So that's not very good then. I wonder if this is something Obsidian were expecting or are they surprised by it. No way to know though.
If number of Steam owners factors in the Backers (it should), then PoE2 had a challenge out the gate if there was a Backer disparity between PoE1 and 2 (73K vs. 33K). Still, the amount people pledged/Backer would make a difference.
While it certainly funded well (and they should be congratulated for that), I do wonder about the marketing push from Fig and in terms of profits, the % that Fig takes before/after/during the campaign - or what % they take after the product is released (I don't know how the payment works vs. Kickstarter, but I'd be curious to know).
You're already losing about 30% to Steam anyway (that's the price of admission and getting eyes on your game), but the Fig part of the equation is more of a mystery to me, and that would set it apart from PoE1, potentially.
I imagine when it comes to paying Fig's share as well, there'd also be some issues with Fig and board members being technically paid a % of the crowfunding of their own games outside what their company gets, but I'm not sure how that works, either. (If someone knows based on Fig policies, I'd love to know.)