Gotta love the morons who keep repeating the word SCAM, while being unable to actually explain who Schaffer scammed, or in what way he will scam people with Fig and Psychonauts 2.
Or, at best, they'll link you to 35-minute video by some mongrel that "explains it all", because they're unable to formulate an original thought of their own, without hearing it first on YouTube. All while, of course, proclaiming their intellectual superiority over 99% of population.
You couldn't make this shit up.
Is "ad hominem" the best you can do? When you can't attack the argument, attack the person making it?
You clearly haven't even watched the videos, they spell it out clearly if you take the time.
The points you should be keeping an eye out for in the videos:
# When it comes to the investment part of Fig (and this applies especially to the uncredited investors) the Return of Interest ratio (ROI) on...say $500, is 0% for the next three years. Fig investors get paid last (after all other costs and cuts are added in) and at least one of the videos calculates how many copies the game needs to sell before Fig investors just manage to break even. That sales number is something the original game could NOT achieve during retail, but keeping in mind that Psychonauts has been sold in more bundles and discounts than you can shake a Jew at, and no actual revenue figures in dollars have been made public...the ROI ratio is likely to remain 0% for longer than 3 years. ANYONE with a background in finanical investment will laugh at you for investing in that.
# Another video took the time to read all the fine print over at Fig's website. You'll see at least one statement in there where Fig reserves the right NOT to pay Fig investors anything in return on their investment, for *reasons*. That same video also goes in-depth into the corporate structure of Fig, which goes a long way towards showing that it's sole purpose is to take the money and run. You want to recoup your losses via lawsuit a few years down the line? Good luck.
# Fig is insolvent as of right now. It has been in that state for months. It's only being propped up by its parent company, and any money that comes into Fig is channeled into another company, so there won't be a single dime in Fig when it goes bust.
In addition, dismissing an opinion because it's made by someone that lacks the proper professional background to reach the conclusion on his own (not to mention being located in another country that has different laws) and instead needs to rely on secondary sources? NOW who's being the moron?
In conclusion, Fig hasn't scammed anyone YET, but everything points to that being the case a few years down the line.
