greenlit by the SEC, the investors could theoretically withdraw the funds, thus reducing the total amount of funding back below the "successfully funded" amount and theoretically leaving the developer in a bad spot.

But in the case of Wasteland 3, InXile already has several million dollars set aside to start development with, so they're not entirely reliant on the funds from the crowdfunding campaign. The SEC also seems to have officially approved Fig's business model as of this week, with Psychonauts 2 setting the precedent, so investments made through Fig will theoretically be handled much more quickly for games like Wasteland 3.
Yeah, we just talked about it in the other thread, remember? With SEC out of the way, there's no reason not to trust Fig. This is a platform where Fargo has some degree of control, which makes it a much safer bet than Kickstarter when funding an InXile game.
Two rite whiff care is quite a feet of witch won should be proud.

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3504
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by SagaDC » September 29th, 2016, 4:34 pm

IHaveHugeNick wrote:Yeah, we just talked about it in the other thread, remember? With SEC out of the way, there's no reason not to trust Fig. This is a platform where Fargo has some degree of control, which makes it a much safer bet than Kickstarter when funding an InXile game.
True, but I figured it was also worth mentioning that InXile has it's own funds to fall back on, too. Unlike most of the other projects run on Fig so far, Wasteland 3 isn't entirely dependent on receiving the money from Fig-based investors just to get off the ground. According to some of the articles about Wasteland 3, InXile already has something like $6-7 million set aside to help with the development.

The main argument I've seen against Fig at this point (mostly on other forums) is that Tim Schafer, head of Double Fine, is tangentially related to the crowdfunding company that the campaign is being run through. But he has no significant involvement with the Wasteland 3 campaign, so it baffles me when people argue that they won't use Fig because "Tim Schafer is involved".

User avatar
VitaminK
Novice
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2012, 9:29 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by VitaminK » September 29th, 2016, 6:19 pm

Quoted from latest article off Polygon (posted today Sept 29) linked in OP.
"I think that Fig has more opportunity ... because if these games start returning profits to people that’s something that you’ll never get tired of. And it’s a system that you’ll return to I think with more excitement each time rather than less excitement each time."

However, Fig itself has seen a loss in momentum as well. Its approvals process with the United State Securities and Exchange Commission has dragged on for most of 2016. Their campaigns have also dwindled. At their peak, Fig was running two campaigns a month, but after Consortium: The Tower closed in May of this year it's failed to launch another.

Fig announced another round of required filings in June. Since then, SEC records indicate they’ve had two more in quick succession, which could signal that the process is nearing its conclusion. But whether unaccredited investors, who’ve been waiting months to fund projects like Psychonauts 2 and Consortium: The Tower will still be willing to pay up is an open question.

Polygon has reached out to Fig for comment, but did not receive a response before publication.
If they have the funds and/or alternative options of raising capital why even risk getting caught up in a mess like this?

I could care less about Tim Schafer, I only want the best for Wasteland 3.
inXile fanboy, Wasteland survivor
Follow me on twitch.tv and see me get owned or once in awhile have a good run!

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9757
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by Drool » September 29th, 2016, 7:15 pm

IHaveHugeNick wrote:I don't see why they wouldn't add PayPal, but it will probably pop up after the campaign.
My information is several years old, but back when Wasteland 2 was first being funded, the reason you couldn't use PayPal until after the project was fully funded was because of PayPal's rules. I don't remember exactly the reasoning, but it had to do with unfunded projects being vapor as opposed to funded ones. A fine line, but the line they drew.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

shaigunjoe
Explorer
Posts: 382
Joined: April 8th, 2012, 10:07 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by shaigunjoe » September 29th, 2016, 8:40 pm

Fig has a long way to go. It has been a while since I looked at it, so maybe it has changed, but the SEC filing thing is still a mess, and they need to have that sorted out before they put something up there I would invest in.

Like I said, it's been a while for me, but when I looked at the psychonauts 2 stuff, it seemed like really poor investment for people looking to invest for monetary gain. Given the amount of time it will take to come out (there will be delays) and then the time to recoup your original investment, just about any solid SP 500 dividend stock will probably treat you way better, plus I'd say psychonauts 2 is a pretty risky investment to begin with.

Wasteland 3 on the other hand has more promise (I think) but I can't help feel that fig is taking advantage of gamers to get them to invest instead of appealing to actual investors. I need to check the terms of fig again, honestly wish we could see a post from someone on here detailing the nitty gritty instead of shifting through the website.

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of equity investment in a product you love, but the risk/reward of fig doesn't seem like smart money management.

User avatar
Gillsing
Explorer
Posts: 292
Joined: May 22nd, 2012, 1:35 pm

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by Gillsing » September 29th, 2016, 11:24 pm

VitaminK wrote:If they have the funds and/or alternative options of raising capital why even risk getting caught up in a mess like this?
Because Brian Fargo is on the advisory board? Presumably he knows what he's doing, and has more insight into Fig than anyone reporting on Fig. (Though that 'advisory board' should probably not be confused with a board of directors. I don't know if Fig has such a board, or who's on it.)

There's also the fees to consider. I just googled "kickstarter fees": 5% plus another 3-5% for handling payments = 8-10%. When I clicked on the investment option on Fig I got to see an infographic that showed a ~2.7% transaction fee between pledges and the developer, with ~97.3% reaching the developer. So more money would go directly to development of the game. And that seems like a good thing to me. Worth a little 'risk getting caught up in a mess'.

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3504
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by SagaDC » September 30th, 2016, 5:16 am

shaigunjoe wrote:Fig has a long way to go. It has been a while since I looked at it, so maybe it has changed, but the SEC filing thing is still a mess, and they need to have that sorted out before they put something up there I would invest in.
SEC finally released the money that was being held for Psychonauts 2, and has apparently given the go-ahead for investment into individual games. This, presumably, will clear the way for future game-investment projects through Fig, with Wasteland 3 being the first one that gets to take advantage of the precedent that has been set.

I'd have to poke around to find the right article, but I believe I saw one that mentioned in the future Fig will get to hold onto the investment capitol until it's given to the company running the crowdfunding campaign, rather than the SEC holding it. That would also theoretically help to expedite the funding process once a campaign has been successful.

User avatar
VitaminK
Novice
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2012, 9:29 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by VitaminK » September 30th, 2016, 9:32 am

In their latest blog posted yesterday;
...it means that as of now, Fig is the only crowdfunding publishing platform where non-accredited investors can earn a return based on a game’s sales.

This is a first for our industry. But with Fig Game Shares being the only investment of its type to pass through the SEC process under Title IV of the JOBS Act, it also has the potential to evolve publishing for all of entertainment and fundamentally change the narrative of crowdfunding. Until now, equity crowdfunding for games in the U.S. had been publicly available only to wealthy, accredited investors. Additionally, investors could only purchase equity that offered a return based on the financial performance of a company—not based on the financial performance of a single game. No longer.

This qualification opens the door for Fig Game Shares, a brand new type of security, one that lets everyone invest in Fig, support the development and publishing of games, and financially benefit from the sales of their favorite games. With Fig Game Shares—PSY2 as a blueprint, we plan to create and qualify with the SEC new series of Fig Game Shares that pay returns based on the sales of additional games..
Full article;
http://blog.fig.co/were-sec-qualified-l ... mes-begin/
inXile fanboy, Wasteland survivor
Follow me on twitch.tv and see me get owned or once in awhile have a good run!

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9757
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Request: No FIG!

Post by Drool » September 30th, 2016, 12:18 pm

shaigunjoe wrote:I love the idea of equity investment in a product you love, but the risk/reward of fig doesn't seem like smart money management.
...so don't invest and just be a normal backer like you would on Kickstarter?
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Darth Trethon
Acolyte
Posts: 75
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 7:53 am

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by Darth Trethon » October 1st, 2016, 1:56 am

I knew Fig was shady and from the second I found out that this would go through Fig I immediately knew I wanted no part of of any such shenanigans.....but to actually understand just how wrong and broken and shady this system is makes me not want to back at all. It seems to me like they're going after big money accredited investors and looking to use fig to in order to show over inflated figures underscoring the success of the funding campaign to help persuade such investors after the campaign ends. That way they can turn to the real investors and saying "See, our project is so popular that we already secured [insert number of millions here] so if you invest in us you'll surely strike gold"......except omitting the part where they may be counting more from unaccredited investors than they may be able to accept and all of it in unbinding promises so there's no telling how many of those investments will actually be collected and on and on and on. And then if the game get in serious financial trouble and fails none of the backers will see back anything......which is far more likely to happen with Fig than with Kickstarter because the project can skate through and sing massive success long before it is approved to accept unaccredited and unbinding investments and long before collecting these funds.....which are then far more likely to fall through.
.
At this point I will pledge nothing to Wasteland 3 until and unless inXile can publicly state precise info on collected funds they have on hand and can reassure backers that those funds are enough to make the game.......this is where KS shines much better.....when the campaign ends if the project is successful the pledges are collected and if anything falls through it is know very fast but even more important is that if a project fails nothing is collected and nothing is misconstrued to make the numbers better than what they actually are. So yeah....I'm all for canceling this nonsense....take Wasteland 3 to Kickstarter and inXile can count on my backing, stick with Fig and I may but the game when it gets a full release.....IF it gets that far.

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3504
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by SagaDC » October 1st, 2016, 7:00 am

Darth Trethon wrote:except omitting the part where they may be counting more from unaccredited investors than they may be able to accept and all of it in unbinding promises so there's no telling how many of those investments will actually be collected and on and on and on.
From what I understand, this is no longer the case. That was only the case when the SEC was placing unaccredited investments on indefinite hold, while they were deciding whether to approve Fig's investment program or not. Now that the SEC has officially approved Fig's business plan (which happened earlier this week), future crowdfunding projects run through Fig should not have a prolonged hold on funds pledged by unaccredited investors (which means that those investors will not be given months to withdraw their funds before they have been collected).

User avatar
Darth Trethon
Acolyte
Posts: 75
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 7:53 am

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by Darth Trethon » October 1st, 2016, 7:12 am

SagaDC wrote:
Darth Trethon wrote:except omitting the part where they may be counting more from unaccredited investors than they may be able to accept and all of it in unbinding promises so there's no telling how many of those investments will actually be collected and on and on and on.
From what I understand, this is no longer the case. That was only the case when the SEC was placing unaccredited investments on indefinite hold, while they were deciding whether to approve Fig's investment program or not. Now that the SEC has officially approved Fig's business plan (which happened earlier this week), future crowdfunding projects run through Fig should not have a prolonged hold on funds pledged by unaccredited investors (which means that those investors will not be given months to withdraw their funds before they have been collected).
Even if that is true Fig still has a lot of major problems and you're unlikely to ever see a cent from an investment there......the company operates at a loss and no unacredited investor has any rights....it is purely optional for Fig to ever hand anything, which they couldn't if they wanted to, and there are no rights to legal action either. To call this an "investment" is extremely misleading.

Bubbles
Novice
Posts: 33
Joined: October 19th, 2015, 9:12 am

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by Bubbles » October 1st, 2016, 11:22 am

Even if you don't get any money back from your investment, you'll still be supporting inXile's vision. For a true fan, that can be enough.

User avatar
VitaminK
Novice
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2012, 9:29 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Request: No FIG! *Updated*

Post by VitaminK » October 1st, 2016, 12:16 pm

It is rather curious to me that literally days before the Fig campaign for W3 launches that this info was posted on their blog... timing is a little suspicious, if I know anything about the government it's things take quite awhile to get anywhere (I know they have been working on this around a year but still, 5 days before campaign launch they get approved, then "claim" that all future games are covered although I have yet to read that anywhere else that isn't simply quoting the blog). Also since it is simply their blog parts of it could easily be in response to community backlash/questioning from the upcoming Fig campaign.
inXile fanboy, Wasteland survivor
Follow me on twitch.tv and see me get owned or once in awhile have a good run!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest