Avatar image for personandstuff
#1 Posted by personandstuff (640 posts) -

I've been going back and forth on whether or not I am going to invest in Psychonauts 2? Admittedly, investing in anything creative is always a crap shoot. But, Psychonauts 2 seems as close to a sure thing as you can have in this space. Psychonauts 2 will probably not not get made and, if it gets made, it seems like it will at least make some money. And it would be interesting to see this weird new process first hand. But it's a minimum of $500 and, whilst that's not a whole lot, I could imagine a scenario where I lose or quit my job and really need that $500 before 2020.

Avatar image for deactivated-5ba16609964d9
#2 Edited by deactivated-5ba16609964d9 (3361 posts) -

The first game notoriously bombed. I picked up my original Xbox copy brand new for $10 after it had only been out for two months. Plus Double Fine games sound great and full of whimsy on paper but in execution very rarely live up to even half the promised charm and fun.

Honestly it seems like a huge gamble and if you're worried about losing that $500 then don't do it. Don't invest in even a sure thing if you don't think you can take the loss. If you aren't comfortable then follow that gut instinct.

Avatar image for baillie
#3 Posted by Baillie (4711 posts) -

What makes you think Psychonauts 2 is a sure thing? Yeah it'll be made, but getting a decent return on your investment? That's either not likely, or if it does, not for a long time.

Avatar image for chrispaul92
#4 Posted by chrispaul92 (149 posts) -

Do you mean that it wouldn't get made otherwise? It already met its goal of 3.8 million.

Avatar image for buddy900
#5 Posted by Buddy900 (88 posts) -

Take the 500 and buy some stock with a put option to hedge.

Avatar image for audiobusting
#6 Posted by audioBusting (2558 posts) -

I thought about it, but it's not like Double Fine has a stellar track record in their business despite me liking their games a lot. It's a relatively small investment, but it's probably better to put the money elsewhere.

Avatar image for clagnaught
#7 Posted by clagnaught (2113 posts) -

I don't imagine this game will sell super well. It's a sequel to an over ten year old cult classic game which didn't sell super well back in the day. I don't imagine this will necessarily lose money, but I don't anticipate this will be a smash hit either. What will be the market? Fans of the first game (which is a small number of people)? People who haven't played the first game?

If somebody is extremely passionate about the project that's a different story, but to invest $500 or whatever into a project that will probably have a small return for the sole sake of gaining a profit...there's probably a better way to make money, even if that means taking a bigger risk and throwing that $500 into the stock market or something.

Avatar image for artisanbreads
#8 Posted by ArtisanBreads (9107 posts) -

Investing just $500 in a game of this type in this way seems insane to me.

Avatar image for kadoom
#9 Posted by KaDoom (71 posts) -

It reallllllllly doesn't help that Tim Schafer doesn't exactly have a great track record for making games on budget or time. Bobby Kotick of all people called him out ages ago during Brutal Legend and everyone thought he was just a big dick for it but... Well, their (DF) recent track record sorta speaks for itself.

Avatar image for onemanarmyy
#10 Edited by Onemanarmyy (4247 posts) -

Psychonauts was a fun time, but most people including me, only got around to it when it was <5$. I wouldn't know how many people would spend 20-40 bucks on it, or whether they rather play Yooka Laylee, which occupies the same genre.

Avatar image for oursin_360
#11 Posted by OurSin_360 (6137 posts) -

500$ minimum? What am i getting besides a game? Otherwise what in the fuck

Avatar image for hunkulese
#12 Posted by Hunkulese (4225 posts) -

Investing $500 is an awful idea. It's not a big enough amount that you'll really ever make a big enough profit to justify risking $500.

If you don't have enough disposable income for the $500 to just be a fun thing to do to say you invested in a video game, don't do it. You should follow the same rules with investing that you do with gambling and only use money you're fine with losing.

Online
Avatar image for slag
#13 Posted by Slag (8157 posts) -

I like Tim Schafer's stuff, but I consider this a very poor investment. I read some of the fine print on how Fig works, and there's enough squirrely legalese in there that I don't want to touch it

If you want to back it because you want to help the game succeed that's great. But I wouldn't expect much if any ROI given Double Fine's track record of overscoping, running long and low-moderate sales.

honestly if you want to make money investing in a video game, try to find the next Clash of Clans or something like that. Mobile is where the $$$ is at.

Avatar image for e30bmw
#14 Posted by e30bmw (650 posts) -

500$ minimum? What am i getting besides a game? Otherwise what in the fuck

This is the investment part of the Fig site that launched a little whiles ago. It's a literal investment, if the game makes a profit, you'll get a return on your investment.

Avatar image for saispag
#15 Posted by saispag (135 posts) -

A sure thing? Psychonauts 1 bombed hard, and is loved by a very very small niche of people. I don't see Psychonauts 2 doing much better at all.

Avatar image for peteycoco
#16 Posted by PeteyCoco (277 posts) -

@personandstuff: If you don't think a product will get made/do well because it isn't attracting enough attention from investors, you might not want to invest in it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a923fc7099e3
#17 Posted by deactivated-5a923fc7099e3 (534 posts) -

No way. I don't think there is a big market for games like this. I loved Psychonauts (I was one of the few that actually bought it at release) but even I have almost no interest in a sequel. It was a thing of a certain time and I don't see how they would make a game like that that would capture a wide audience now.

Avatar image for mattyftm
#18 Edited by MattyFTM (14886 posts) -

The problem with these crowdfunded projects is that a lot of the time the majority of the target audience back the game on the crowdfunding platform to get the game, so when it actually releases the sales can be quite low. Most people who really really care about Psychonauts 2 have probably already secured their copy of the game via Fig, so they're not going to be a sale when it comes out and they're not going to give you a return on your investment. Yes, there will be people who buy the game outside of crowdfunding, but it might not be as high as you would hope. This is why so many studios have a hugely successful kickstarter, the game comes out and is well liked, but then they need to do another kickstarter for their next project. The sales just aren't high enough to fund future development. And in the case of Fig, sales might not be high enough for you to see a significant return on your investment.

Moderator
Avatar image for evilsbane
#19 Posted by Evilsbane (5618 posts) -

As someone whose only complaint about the first Psychonauts was that it was to short, I would have to say no, I love Tim and Double Fine has made some great games but the whole FIG platform just seems strange I would only do it if your really ready to throw that $500 dollars away.

Avatar image for sammo21
#20 Edited by sammo21 (5968 posts) -

I love Psychonauts, but no. I have a thing about crowdfunding games from established sources who could get credit and funds that other studios could not. I also did not think too highly of Broken Age or Double Fine's other crowd sourced games so that also makes me less likely to fund the game. I will gladly buy the game if/when it is released but I have no interested in crowd sourcing anything else from that studio.

More important question: Where is Dave Muir? I know he quit DF to work at Valve, but since his move to Valve I feel we haven't heard a peep from him here at GB.

Avatar image for getz
#21 Posted by Getz (3764 posts) -

yeah Double Fine games are great and quirky and not usually commercial successes.

Avatar image for oursin_360
#22 Posted by OurSin_360 (6137 posts) -

@e30bmw: ah ok that makes way more sense. I would possibly invest if they didn't get that bad press for their last few kickstarters. Pyschonauts is a pretty big cult classic with an enthusiastic fan base. As quality as i think double fine is they gave up too many red flags with past crowdfunding.

Avatar image for artisanbreads
#23 Edited by ArtisanBreads (9107 posts) -

On the topic of DF, I think their last good game was Trenched/Iron Brigade and otherwise their track record has really not been so hot in recent years. I think they are becoming a pretty disappointing studio really. Publishing Gang Beasts is cool though.

Avatar image for jesus_phish
#24 Posted by Jesus_Phish (3808 posts) -

@artisanbreads: I kind of wish they didn't. I'd have liked to see Gang Beasts do it on their own, which I think they could've done, or gone with someone like Devolver or even Iron Galaxy.

I think DF are a really weak publisher/studio. Like you say, their track record hasn't been so hot and they've resorted to just going back to the old well once a year on their point and click adventures.

Tim Schafer is up there with Randy Pitchford in the pantheon of people I wouldn't trust to buy me a beer when it came to their round.

Avatar image for artisanbreads
#25 Edited by ArtisanBreads (9107 posts) -

@jesus_phish: I have been a big fan of his games in the past but as a studio head I see why you would say that. I wish he would go back to purely creative and see how that went. Broken Age was not a good adventure game IMO though so I don't even know what to say. The last thing he had a major hand in (that I know of) that was quality was the fantastic Grim Fandango but since then it's been nothing good, to me.

I guess I can't say how Gang Beasts would be different under someone else but I'm just glad it is being supported by someone.

Avatar image for dudeglove
#26 Posted by dudeglove (13710 posts) -

I don't know what the usual expected return on investments is, but Psychonauts 1 took forever to pick up. It cost a lot at the time for the circumstances DF was in to the point where Schafer was putting his own money in, then it bombed in terms of sales (but not critically), all but faded from knowledge, and it's only seemingly after its dissemination digitally several years after the fact that he's finally made his money back and the game got its due. Psychonauts is/was good, but it wasn't lightning in a bottle.

So no. Throwing in money would just be bragging rights.

Avatar image for whitegreyblack
#27 Posted by whitegreyblack (1950 posts) -

I'd be willing to bet you'll see more return on a 5-year GIC, even at the meager interest rate that would offer you. Even if it made zero interest, you still have your $500 investment guaranteed to come back to you.

Tossing $500 at this Fig investment seems like it's likely just tossing that money away, but I could be wrong. That said, if you feel like you'd like to potentially donate $500 to the game without ever seeing a dime come back to you, it's your money! I would not do it personally.