One of the producers on the Collective project has a Gamasutra blog. His first post bragged about how popular the announcement was, 250,000+ pageviews. Then there's a post about adding Kickstarter support because initially it was only IndieGoGo (possibly a response to World War Machine failing?). Then there's a post giving tips on how to make a successful SE Collective pitch. Then there's a post about the value SE Collective adds in July 2014... then nothing.
So the value it adds is the "Team Assessment", which is basically a short 2-3 page document that you put on your Crowdfunding campaign saying "Square Enix audited us, we are who we say we are, this is the level of development we're at.*
* Square Enix is not responsible for the developers taking your money and running." Actual Square Enix staffers including producers and programmers and directors take part in this process and attach their names to this document.
Moon Hunters had a team assessment. World War Machine had a team assessment. Goetia had a team assessment. The others didn't, so I'm guessing either they were doing their crowdfunding without Square Enix (in which case, what's the point of this service again?) or Square Enix didn't do Team Assessments. Black The Fall has a Square Enix Collective logo on its KS page, but no Team Assessment.
Here's what Goetia's Team Assessment looks like. Is this something that you think would add value to your Kickstarter? Is it likely that funders would a) click the link to go to these documents, and b) that these assessments would lower the "risk" of pledging for consumers?
Let me put it this way. Assume that 100% of all the KS revenue generated by the successful KSes can be attributed to Square Enix. That's a crazy assumption, as I suspect Moon Hunters would have been wildly successful anyway, but we'll pretend it's true. That's a $207,000 value add to the indie ecosystem. I think we can get behind that. But how much did it cost to build Collective? How much staff time? Three or four full-time people are going to get you to costs (including benefits, office space, etc) that exceed the maximum possible value add. SE could have come up with a program where they just gave $15,000 a month to a single producer and told him "in your spare time, outside work hours, donate this to promising looking KickStarters", and the same amount of money would be funnelled to indie developers at the same cost for Square Enix. Now imagine the reality where SEC's contributions to those KSes (both from the value add of the assessment and the pre-funding tips about designing your campaign and the marketing/promotion value) are actually much smaller than the full totals of money those projects took in.