«Previous post | Next post»

***Update 3 – 2015-12-15 – 19:35 CET***

I just wanted to let you guys know that I did indeed get an answer from Gerard McDermott the other day (via e-mail). However, it turns out as if the games industry is in a much worse state than I thought. Because McDermott told me that there are a lot of bullying going on in the industry right now, (if you hold the “wrong” thoughts and “ideas”, then you need to be punished) and since “some” people like to control the industry with an iron fist. McDermott won´t be able to do an interview with us (that´s why he only comments on matters such as this on Twitter, and not publicly). Even so, McDermott did share a picture with me via mail (the top one as seen down below). He also recommended me to watch Bitscreed´s “PIXEL BURN – The Psychonauts 2 Shill Game” video (you can watch the video further down the page). And so I did, and what can I say? Fig, Tim Schafer and the “Psychonauts 2” crowdfunding project sure stinks really fishy in my opinion (and no, I have not received an answer from neither Fig nor Tim Schafer on this matter).

It sure sounds like a really safe investment to hand over your money to Fig…

Polygon mentioned nothing about the risks in putting money into the “Psychonauts 2” project (nor how long you will have to wait before you “might” get some of your hard-earned money back).

Still, I have a feeling that things will get even uglier and more fishy over time in the case with “Psychonauts 2” and Fig. So I´m going to keep a close eye on both of them from now on.

Credit:
Gerard McDermott
Bitscreed

————————————————

***Update 2 – 2015-12-15 – 00:02 CET***

It´s fun sometimes how small the world can be, because just a couple of hours after that I updated my Fig article yesterday (2015-12-15). Mr. Gerard McDermott made a really good comment about Fig and Tim Schafer´s Psychonauts 2´s crowdfunding campaign (McDermott made that comment on this very article actually). And this is what McDermott said:

“After reading Galfon’s comments below and seeing the image of the date shifting I went through some numbers this morning.

The first 307 backers gave an average of $78.87
Next 11,051 backers gave average $152.80

It is currently $2,663,604 from 16,079 backers. That means last 5,028 backers donated $192.45 each.

Now that set off alarm bells because Shenmue 3 got $6,333,295 from 69,320 backers. An average per backer of $91.36. Then I noticed that only $1,150,759 in rewards have been claimed by 14,905 backers. I looked into Fig’s investing setup. You can register as an investor and share in the profits of the game. Based on my numbers above, there are currently 1,178 investors contributing average $1,284 .72 each.

It has already been suggested that all the gamers who paid for rewards were bait to bring the investors in. Schafer needed to demonstrate that the game would be popular and have a potential for return. That would also explain the big jump in funding amount. He would have taken the early numbers at the time to investors to show them that interest was there. As the number of investors increased so did the average per “backer”. Now about 57% of all the money they have is from investors.

Keep in mind that you have to apply to be an investor. Who are these investors? Hopefully not videogame “journalists” or bloggers again. We’ll know when Psychonauts 2 comes out I guess. Remember that part of the original issue over a year ago was IGF judges investing in award winners. Based on the behaviour of people linked by Patreon accounts we should be concerned any time members of the video game media stand to secretly make money from games they promote.

I stand by my original comments that this gives a lot of control over indie game development to Schafer and his friends. Now we have a platform that can decide which games get funded and they can drive media coverage by allowing media to invest in those games. Now look into who is in the self-appointed Ministry Of Culture that Schafer is part of and how they treat gamers with contempt. If Fig succeeds (and it looks like it will) then these people will have even more control over indie game funding and media coverage than they ever had.

If you thought the politicizing of games and the media corruption uncovered last year was bad then you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.” – Gerard McDermott, owner GMAC Internet Solutions

Thank god for archive.is and archive.org.

In other words, Fig and Tim Schafer are everything but honest about their business model and the crowdfunding campaign for “Psychonauts 2”. And quite a few of our readers and followers have requested a “in-depth analysis and comparison of the terms from Fig and other crowdfunding sites” (some would also like to get the IRS involved in the case with Fig´s business model). So I will do what I can to fix that as soon as possible. Nevertheless, I will try to reach out to Fig, Tim Schafer and Gerard McDermott for a comment on this matter.

Credit:
Gerard McDermott
The best Gamers

————————————————

***Update 1 – 2015-12-14 – 20:20 CET***

I´m aware of the fact that my Fig article is almost a week old now. However, I felt like I needed to update this article since a fellow reader and follower of us (thank you James!), pointed out something really important in the case with Tim Schafer (and friends) crowdfunding platform Fig. Because it appears as if there are quite a “few” questionable parts to be found in Fig´s “terms of use” and “rewards requirements” texts on Fig´s homepage (as seen in the pictures down below).

In other words, all the money that Fig gets will be counted as gifts?

That sure seems to be the case, yes.

This part looks (and smells) really fishy, in my opinion.

And I have read through the text just now, and even though I´m no lawyer. I still have to admit that the terms of use and rewards requirements looks really fishy. Just take the following parts for example:

“FIG IS NOT A REGISTERED BROKER-DEALER, FINANCIAL ADVISOR OR FUNDING PORTAL” – That sounds really safe and reliable for sure…

“Contributions should be considered a gift or donation rather than a purchase” – In other words, every single cent that Fig gets will be considered as a gift? (is this an attempt to take away the consumer rights?).

Tim Schafer is out on really thin ice if all of this is true.

I can´t say that I trusted Fig or Tim Schafer before, but this made me trust Tim and Fig even less. And “if” it´s true that he tampered with “Psychonauts 2´s” crowdfunding campaign (as seen in the picture above). Then it´s going to be yet another scandal on his “I messed up” achievements list.

Credit:
James
Motherfucking Deadpool
————————————————

When I wrote my article about Fig and Tim Schafer´s 3.3 million-dollar pitch for “Psychonauts 2” three days ago, I was somewhat concerned about corruption and Schafer´s past scandals (as Tim has been involved in quite a few “incidents” over the years). Well, it seems like I´m far from the only one who has these thoughts. Because earlier today I noticed an interesting tweet by Gerard McDermott (owner GMAC Internet Solutions) on the matter of Fig (it´s a “different kind of crowdfunding platform”) and Tim Schafer´s Psychonauts 2, these were McDermott ´s exact words in that tweet:

“I would not die of shock if a large amount of the money donated to Tim Schafer´s project is really going into Fig´s pockets for dev and promo. If Fig takes off then Schafer and friends will have a lot of control over the game dev community. It will be worse than the IGF corruption. So my theory is that Tim´s games are the bait to get millions of dollars into Fig which can be used as a war chest of bribes/influence.

And Fig is their way of controlling indie games” – Gerard McDermott, GMAC Internet Solutions

I really hope that Gerard is wrong about this, because that´s the last thing, that the games industry needs right now.

I have to admit that McDermott´s words sent a very unpleasant feeling down my spine, because “if” he´s right then we might face a much bigger corruption problem than the IGF scandal for sure. And that would be a dead serious matter, as it, in fact, could cause the games industry crash. So, yes, we should also keep a very close eye on the Fig platform and its progress over time. In my opinion, the timing couldn´t possibly have been any worse. As the games industry are already struggling to keep its head above the waterline (there are ongoing rumors about a mobile game and indie game bubble that´s about to burst). However, it seems like “some” sites are way more naive and optimistic about Fig then I am. Like the following sites for example:

“With a focus on video games alone, Fig aims to make indie developers stand out versus the thousands of other projects on crowdfunding sites.” – fastcompany

“What if Kickstarter let you profit from a game’s success? Fig found a way and launches today.” – Polygon

“maybe the promise of an actual share in profits will make crowdfunding interesting again.” – PCworld

“A conspiracy has been hatched by the world’s top Triple-A and indie developers to change the way computer games are financed. It’s called Fig. It’s a highly curated reward and equity crowdfunding platform just for games.” – Techcrunch

So, what do you guys and girls think? Should we be worried and concerned about Fig, Tim Schafer and his friends? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section down below!

Credit:
LyricalPunkingScrubs

Source:
Gerard McDermott

***Disclaimer***
This is a personal opinion of the writer, and it doesn’t necessarily represent the other writers (nor The Gaming Ground´s) opinions.

***Disclosure***
I am not a fan of Tim Schafer anymore.

Robin “V-Act” Ek
The Gaming Ground
Twitter: @TheGamingGround