What came as a surprise to me was the $500k goal. During early look it showed the puny goal of $20k, and we were told this was wrong, but I was under the impression there was no actual goal and this was moving on regardless. This was due in large part to the initial plan of getting EEA versions as soon as one pledged, which implied the campaign could not fail. The change to "after the campaign" seemed to simply be brought on by my suggestion - I think I said it, anyway - that someone could pledge, get the game, and immediately remove their pledge.
When I saw the $500k number (by no means a high number for a solid fighting game), I assumed it was a placeholder as well. When that stayed the number for launch, I thought it would get "fixed" again. With that goal, I never actually expected the project to succeed, which is why I backed on Patreon to get the game now rather than wait until completion. While I wish Sirlin et al the best in this endeavour and would love some big name blogger to make magic happen, I've been seeing this at best as a visibility campaign, like Pocket Rumble's first attempt at Kickstarter: a way to get on people's radar and sign them up to hear about the next attempt.
Why? Because Yomi had a "sweet spot" pledge of $300+ and Codex $200+, and they barely cleared $500k together. That's with a lot of Sirlin regulars pledging over $500 apiece over both projects. In this one, what's the sweet spot, really? On could easily argue $20. I got a Codex box for a friend, so my pledge went il $200. Getting an FS code for a friend adds $20 - so any sub-community can get keys at $20 per player, plus an optional one-time $30 pledge to get EEA for everyone. This campaigns might need twenty times the crowd from Codex to even hit the goal.
My $100 pledge is really hoping for it to succeed, but my $10 on Patreon is actually a bet against it. Note that every person who puts in $10 for the Patreon build now can be thought of $10 wasted on making the Fig goal and collecting that money. (it's also a guaranteed $10 invested in the game, which is great for the game. It's just no good for the Fig campaign.)
But if it's regroup, redesign and retry, with some features pushed off to stretch goals to make the target lower, quicker demo access, and more promotion from more interested people, it seems like that could be a sound plan, if not the initial intent. For the time being, probably keep going like this is it, just in case it works out.