I could agree with that - partly I even do - if there wouldn´t be the fact that the Fig campaign is a success so far.still have two yet-to-be released crowdfunded games doesn't sit well with a lot of people
- you mentioned in your post is an idicator that most people trust inxile.T:ToN is in early access and reception on Steam has been "mostly postive"
Success or failure is a relation of this event to previous and past events in current or other enviroment (if it is not measured by a goal). From viewpoint of collected revenues this project could be called quite successful, since it has collected more money than WL2 and BTIV. But if you consider the amount of Backers to this point it does not compare to other inXile projects and most of the funds are investments that have to be paid back, if WL3 sells enough copies. This can be due to the choice of the enviroment (Fig) or due to other factors, like that dissatisfaction with WL2 and the currently not released project, that are in the production pipeline and etc.
A very interesting observation, but let us not forget that the campaign is still going on. The chances are existent that the number of backers will rise.But if you consider the amount of Backers to this point it does not compare to other inXile projects
I do not see why this fact is a trust issue towards inxile for not delivering a pretty good game.and most of the funds are investments that have to be paid back, if WL3 sells enough copies.
Technically it states nothing about the expected quality of WL3, but investing is not equal to buying a game. And all the KS backers were true buyers of the game, but this is not the Fig model.