We hope you guys enjoyed this video that we put together. It was definitely one of the most ambitious ones yet from us, taking months of research, writing, interviews, and editing, but was something fun to attempt! Did you ever try Artifact? If so, what was your experience like?
I am happy for them. They seem to be genuinely good guys. I am not really into Dota, so I never heard about them, so I was worried, that these attempts ruined the company. I am glad they survived. :)
Only after finishing the video, which I liked quite a lot, did I realize the missed opportunity to actually explain the game and its mechanics. Why did it seem more difficult? How did the lane works? Why isnt it as expensive as Hearthstone even when it seems to be more expensive, etc. Wish those would have been covered
Yeah the f2p dilemma is interesting since hearthstone was obviously more expensive but the difference is introduction, progression, and rewards. Artifact had none of that; it was like a physical card game back in the early 2000s and that just won't fly anymore. Not to mention they were basically using the cs:go monetization strategy which again won't fly anymore with new games
I really hope Runeterra keeps doing fine and making progress as a game, it seems like is one of the few ccgs that don't view players as a money machine. I think they learnt from artifact and made it more enjoyable for casual players in some way
I hope so too. Comparing Runeterra to hearthstone (a game I sunk a lot of hours and only ever bought their starter bundle) I can say Runeterra is leagues more generous than hearthstone or any other online cars game.
Runeterra is Riot's entry game. It's never gonna make them money, but they're gonna keep it alive because it expands all of their League related IPs and serves as a gateway for people. They need it for the MMO.
The "terrible for spectators" aspect was definitely what kept me out, I tried to watch a few people play it and it was weirdly difficult to follow. The game clearly had a ton of work put into the visuals but it seemed to have all gone to the wrong places, like the overly ornate boards. Coupled with no F2P option to go try it out for yourself and it's not hard to see why that would turn a lot of people away, you had to spend $20 just to have a decent chance at even figuring out what the game was.
@@marfology I don't think any game failure will ever top Artifact for me. I fell in love with it. I am not much of a card game player, but i've dabbled in MTG and Hearthstone, but Artifact was just exactly what I wanted. Pain.
Now that's irony, a great video which didn't succeed compared to the creators other creations about a great game which didn't succeed compared to the creators other creations.
Man the WePlay organization sounds like a haven for gamers and devs. After the recent debacle of Antivision-Blizzard it's comforting to know that there're actually great companies in the industry.
I'm very impressed with the production quality of this video - it feels like a real documentary. The thoughtful structure and pacing kept me engaged the entire runtime. I loved Artifact, and this video brought back a lot of memories for me. Thank you for making it!
ONE HOUR?? Damn i was looking for something quick to add to my work playlist and this is amazing. I love not having to cycle through vids quickly XD good work
The combination of being hard to watch and a 20$ entry barrier is what doomed artifact. Many people who might have enjoyed the game never tried it because of that I think.
Personally what killed for me was the 20 dolar + ingame market/purchases. I started MTG with Arena, but left it because every set it asked: money or and absurd ammount of time. With the price barrier I hoped that at least the rest of cards would be free, simply play a few hours and you got any deck. Other videos talking about Artifact commented on how even when it was active, you could get all the cards for 35$, but by then, everyone knew the game was death
probably the competitive audience this game is meant to attract plus so many people getting a month-long head start. I wouldn't want to try to play catchup either tbh. better to have a staggered launch for more casual games where most of the playerbase wont care if they ever git gud I've never heard of this game but these interviewers seem incredibly tone deaf. Like yeah it was fun for you because you got to skip ahead of everyone else. It doesn't matter how good the game is if one half of the playerbase is funding the other half.
I cant stand these people honestly I'm glad their game is dead. Just got to the part where random creatures spawn and they're like yeah it doesn't matter. I've never even played this game and it seems obvious to me that a random 2/2 matters a lot more, when you have two new players with two starter decks, than it does when you have two veterans with powerful decks and combos. 'our game is unique because you have to think ahead' none of these people would get past 1000 elo in chess.
@@r.henryjr.1533 let me dumb it down for you. If our decks are all 1/1s then a random 2/2 matters a lot. If our decks are all 10/10s then a random 2/2 doesn't matter very much. These people who got their 10/10s for free to shill the game seem oblivious to how someone might have a different experience with their 1/1s
it probably scared them. "if we ever fucking make Half-Life 3 we better make it like our lives depend on it, because it totally is" and then they made Half-Life Alyx.
It almost feels like LoR was paying attention to what Artifact got right with tournament systems and more activity on board, and not just focus on what made Artifact plumet or what Hearthstone was doing on the other end.
Devs actually was planning LoR before Hearthstone then they dropped the plans when HS released, If they didn't dropped it and didn't remake it, LoR would've flopped too
What do you mean? The only thing that LoR did "right" was having a very consumer-friendly economy. Besides that, LoR has pretty much stagnated and in no way a serious competitor to Hearthstone or Magic Arena. I am genuinely surprised that Riot Games has not shut down runeterra since its viewership is practically nonexistent despite the game being designed from the ground-up to be an ESPORTS.
@@richardsejour7731 14 million players + new events / cards every month + no Chinese release + consumer-friendly monetization + fixed balance changes = game’s stagnating
@@blehaman5950 14 millions players? Where did you hear that? LoR is doing horribly on twitch, so those numbers are either fudged or represent everyone who made an account, but may no longer play. What does no Chinese release have to do with anything?
Amazing video. Been watching card game stream for years now and Artifact is still one of the best I've had the pleasure to enjoy. The WePlay tournament had the best production value (and it was just so fun and comfy with great casters) I've seen on an esports event to this day.
I'm glad Artifact made some good in its short life, but hearing a lot of these content creators reminds me of how I feel about Gigantic and its closure. And who knows how many other dead multiplayer games out there have inspired similar stories, known mostly by people who have long since had to grow past those games' endings?
I feel like there will be more of those stories in the decades to come. The 'live service multiplayer game' is a fairly recent concept, so most of the biggest, most popular ones are still active to varying degrees. There will come a day when people will be like "Remember Destiny 2? Man, so much potential. I put thousands of hours into it back in the day. Yet somehow always walked away frustrated lol." "What ever happened to Seige? Haven't heard about that game in over a decade. What killed it?" "Oh and do you remember those Overwatch games back in the 2010's-2020's? Oh yeah, that was when League of Legends was a thing. "God League, that game was toxic as hell. Glad it finally died." "Don't forget those early BR's like Fortnite and Apex." "Now you're going way back."
Thank you so much for this. Was always interested in trying Artifact but it never seemed like a good time to get in and, just as it was, it just stopped. This video seems like such a thoughtful and earnest send off for a game that looked like it meant a lot to the people you got footage from and the way this channel so consistently manages to paint such caring portraits of these games that came and went is one of the reasons why I enjoy the content here so much. I normally expect vitriolic parroting of online echo speak from longer videos on video games, but this video among the many other videos on this channel manage to convey those sentiments with such a measured portrayal from so many perspectives that the talking heads involved actually feel like people.
I don't know who are the people behind this channel but the investment they display on most of the videos is truly praisable. I enjoyed every minutes of that one.
Maybe you can add 'Documentary:" or "Feature:" or "A Detailed Look:" or a word that can describe these hour long videos (if they are gonna be a thing!). Viewers may adjust expectations and feel more inclined to commit an hour to watch!
Free to play online game is a must here in south-east asia as it will definitely would get more players that would only spend money in the long haul. ver 1.0 of artifact was the opposite of how valve makes online games as it leans to catering to the elite esport players or some people that has money to throw.
Phenomenal video, I remember following the game throughout 2018, and being super hyped. Upon release I immediately was disappointed, too many features were locked behind paywalls and the lack of progression/ladder system made the game boring. I still check in on the artifact subreddit every so often, and it seems that it's finally dying down as well
That bit about people loving to bash on a project with high expectation that falter is so true and him following with the CP2077 comparison is on point as I remember being very alone defending my experience of that game which was and still is very good.
Artifact was the right game from the wrong people. Gameplay wise, it was reasonable in most of the critical areas: primary loop, engagement, conveyance. Solid. People generally got it if they had even a passing acquaintance with MOBAs and TCGs. Problem is, this isn't what people wanted from Valve. A market for a game doesn't just spring up overnight; you need some sort of core to build off of and launch into, and Artifact just didn't have one, couldn't build one, and couldn't keep one. There's a reason Hearthstone still has a few hundred thousand users active at any given time.
The primary loop of Artifact was not okay. Games took forever and were exhausting, and often lacked the satisfying big moments that make people latch onto card games in the first place.
Artifact's built-in tournament lobby is the best, it was so easy to join or even host tournament within the game. Every other games (not just card games) should definitely look into this.
@@Mark-hn1vu the opening bit with the reveal, it doesn't show the full reaction of the crowd. When Artefact appeared, the crowd lost their shit and then "a dota card game" appeared and ti was a full 180. Honestly, one of my favorite announcements
It's a sin that this video hasn't got more viewership, what a wonderfully informative video on the project. Like many I was completely uninformed going into this video, and only knew of the terrible passing horror-stories the community had to endure. This video almost watched as if it were a love letter, an ode to the community that gave Artifact everything. God damn I love a good esports documentary.
One of my close friends was in the last 70 active players of Artifact. He was obsessed with the game, but he was also a marketing student. I remember him ranting to me “the second there’s a debate about your monetization you lost. No one questions magic, that’s how they’ve always done cards. It’s fucking bullshit”
This and Diablo Immortal are the best examples of how managing expectations during an announcement is very important. Particularly when your studio has numerous *highly* beloved and anticipated IPs. While lukewarm reactions may have been inevitable. It was definitely the treatment of these announcements, as these big center pole reveals, that garnered such a negative reflex. I think non-card game fan’s natural reaction would be skepticism or ambivalence. But when one of your favorite developers says we got something you’re going to be excited about, and plays a bit coy with it, people’s gut instinct is going to turn against them when the actual reveal comes out.
Amazing content here, akin to Noclip level deep dive, minus industry insiders. Keep it up, this was an amazing watch, would love to see more work like this.
Phenomenal documentary. I can really tell how important scrutinization of the finer details in retelling the history and player experience of Artifact was for this video. Good work!
You have done amazing work here. Huge props. I love Artifact more then anything else. My heart was crushed when I learned it was being abandoned and discontinued. I still play both Classic for draft play and Foundry to 1v1 with my girlfriend.
I didn't get to play artifact and this is kinda unrelated, but seeing these people during the interviews made me realize how much there are others like me out there who aren't necessarily under the spotlight and this video encouraged me to seek those "others" out. Very random and not anything with to do with the subject, but thank you for this video. It might have just changed my life forever... and for the better!
you guys were WAY too nice about monetisation. thats 100% of the reason i and my friends didnt bother with it. the booing crowd was almost certainly because valve's first game in years was the biggest cashgrab in a genre that accepted it, and you call it "an unusual monetisation method"?
@@ya.fanat.trapa.zhestkogo 60k players at launch, because the game was the first new game by Valve in 12 fucking years. Then literally next month the 60k players went down to 5k and then next months less than 1k players, the game died in 3 months, and currently the game sits at 60 average peak players.
Thank you for making this, it's a great overview of the game's history. Artifact 1.0 is still my most beloved card game and the amount of missed potential is a tragic disappointment.
It really needed an expansion set. Like, just one expansion with all the ideas that couldn’t be fit into the base set could have made the game so much better.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 It needed much more. The art style itself was rather subdued for example. Compare it to their top competitor - Hearthstone. The art and abilities(keywords) their cards have are very obvious, unmistakable and at this point kinda iconic. Artifact art style does not jump out that much and is not really inovative when it comes to layout of the cards. That does not mean that the art was not good, but it was not impresive enough to compensate for other issues with the game so it only compounded on all other problems. Like that heavy new players unfriendlines. With popular card games new potential players will check how the game looks, see some gameplay and will think "yeah I could do that, I could be cool like that, it is not that hard, lets go and try it". Artifact was for new player quite honestly a confusing mess. Certain ammount of RNG is expected with all card games and good card games will give you some option to manipulate that RNG to certain degree. But the kind of RNG that artifact picked to implement into their game was too unfamiliar and felt too confusing. Especialy the arrows. When I first saw it, I had no idea why they are there, if player had any input into where they will go, why some are straight and some are curved away from enemy units, no idea if cards that are oposite to each other can also miss each other if the RNG will say that they should not go straight etc. Too many things that were too unfamiliar and not obvious. That is imho artifact largest failure. It was poor at visual storytelling. Too oriented on all the technical details and how this can go that way or this way, with 3 boards etc. But it was hard to watch if you were not well familiar with it yourselve. And that is something that really detracts new players. As was stated here in this video, largest artifact channel managed to get only 5k views on their vids. Thats how much artifact was unatractive to viewers.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 I agree but I do also think the monetization was also a gigantic issue considering DOTA and Hearthstone were both free to play. Though, even still I much preferred the monetization model of Artifact over Hearthstone (except for the brief period when drafts were buy-in only). It was especially great for players like me that enjoyed experimenting. Off-meta cards were often 3 cents even before the market crashed via the game dying. To your point though, even something as busted as gust could have been handled with more dispel mechanics (one of which was later patched in). It was so demoralizing to see Artifact 1.0 abandoned so readily in favor of a rework. There were a couple things about the rework I liked (namely I thought the Hero card design was more interesting), but overall it was a far less interesting, more milquetoast card game that abandoned so much of what I enjoyed about the original. I could never muster up the interest to try it out.
I am addicted to Legends of Runeterra right now, becuase of the Pirority passing play type. And If artifact was free from the get go, I would've loved to at least try it for like 2-4 weeks at most.
No matter whether you like card games or not it is disappointing to see the company to not come out with a game for 5 years and then get a card game that shouldn’t take 5 years to make
"People don't take card games seriously because they think they're children's games" No, they don't take them seriously because you have to spend hundreds (but more likely) thousands of dollars to be viable competitively
Good editing and interesting topic. I would have loved a bit more of an 'outside' look into the controversies, the leadup, the marketing, the communication etc. As it is now it feels a bit more "But it was so great why are people to blind/mean/stupid to udnerstand how great it is?" It's understandable as the creators and their interview partners all seem to be fans of the game and the goal of the video is to make that voice heard not dredging up past turmoil. It's just me that would have like a bit more an analytical look. Saying 'people are just too impatient/stupid/toxic/greedy' always feels like a copout from actually looking at what happened and why people reacted the way they did 🤔
I’m waiting for them to actually talk about the game design issues. - The overuse of keywords, many of them redundant. - The lack of build-around cards, or creative cards in general. The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever. - The imbalance of mechanical depth in the colors, with Red and Green being almost exclusively boring stat buffs while Blue had basically every mechanic imaginable. There were at least 3 different green heroes that did the exact same thing (increasing units’ survivability) with different phrasing. - Speaking of stats, how sad is it that the best hero at launch was Axe, who was basically a French vanilla unit? - The pacing of games was just a slog. Artifact is a game where the intensity doesn’t go up and down, it just stays at a constant level. The constant micromanagement means that there is no feeling of accomplishment when you do make a game-changing play. - The game took out a lot of implicit randomness by having you draw 2 cards, and then added explicit randomness with the creeps, arrows, and loot system. (They address this, but don’t realize why this is a problem. Both are sources of randomness, but one inherently feels worse.). - The hero respawn mechanic is unintuitive to a fault. The idea that it’s often better to have your hero die than survive means that things that should feel good often don’t. - The way you needed a hero in a lane to play in a lane just... Wasn't fun. Having an opponent play out a turn while you're powerless to interact isn't fun. I'm just not sure how you can fix that, since it also was one of the few ways that knocking out heroes felt good. It’s a shame what happened to artifact, but… I really feel like any post-mortem that doesn’t delve into these game design issues is incomplete.
I WANTED this game to be good. I bought it day one. The feeling of having your hero randomly double teamed and killed by the arrows or having a unit that can kill their tower change target to the creep next to him was terrible. I don't care if it averaged out to being balanced, the game had some of the worst feeling moments of any cards game ever
"The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever." I'd like to introduce you to the base set of yugioh, the legends of blue eyes. A set where there are monsters with defense that no comparable monster can get over, so the game entirely relies on pulling removals to get over each or stagnate forever. At least, prior to limit/bans, you can run 3 copies of every removal, including both ragaki and dark hole, or the game will literally run on forever. Don't get me wrong, valve had almost 20 years advantage on konami as far as card game industry development goes, so they really should do better. But yeah, the worst are often in the past.
@@justanoman6497 Yeah, in hindsight I should have said "except Yugioh". And there are a boatload of failed card games every year, many of which probably have dull base sets.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 - The lack of build-around cards, or creative cards in general. The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever. - The imbalance of mechanical depth in the colors, with Red and Green being almost exclusively boring stat buffs while Blue had basically every mechanic imaginable. There were at least 3 different green heroes that did the exact same thing (increasing units’ survivability) with different phrasing. These things so much, I played Artifact for a while and thought it was alright. Better than the majority of the internet had decided it was. But my favorite part about card games is building decks and that aspect of the game felt very shallow to me. So I was like "oh, okay, rocky start but when we get an expansion or two with new cards this game will be great." I still think thats all the game really needed
This is awesome! You just should do a docu series where every episode is about a certain game and put it up on Netflix!! There's already a handful of games out there that are worth doing documentary like this such as Cyberpunk, No Man's Sky, Warcraft Reforged. Very well done, guys.
Haha thanks, glad to hear that you liked the video. We looked into Netflix before, but there's a whole bunch of licensing issues when it comes to footage, especially that of videos games / esports broadcasts so it might be a while before we get our own Netflix show.
Valve Fans: “Can we have half life 3?” “Can we have a new portal?” “Can we get some TF2 updates?” Valve: “A dota hearthstone it is!” And yes I know that some people were probably asking for a card game. But cmon man. This is the first new PC game your releasing in half a decade. People are desperate for you to actually use your IPs. You have EXPECTATIONS to meet, and a card game is not part of that.
I think what LoR does really well is maximizing gameplay complexity while minimizing mechanical complexity. The priority system (which it apparently got from Artifact) as well as things like banking extra spell mana are examples of simple mechanics that introduce a great level of gameplay complexity. Some of the other Artifact systems like the shop, multiple lanes, and the creep spawning strike me as things that add a lot of mechanical complexity without a sufficient payoff to the gameplay complexity. I haven't played it, so I might be wrong on some of those, but the creep spawning to me at least seems wholly unnecessary. Artifact game designers should have been focused on doing more with less.
I absolutely love the coverage of both popular and niche scenes. I think aspiring game devs can look at these and get an idea of what will make a solid formula for play patterns, models, etc. Especially when they see what went wrong, or how a game can become a cult hit, so they can be more dedicated to polishing a project even when it didn't have the best initial launch. As a viewer, I love that I'm getting introduced to scenes I didn't even know existed. Reminds me of when I discovered the competitive Age of Empires and Custom Robo communities for the first time.
The fact that everyone was wanting a continuation to Valve gemstones like Half-Life and Team Fortress and instead got Artifact led to a lot of negativity that did not fade, and everything went downhill from there. Then them trying to milk as much money as possible from players certainly didn't help. No one wants to be treated like a money milking machine and players will definitely let you know what they feel about that. That negativity from the reveal just tainted everything, even for people who loved the game.
I really think the monetization combined with the complex, viewer unfriendly experience was what killed the game. Anyone who wasn't a hardcore TCG fan was gonna look at the way it plays and go "Man, that seems complicated, but maybe if I try it I might like it. Wait, it costs twenty dollars to even buy in, and arena/draft is paid, and you still need to buy cards? Screw that! I'm gonna play hearthstone... or any other game ever." Then, when the players fell off, it created a death spiral. How can you start learning a game when almost all 1,000 players are competitive level gamers who have been there from the start? I really think this game was doomed from the start. The timing, the monetization, even the gameplay seems quite flawed for the modern gaming market. I question whether this game could've had even moderate success, much less the mega-hit that Valve wanted it to be.
*"even the gameplay seems quite flawed for the modern gaming market."* ------------------------------- Out of curiosity, this isn't implying the attitude of "if it isn't braindead, it isn't gonna sell", is it?
how was it complicated though? I dont understand you or the people in the vid calling 1.0 "complicated", when all that is actually happening is the game telling you how the actions are going to go and randomly putting a creep in lane and then telling you to "suck it up". Having every aspect not connected to playing cards be RNG meant that the only way to win was literally to take it out of the equation. its why Blue Blow Up became the ultimate dominant deck in the meta (especially after cheat death was nerfed to 25% from 50%). The best way to not worry about about the RNG was just to make everything dead until you win.
@@8Kazuja8 Idk, I think the Hero part actually worked to the games advantage, which if you look at LoR and how its trying SOOO HARD to make their Champs better "than just better followers" you can see how if they just used the Hero system from Artifact, it would have saved a lot of pain from having to make these dumb, unwieldy, unkillable monsters that need to be nerfed into obsolescence constantly. Again, the problem i have is most interactivity is made pointless because the simple answer in the game was just "kill all of it dead" multiple times. Maybe if that and cheat death werent there, the game would have had a chance. But at the end of the day, the games took too long, there wasnt any agency on the board, and having most of said agency front loaded to the hand meant whoever top decked first was basically the loser, even with the draw 2.
@@8Kazuja8 well what REALLY HAPPENED was Valve thought the Richard Garfield they had work on was 1993 Richard Garfield that made MTG. Instead they had 2016 Richard Garfield, who is not at all the same person and designer he was back then. It's like if I hired Shigeru Miyamoto to make a game and thinking I was going to get the next Super Mario 3 or World and instead I end up with Wii Music or Star Fox Zero. The decades just run roughshod on you as a person and the result are as everyone saw it. I can totally understand that Valve KNEW they had a piece of shit on their hands because of the complaints leading up to release but spent so much money on RnD and already had the design in place before the game made closed beta that nothing could be changed without making a new game. And that ended up being true. But by then Valve didn't care. Had a ghost crew make the into what should have been from the start, only to leave even THAT unfinished because Steam Deck and VR are the things the company and employees care about now and DCGs are on their way out. And they were right. LoR , the "best one" has only made 16 mil in it's 2 years on the market. The games balance is in shambles and most players don't enjoy the crap PvP. Which sucks because everything else around it is great and amazing. MTGA is trying to destroy itself over greed and Hearthstone is doing whatever while the Blizzard offices are on fire. It just all kinds blows tbh.
@@8Kazuja8 I don't get it either myself. I miss good Card RPGs like Pokemon TCG GB, Card Fighters Clash, Monster Rancher Card, and the Yugioh DS and PSP games. Where it was just about playing cool decks and earning cards at your own pace and sometimes playing against people with your pet deck you've been building. The only game released since like that is Cardpocalypse, and that game is far more story driven and linear and the art style really isn't for everyone. Everything else is just a "lifestyle" game where all of your time and money needs to be devoted to it or you won't be able to compete, and that's how a lot of these games fail. NOBODY does that anymore. Nobody wants to spend every cent they have to get the best cards. nobody wants to travel everywhere just to get to the next big tournament. Definitely not now with COVID. Nobody wants to spend a million dollars for this huge ass tournament spectacle that only a few diehards are interested. And no dev team wants to make cards for the rest of their lives to feed the TCG/DCG beast. If these were just simple buy to play games that were updated once or twice a year for like a year or 2 with an expansion and additional story you could pay one price for, then I think that would be enough. If there was an actual tournament/league mode with rules you could make up, drafts, special promo art cards in the code you could get for participating with players, it would be FINE. But the days of these lifestyle TCG/DCG games is just over.
That documentary feels very indulgent. I got PTSD watching it. It was like reading all over again those reddit or steam fanboys posts explaining that it was all a misunderstanding, that it was just bad press, that the game was excellent, that it's just a problem of "perception", etc. Maybe it's just that it gives so much space to those close-beta players (that were a HUGE part of the problem IMHO).
I think their biggest problem was the hype that got built around it. From what I remember it either got leaked or teased just with the name Artifact. Just from that people speculated. From the name it could be a lot of things. Card game market was already fairly saturated at that point too. And to add insult to injury it cost money unlike it's competitors. So no one expected it to be a card game, the market was already fairly saturated and unlike it's competitors it had an "entrance fee". It's like how blizzard overhyped a mobile game.
It feels so weird seeing people defend the monetisation model when even if “its cheaper than heartstone” is a decent defence. Building a digital card game exactly like its a physical one just doesn’t work. Especially as the big point was the marketplace to basically give a digital card game a secondary market, but with valve always taking a cut, the only reason to sell was if you really only wanted one deck and sold everything else, the card was bad and nobody wanted it, or you wanted to leave and recoup some of your lost cash. And seeing the game close down is exactly why this model doesn’t work, because the cards aren’t really your property the same way they are in a physical tcg.
How is that different than a digital card game making it laborious or downright impossible to obtain all of the cards without spending a substantial amount of money? Most people are reasonable enough to see that free-to-play digital card games are the greatest offenders of pushing monetization to the point where a player is pressured to spend money if they want a chance at staying competitive. On Magic Arena, people spend hundreds of dollars despite the fact that none of the cards have physical value, and to make things even more insane, most of the supporters are people who also play the physical version of mtg, so they are in essence paying for the same cards on an app that is inferior to what they already physically own. I would gladly spend $20 to play a game than hundreds of dollars every couple of sets to remain relevant in Magic Arena. Artifact failed because people were not interested in another digital card game (there were many at that time), not to mention that the game did not receive the support that was advertised earlier on. If Artifact released with the same model, reduced ambitions, but at the time of Hearthstone, then the game would likely still be around.
@@richardsejour7731 You’re missing the point here, I’m not defending the system most games use, just saying this system doesn’t work because it didn’t understand that digital card games aren’t just a tcg on a computer screen, the audience and expectations are different. Part of what makes a secondary market work in a tcg is the fact its secondary, buying singles a direct competition to sealed product, not another fork of monetisation where the game owners take a cut.
@@Cassapphic I understand your point, and I am suggesting that you reconsider your stance since magic arena uses the tcg formula in digital format, yet Magic Arena is extremely successful. For example, 1) Reprints of the same cards (from different sets) are treated as separate cards even if you can have 4 copies of a single card in a deck. This means that you can unlock 12 copies of the same cards (4 copies from 3 different sets) and receive no compensation. This is a major issue because WOTC is notorious for reprinting a LOT of cards, sometimes reprinting the same card 3 times within the last 4 sets. Reprints should not ve included in digital card games since they function exactly the same, but with different skins. There should be an option to get the alternative skin, but its forced on the player thereby reducing the value they get from card packs. 2) Powercreep is rampant. People typically refer to power creep as the practice of releasing cards that fit a similar role as an existing card, but is overall superior. However, the worst form of powercreep is the practice of releasing cards that superannuate existing cards. By that, I mean that 2 cards have the exact same effect, but one card is cheaper to cost, thereby making the other card objectively inferior and useless. A few examples are (Stomp vs. Hunt the Weak, Luminous Bonds Vs. Pacifism, Cancel Vs. Sabotage/every other 3 mana counter, Hieromancer's Cage Vs. Conclave Tribunal/Ixalan Binding, Fabled Passage vs. Evolving Winds, Murderous Rider Vs. Murder, Raging Ceratoks Vs. Questing Beast, Bone Splitters Vs. Spark harvest, Ram through vs Rabid Bite, dual lands from M19 vs many other dual lands, and these examples are only from a few sets). Also, every creature card without an effect is absolutely garbage since they offer no advantage nor are their any archetypes for normal monsters, which Yu-Gi-Oh supports. Digital card games should NOT have cards that are flat out weaker than other cards since it devalues a system where cards already have no value. Why is it that Magic Arena incorporated more tcg elements which are inherently anticonsumer, yet WOTC makes record highs in revenue each year since Arena's release? The only logical answer is that success of digital card games stem from the support and temperament of the community. Most people who play Arena are hardcore fans who would rather play a restricted version of magic because its convenient, and far cheaper than paper. Very few people who play Arena are newcomers since the economy is so anticonsumer and rigid that its nearly impossible to have a sizeable collection without spending some money right off the bat. However, in Artifact's case the core Valve community wanted the game to fail even going as far to aggressively mount a campaign to discredit and sabotage Artifact. Monetization is just an excuse when in reality microtransactions and other monetization scams are nothing new, and are FAR more exploited in other games that are incredibly popular.
I never really hyped any game ever, I know they always exaggerate on the marketing of the game and most of the times disappoint when it's released. This should be mandatory at this point: always set low expectations for whatever product any company is announcing, to avoid this excessive disappointments
This sure was a piece of engaging work, as someone who would never set my foot into playing a card game myself. I feel deeply saddened that the plans fell through for this game as there seemed to be major potential. At the very least some players got to keep some rather fond memories.
That announcement was like going to a restaurant, asking for the chef's choice and seeing the waiter come out with a tray of twix bars... Nothing wrong with twix bars, infact, you would be delighted to see a tray of twix bars 99,9% of the time, just not at that particular context.
@@j0nasbs Yeah, it’s honestly a HUGE contrast compared to Riot’s LoR. It was announced during an important date within their 10 year anniversary stream. Difference is that it wasn’t the only announcement, they delivered on what they promised with their monetization policy, and they actually listen to their playerbase’s feedback. It’s Leagues better than Artifact ever was.
@@FabschOblivion669 1st impression is important. But how you manage your game is still what decide your fate. Despite all the bad press, Artifact still manage to gain some big numbers after launch. They just doesn't know how to keep the momentum. While Riot did well with their first impression. I'd still put more credit on their management side more than the marketting. Had Valve did the same to artifact, they could've survived. Such a shame
Yeah you really can't do shit when people refuse to give you a chance. So many games get made excuses for fuckup after fuckup but when the memes say you can't succeed, you can't succeed.
@@Stroggoii It really do be like that sometimes. In the entertainment industry, regardless of the piece of media (movies, games, comics, shows, etc) first impressions are EVERYTHING.
Wait, autochess is still a thing? As of right now, Mobile MOBA, Genshin, and the strange crypto game is hot right now in south east asia, in which I do not play.
@@williamboshi1855 it's doing great actually also their card game is also entering its 5 or 6th expansion later this week so every multiplayer game Riot has released has been successful for a online game
This editing is AMAZING, wow instant sub, this is the kind of quality is Movie level! This is a Movie, hour long! Love it! Kinda sad to see what happened to Artifact.
@@johnpauljonesisabadass8134 Legends of Runeterra is garbage League of Legends is garbage Team Fight Tactics is garbage Valorant is garbage Arcane is garbage
The nail in the coffin for me was how the card economy was tied to the steam community market, you know how high those prices can go if your played dota or csgo.
And since it was based on a free2play game, people expected it to be similar. But instead it had a price tag, had a pay 2 play model(tickets), had paywall content(the card packs are loot boxes), more computer intensive(it had higher pc spec requirement than Dota2) and unfun gameplay(most games won around not letting players play cards).
Cool vid, from a huge hs player when I heard the hype I was interested in seeing a competitor, but after seeing a bit of gameplay I knew this appealed to whole different type of player. Dota II pretty much abandoned their willingness to accept teaching new players with their complete lack of a proper tutorial, so I knew it would be the same for artifact. The fact they kept to that on a novel game was bewildering to say the least. Hs in a sense is easy to learn but hard to master (maybe less so on the master part, but not super off either), making the f2p aspect the perfect model. Artifact essentially went a route of hard to learn and master, which meant that even if did succeed it would not be a ‘Hearthstone killer’. It’s a tcg yes, but that’s where the similarities end with a game like hs. It’s a great story, but I found it laughable to consider in hs competition, not due to quality, but the style.
Just one thing I missed: The first gameplay video we had, was from a smartphone camera from someone filming people playing at PAX west, yeah, the first view on the gameplay wasn't a 1080p gameplay trailer
Amazing video. I was, forever will be a "Long Hauler", I think almost all of us accepted that it's ded, but boy it was a good ride. and a good game is a good game, even when everyone stops playing it.
We hope you guys enjoyed this video that we put together. It was definitely one of the most ambitious ones yet from us, taking months of research, writing, interviews, and editing, but was something fun to attempt!
Did you ever try Artifact? If so, what was your experience like?
crazy video. Honestly big props to everyone involved! You guys can really be proud of this one
INSTASUB after this. So well made.
NOW MAKE ABOUT RUNETERRA. I SEE THAT YOU HAVEN'T MADE A SINGLE VIDEO ABOUT IT
I’m only 5 minutes in but I love this type of video!
recovering from my biontech shot, perfect video to listen to while in bed!
It’s pretty ironic that basically every popular legends of runeterra streamer was an artifact refugee.
All except for the papaya lord grapplr, forged from the fires of missing allegiance from the depths of runeterra itself.
Card game skills generally carry over well between game to game so it makes sense.
@@rogerbacon7746 Grapplr? That guy was on Artifact too.
@@rogerbacon7746 Grapplr was one of the most consistent Artifact 1.0 streamers
Taking even one more step back: A lot of Artifact streamers had a background in Gwent. An interesting journey.
1 hour? Oh this gon' get good.
And thanks to artifact, we now have one of the best tournament organizers ever, WePlay is doing incredible work in dota 2.
And Tekken too!
I am happy for them. They seem to be genuinely good guys.
I am not really into Dota, so I never heard about them, so I was worried, that these attempts ruined the company. I am glad they survived. :)
Only after finishing the video, which I liked quite a lot, did I realize the missed opportunity to actually explain the game and its mechanics. Why did it seem more difficult? How did the lane works? Why isnt it as expensive as Hearthstone even when it seems to be more expensive, etc. Wish those would have been covered
This is my one criticism of all their videos
Yeah the f2p dilemma is interesting since hearthstone was obviously more expensive but the difference is introduction, progression, and rewards. Artifact had none of that; it was like a physical card game back in the early 2000s and that just won't fly anymore. Not to mention they were basically using the cs:go monetization strategy which again won't fly anymore with new games
I really hope Runeterra keeps doing fine and making progress as a game, it seems like is one of the few ccgs that don't view players as a money machine. I think they learnt from artifact and made it more enjoyable for casual players in some way
I hope so too. Comparing Runeterra to hearthstone (a game I sunk a lot of hours and only ever bought their starter bundle) I can say Runeterra is leagues more generous than hearthstone or any other online cars game.
@@glider210 how about gwent?
@@glider210 "leagues more generous" is that a pun? Hehe
@@TheDarkstar3601 why do i see you everywhere
Runeterra is Riot's entry game. It's never gonna make them money, but they're gonna keep it alive because it expands all of their League related IPs and serves as a gateway for people. They need it for the MMO.
I'm hoping Akshon makes more of these type of videos.
way better than thescoreesports who just do videos reading twitter tweets and wiki pages for content
One of the best esports channels on RUclips
@@thadex454 they should rename to thescoretwittertwitchsports
The set up to SunsFan’s tournament prize pool was great. Laughed out loud
The "terrible for spectators" aspect was definitely what kept me out, I tried to watch a few people play it and it was weirdly difficult to follow. The game clearly had a ton of work put into the visuals but it seemed to have all gone to the wrong places, like the overly ornate boards. Coupled with no F2P option to go try it out for yourself and it's not hard to see why that would turn a lot of people away, you had to spend $20 just to have a decent chance at even figuring out what the game was.
it's a shame because once you actually got through the tutorials and into a game, it was very fun.
@@marfology I don't think any game failure will ever top Artifact for me. I fell in love with it. I am not much of a card game player, but i've dabbled in MTG and Hearthstone, but Artifact was just exactly what I wanted. Pain.
im quite sadden that this video didnt get much traction as the rest of your other video. by far the best video on your channel and it shows.
Now that's irony, a great video which didn't succeed compared to the creators other creations about a great game which didn't succeed compared to the creators other creations.
Man the WePlay organization sounds like a haven for gamers and devs. After the recent debacle of Antivision-Blizzard it's comforting to know that there're actually great companies in the industry.
WePlay Academy League events in CSGO have better production value than top tier 1 tournaments
I'm very impressed with the production quality of this video - it feels like a real documentary. The thoughtful structure and pacing kept me engaged the entire runtime. I loved Artifact, and this video brought back a lot of memories for me. Thank you for making it!
ONE HOUR?? Damn i was looking for something quick to add to my work playlist and this is amazing. I love not having to cycle through vids quickly XD good work
Better content than all the esports Twitch drama channels out there. These guys are underrated
I'm still terribly sad about artifact. It looked like everything I wanted in a card game and yet it was plagued by so much awful. Rest in peace buddy.
Artifact- a hour long group therapy session
The combination of being hard to watch and a 20$ entry barrier is what doomed artifact. Many people who might have enjoyed the game never tried it because of that I think.
Personally what killed for me was the 20 dolar + ingame market/purchases. I started MTG with Arena, but left it because every set it asked: money or and absurd ammount of time.
With the price barrier I hoped that at least the rest of cards would be free, simply play a few hours and you got any deck. Other videos talking about Artifact commented on how even when it was active, you could get all the cards for 35$, but by then, everyone knew the game was death
probably the competitive audience this game is meant to attract plus so many people getting a month-long head start. I wouldn't want to try to play catchup either tbh. better to have a staggered launch for more casual games where most of the playerbase wont care if they ever git gud
I've never heard of this game but these interviewers seem incredibly tone deaf. Like yeah it was fun for you because you got to skip ahead of everyone else. It doesn't matter how good the game is if one half of the playerbase is funding the other half.
I cant stand these people honestly I'm glad their game is dead. Just got to the part where random creatures spawn and they're like yeah it doesn't matter. I've never even played this game and it seems obvious to me that a random 2/2 matters a lot more, when you have two new players with two starter decks, than it does when you have two veterans with powerful decks and combos.
'our game is unique because you have to think ahead' none of these people would get past 1000 elo in chess.
@@letsmakeit110
>I've never even played the game
>I clearly know more than people who have extensively played the game
@@r.henryjr.1533 let me dumb it down for you. If our decks are all 1/1s then a random 2/2 matters a lot. If our decks are all 10/10s then a random 2/2 doesn't matter very much. These people who got their 10/10s for free to shill the game seem oblivious to how someone might have a different experience with their 1/1s
The Artifact reveal reaction is still the funniest event in gaming history.
Diablo Immortal was funnier.
it probably scared them. "if we ever fucking make Half-Life 3 we better make it like our lives depend on it, because it totally is" and then they made Half-Life Alyx.
that and peggle 2
It almost feels like LoR was paying attention to what Artifact got right with tournament systems and more activity on board, and not just focus on what made Artifact plumet or what Hearthstone was doing on the other end.
Devs actually was planning LoR before Hearthstone then they dropped the plans when HS released, If they didn't dropped it and didn't remake it, LoR would've flopped too
LoR does several things right that Artifact missed. Most notably, it actually had a variety of fun buildaround cards in the first set.
What do you mean? The only thing that LoR did "right" was having a very consumer-friendly economy. Besides that, LoR has pretty much stagnated and in no way a serious competitor to Hearthstone or Magic Arena.
I am genuinely surprised that Riot Games has not shut down runeterra since its viewership is practically nonexistent despite the game being designed from the ground-up to be an ESPORTS.
@@richardsejour7731 14 million players + new events / cards every month + no Chinese release + consumer-friendly monetization + fixed balance changes = game’s stagnating
@@blehaman5950 14 millions players? Where did you hear that? LoR is doing horribly on twitch, so those numbers are either fudged or represent everyone who made an account, but may no longer play.
What does no Chinese release have to do with anything?
Amazing video. Been watching card game stream for years now and Artifact is still one of the best I've had the pleasure to enjoy. The WePlay tournament had the best production value (and it was just so fun and comfy with great casters) I've seen on an esports event to this day.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Damn man! You should do one on Autochess, Underlords, and the underlying development of these games. TFT and Hearthstone Battlegrounds as well!
I'm glad Artifact made some good in its short life, but hearing a lot of these content creators reminds me of how I feel about Gigantic and its closure. And who knows how many other dead multiplayer games out there have inspired similar stories, known mostly by people who have long since had to grow past those games' endings?
Anyone else remember battlefield play4free? :(
@@GoScience123 yeppp good times
Look into Achron. Cry with me
@@MrDeadDivision Or Everquest Next!
I feel like there will be more of those stories in the decades to come. The 'live service multiplayer game' is a fairly recent concept, so most of the biggest, most popular ones are still active to varying degrees. There will come a day when people will be like
"Remember Destiny 2? Man, so much potential. I put thousands of hours into it back in the day. Yet somehow always walked away frustrated lol."
"What ever happened to Seige? Haven't heard about that game in over a decade. What killed it?"
"Oh and do you remember those Overwatch games back in the 2010's-2020's? Oh yeah, that was when League of Legends was a thing.
"God League, that game was toxic as hell. Glad it finally died."
"Don't forget those early BR's like Fortnite and Apex."
"Now you're going way back."
These videos are so incredibly made, I can’t believe they don’t have a massive audience
Thank you so much for this. Was always interested in trying Artifact but it never seemed like a good time to get in and, just as it was, it just stopped. This video seems like such a thoughtful and earnest send off for a game that looked like it meant a lot to the people you got footage from and the way this channel so consistently manages to paint such caring portraits of these games that came and went is one of the reasons why I enjoy the content here so much. I normally expect vitriolic parroting of online echo speak from longer videos on video games, but this video among the many other videos on this channel manage to convey those sentiments with such a measured portrayal from so many perspectives that the talking heads involved actually feel like people.
I don't know who are the people behind this channel but the investment they display on most of the videos is truly praisable. I enjoyed every minutes of that one.
Thanks so much for the kind words
Already looking forward to the road to OW2 documentary 🤣 we appreciate y’all!
As the once voice of the Artificers Guild. Thank you for this. As Sunsfan has his tournament for closure, I guess I finally get mine
This is a legendary-tier documentary on the game. Production quality is amazing. BGM amazing. Wow great job Akshon.
An hour long banger? I’ll go get some popcorn
It's an hour long hauler...
Watching Magwai come so far since his days playing Duelyst… wow. Love the guy.
Now you've reminded me about duelyst
:( wish I could play that game again
@@harrysteel864 ahh damn, had no idea Duelyst shut down, was a whole bunch of fun.
Maybe you can add 'Documentary:" or "Feature:" or "A Detailed Look:" or a word that can describe these hour long videos (if they are gonna be a thing!). Viewers may adjust expectations and feel more inclined to commit an hour to watch!
I mean there is that timestamp thing
@@popo237 but you can't see the time stamp in the thumbnail
@@thevenerabledoubleu1771 bruh thumbnail timestamps?
@@popo237 i believe in mobile you can't see timestamps
Free to play online game is a must here in south-east asia as it will definitely would get more players that would only spend money in the long haul. ver 1.0 of artifact was the opposite of how valve makes online games as it leans to catering to the elite esport players or some people that has money to throw.
Phenomenal video, I remember following the game throughout 2018, and being super hyped. Upon release I immediately was disappointed, too many features were locked behind paywalls and the lack of progression/ladder system made the game boring.
I still check in on the artifact subreddit every so often, and it seems that it's finally dying down as well
That bit about people loving to bash on a project with high expectation that falter is so true and him following with the CP2077 comparison is on point as I remember being very alone defending my experience of that game which was and still is very good.
Artifact was the right game from the wrong people.
Gameplay wise, it was reasonable in most of the critical areas: primary loop, engagement, conveyance. Solid. People generally got it if they had even a passing acquaintance with MOBAs and TCGs.
Problem is, this isn't what people wanted from Valve. A market for a game doesn't just spring up overnight; you need some sort of core to build off of and launch into, and Artifact just didn't have one, couldn't build one, and couldn't keep one.
There's a reason Hearthstone still has a few hundred thousand users active at any given time.
The primary loop of Artifact was not okay. Games took forever and were exhausting, and often lacked the satisfying big moments that make people latch onto card games in the first place.
Artifact's built-in tournament lobby is the best, it was so easy to join or even host tournament within the game. Every other games (not just card games) should definitely look into this.
Dude just drops an hour-long video essay on that one game that got the really funny "YEAAAAAAH- awwwwww" reaction, the absolute madman
Can you tell me what the yeah aww refetence is?
@@Mark-hn1vu search up DotA Artifact game reveal reaction
@@amacheez3270 Ty
@@Mark-hn1vu the opening bit with the reveal, it doesn't show the full reaction of the crowd. When Artefact appeared, the crowd lost their shit and then "a dota card game" appeared and ti was a full 180. Honestly, one of my favorite announcements
After watching the entire Animajor and watching this, my main take away is that WePlay is the best tournament organizer ever
Not into card games, but I love history lessons like this
What killed Artifact- $20 entry 'barrier' instead of $5 or even Free then just micro transactions for packs, sleeves, etc.
It's a sin that this video hasn't got more viewership, what a wonderfully informative video on the project. Like many I was completely uninformed going into this video, and only knew of the terrible passing horror-stories the community had to endure. This video almost watched as if it were a love letter, an ode to the community that gave Artifact everything.
God damn I love a good esports documentary.
One of my close friends was in the last 70 active players of Artifact. He was obsessed with the game, but he was also a marketing student. I remember him ranting to me “the second there’s a debate about your monetization you lost. No one questions magic, that’s how they’ve always done cards. It’s fucking bullshit”
This and Diablo Immortal are the best examples of how managing expectations during an announcement is very important. Particularly when your studio has numerous *highly* beloved and anticipated IPs.
While lukewarm reactions may have been inevitable. It was definitely the treatment of these announcements, as these big center pole reveals, that garnered such a negative reflex.
I think non-card game fan’s natural reaction would be skepticism or ambivalence. But when one of your favorite developers says we got something you’re going to be excited about, and plays a bit coy with it, people’s gut instinct is going to turn against them when the actual reveal comes out.
Amazing content here, akin to Noclip level deep dive, minus industry insiders. Keep it up, this was an amazing watch, would love to see more work like this.
Much appreciated!
Phenomenal documentary. I can really tell how important scrutinization of the finer details in retelling the history and player experience of Artifact was for this video. Good work!
You have done amazing work here. Huge props. I love Artifact more then anything else. My heart was crushed when I learned it was being abandoned and discontinued. I still play both Classic for draft play and Foundry to 1v1 with my girlfriend.
i remember people starting streaming porn, tv shows and even gore vids under the artifact directory on Twitch
We need more long-form documentaries on the channel. I’ve heard this story many times, but this was so well executed that I couldn’t help but stay
I didn't get to play artifact and this is kinda unrelated, but seeing these people during the interviews made me realize how much there are others like me out there who aren't necessarily under the spotlight and this video encouraged me to seek those "others" out. Very random and not anything with to do with the subject, but thank you for this video. It might have just changed my life forever... and for the better!
you guys were WAY too nice about monetisation. thats 100% of the reason i and my friends didnt bother with it. the booing crowd was almost certainly because valve's first game in years was the biggest cashgrab in a genre that accepted it, and you call it "an unusual monetisation method"?
>biggest cashgrab
>20$ game
>60k peak online
What r u talking about? U people r so dumb.
@@ya.fanat.trapa.zhestkogo 60k players at launch, because the game was the first new game by Valve in 12 fucking years.
Then literally next month the 60k players went down to 5k and then next months less than 1k players, the game died in 3 months, and currently the game sits at 60 average peak players.
I know this type of vid is hard to make, but i need MOAR VID LIKE THIS. Love it guys
Thank you for making this, it's a great overview of the game's history. Artifact 1.0 is still my most beloved card game and the amount of missed potential is a tragic disappointment.
IKR, same here, i crai
It really needed an expansion set. Like, just one expansion with all the ideas that couldn’t be fit into the base set could have made the game so much better.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 It needed much more. The art style itself was rather subdued for example. Compare it to their top competitor - Hearthstone. The art and abilities(keywords) their cards have are very obvious, unmistakable and at this point kinda iconic. Artifact art style does not jump out that much and is not really inovative when it comes to layout of the cards.
That does not mean that the art was not good, but it was not impresive enough to compensate for other issues with the game so it only compounded on all other problems.
Like that heavy new players unfriendlines. With popular card games new potential players will check how the game looks, see some gameplay and will think "yeah I could do that, I could be cool like that, it is not that hard, lets go and try it". Artifact was for new player quite honestly a confusing mess. Certain ammount of RNG is expected with all card games and good card games will give you some option to manipulate that RNG to certain degree. But the kind of RNG that artifact picked to implement into their game was too unfamiliar and felt too confusing. Especialy the arrows. When I first saw it, I had no idea why they are there, if player had any input into where they will go, why some are straight and some are curved away from enemy units, no idea if cards that are oposite to each other can also miss each other if the RNG will say that they should not go straight etc.
Too many things that were too unfamiliar and not obvious. That is imho artifact largest failure. It was poor at visual storytelling. Too oriented on all the technical details and how this can go that way or this way, with 3 boards etc. But it was hard to watch if you were not well familiar with it yourselve. And that is something that really detracts new players. As was stated here in this video, largest artifact channel managed to get only 5k views on their vids.
Thats how much artifact was unatractive to viewers.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 I agree but I do also think the monetization was also a gigantic issue considering DOTA and Hearthstone were both free to play. Though, even still I much preferred the monetization model of Artifact over Hearthstone (except for the brief period when drafts were buy-in only). It was especially great for players like me that enjoyed experimenting. Off-meta cards were often 3 cents even before the market crashed via the game dying.
To your point though, even something as busted as gust could have been handled with more dispel mechanics (one of which was later patched in). It was so demoralizing to see Artifact 1.0 abandoned so readily in favor of a rework. There were a couple things about the rework I liked (namely I thought the Hero card design was more interesting), but overall it was a far less interesting, more milquetoast card game that abandoned so much of what I enjoyed about the original. I could never muster up the interest to try it out.
I am addicted to Legends of Runeterra right now, becuase of the Pirority passing play type. And If artifact was free from the get go, I would've loved to at least try it for like 2-4 weeks at most.
and then we got Legends of Runeterra. and everything was ok.
its riots job to give a dead games players a second home
well, its free. while artifacts is just cashgrab
An hour long video, Akshon you shouldn't have!
No matter whether you like card games or not it is disappointing to see the company to not come out with a game for 5 years and then get a card game that shouldn’t take 5 years to make
GOD DAMN!! This is one of my favorite videos from the channel period.
The production level of this video is so good. Great job Akshon team !
Thank you!
IMO, It's the timing of announcement that really let a lot of people down, same with diablo immortals
AAA devs not making AAA games? LOL
@@thadex454 more like promoting a spin off before the main series, when all the fans are waiting decades for news of the main series.
@@thadex454 IM okay with what ever games they make. Creative game is not always aaa budget lvl. But look diablo imortal reskin mobile game they Made
"People don't take card games seriously because they think they're children's games" No, they don't take them seriously because you have to spend hundreds (but more likely) thousands of dollars to be viable competitively
seriously im a card game player and when I heard that I was like no that's not correct at all.
Brosephs, I can't believe ya'll still deliver on hour-long content, you mad lads!
Good editing and interesting topic. I would have loved a bit more of an 'outside' look into the controversies, the leadup, the marketing, the communication etc. As it is now it feels a bit more "But it was so great why are people to blind/mean/stupid to udnerstand how great it is?"
It's understandable as the creators and their interview partners all seem to be fans of the game and the goal of the video is to make that voice heard not dredging up past turmoil. It's just me that would have like a bit more an analytical look. Saying 'people are just too impatient/stupid/toxic/greedy' always feels like a copout from actually looking at what happened and why people reacted the way they did 🤔
I’m waiting for them to actually talk about the game design issues.
- The overuse of keywords, many of them redundant.
- The lack of build-around cards, or creative cards in general. The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever.
- The imbalance of mechanical depth in the colors, with Red and Green being almost exclusively boring stat buffs while Blue had basically every mechanic imaginable. There were at least 3 different green heroes that did the exact same thing (increasing units’ survivability) with different phrasing.
- Speaking of stats, how sad is it that the best hero at launch was Axe, who was basically a French vanilla unit?
- The pacing of games was just a slog. Artifact is a game where the intensity doesn’t go up and down, it just stays at a constant level. The constant micromanagement means that there is no feeling of accomplishment when you do make a game-changing play.
- The game took out a lot of implicit randomness by having you draw 2 cards, and then added explicit randomness with the creeps, arrows, and loot system. (They address this, but don’t realize why this is a problem. Both are sources of randomness, but one inherently feels worse.).
- The hero respawn mechanic is unintuitive to a fault. The idea that it’s often better to have your hero die than survive means that things that should feel good often don’t.
- The way you needed a hero in a lane to play in a lane just... Wasn't fun. Having an opponent play out a turn while you're powerless to interact isn't fun. I'm just not sure how you can fix that, since it also was one of the few ways that knocking out heroes felt good.
It’s a shame what happened to artifact, but… I really feel like any post-mortem that doesn’t delve into these game design issues is incomplete.
I WANTED this game to be good. I bought it day one. The feeling of having your hero randomly double teamed and killed by the arrows or having a unit that can kill their tower change target to the creep next to him was terrible. I don't care if it averaged out to being balanced, the game had some of the worst feeling moments of any cards game ever
"The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever."
I'd like to introduce you to the base set of yugioh, the legends of blue eyes.
A set where there are monsters with defense that no comparable monster can get over, so the game entirely relies on pulling removals to get over each or stagnate forever. At least, prior to limit/bans, you can run 3 copies of every removal, including both ragaki and dark hole, or the game will literally run on forever.
Don't get me wrong, valve had almost 20 years advantage on konami as far as card game industry development goes, so they really should do better. But yeah, the worst are often in the past.
@@justanoman6497 Yeah, in hindsight I should have said "except Yugioh". And there are a boatload of failed card games every year, many of which probably have dull base sets.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 - The lack of build-around cards, or creative cards in general. The base set for Artifact might be the most boring base set in any card game ever.
- The imbalance of mechanical depth in the colors, with Red and Green being almost exclusively boring stat buffs while Blue had basically every mechanic imaginable. There were at least 3 different green heroes that did the exact same thing (increasing units’ survivability) with different phrasing.
These things so much, I played Artifact for a while and thought it was alright. Better than the majority of the internet had decided it was. But my favorite part about card games is building decks and that aspect of the game felt very shallow to me. So I was like "oh, okay, rocky start but when we get an expansion or two with new cards this game will be great."
I still think thats all the game really needed
Such a shame I really like the game but damn is the management of the game piss poor...
i have no clue how this video has 30k views yet is one of the best videos i have watched in a long time
This is awesome! You just should do a docu series where every episode is about a certain game and put it up on Netflix!! There's already a handful of games out there that are worth doing documentary like this such as Cyberpunk, No Man's Sky, Warcraft Reforged. Very well done, guys.
Haha thanks, glad to hear that you liked the video. We looked into Netflix before, but there's a whole bunch of licensing issues when it comes to footage, especially that of videos games / esports broadcasts so it might be a while before we get our own Netflix show.
Valve Fans:
“Can we have half life 3?”
“Can we have a new portal?”
“Can we get some TF2 updates?”
Valve: “A dota hearthstone it is!”
And yes I know that some people were probably asking for a card game. But cmon man. This is the first new PC game your releasing in half a decade. People are desperate for you to actually use your IPs. You have EXPECTATIONS to meet, and a card game is not part of that.
Dota is Valve's second-biggest game, and used to be the first. It makes sense to expand on its setting.
@@Enceladeans financially? Yes. But financially wise decisions are not equivalent to ‘making your fans happy’ decisions
@@pandastical9205 u still live in a world where companies cares about what fans want? Come on man its business and it always was.
@@pandastical9205 The fans love Dota, hence its player count.
As someone who had no idea what Artifact was about, I can now see the many things Legends of Runeterra took from it and perfected
I think what LoR does really well is maximizing gameplay complexity while minimizing mechanical complexity. The priority system (which it apparently got from Artifact) as well as things like banking extra spell mana are examples of simple mechanics that introduce a great level of gameplay complexity. Some of the other Artifact systems like the shop, multiple lanes, and the creep spawning strike me as things that add a lot of mechanical complexity without a sufficient payoff to the gameplay complexity. I haven't played it, so I might be wrong on some of those, but the creep spawning to me at least seems wholly unnecessary. Artifact game designers should have been focused on doing more with less.
I absolutely love the coverage of both popular and niche scenes. I think aspiring game devs can look at these and get an idea of what will make a solid formula for play patterns, models, etc. Especially when they see what went wrong, or how a game can become a cult hit, so they can be more dedicated to polishing a project even when it didn't have the best initial launch.
As a viewer, I love that I'm getting introduced to scenes I didn't even know existed. Reminds me of when I discovered the competitive Age of Empires and Custom Robo communities for the first time.
The fact that everyone was wanting a continuation to Valve gemstones like Half-Life and Team Fortress and instead got Artifact led to a lot of negativity that did not fade, and everything went downhill from there. Then them trying to milk as much money as possible from players certainly didn't help. No one wants to be treated like a money milking machine and players will definitely let you know what they feel about that. That negativity from the reveal just tainted everything, even for people who loved the game.
I really think the monetization combined with the complex, viewer unfriendly experience was what killed the game. Anyone who wasn't a hardcore TCG fan was gonna look at the way it plays and go "Man, that seems complicated, but maybe if I try it I might like it. Wait, it costs twenty dollars to even buy in, and arena/draft is paid, and you still need to buy cards? Screw that! I'm gonna play hearthstone... or any other game ever." Then, when the players fell off, it created a death spiral. How can you start learning a game when almost all 1,000 players are competitive level gamers who have been there from the start?
I really think this game was doomed from the start. The timing, the monetization, even the gameplay seems quite flawed for the modern gaming market. I question whether this game could've had even moderate success, much less the mega-hit that Valve wanted it to be.
*"even the gameplay seems quite flawed for the modern gaming market."*
-------------------------------
Out of curiosity, this isn't implying the attitude of "if it isn't braindead, it isn't gonna sell", is it?
how was it complicated though? I dont understand you or the people in the vid calling 1.0 "complicated", when all that is actually happening is the game telling you how the actions are going to go and randomly putting a creep in lane and then telling you to "suck it up". Having every aspect not connected to playing cards be RNG meant that the only way to win was literally to take it out of the equation. its why Blue Blow Up became the ultimate dominant deck in the meta (especially after cheat death was nerfed to 25% from 50%). The best way to not worry about about the RNG was just to make everything dead until you win.
@@8Kazuja8 Idk, I think the Hero part actually worked to the games advantage, which if you look at LoR and how its trying SOOO HARD to make their Champs better "than just better followers" you can see how if they just used the Hero system from Artifact, it would have saved a lot of pain from having to make these dumb, unwieldy, unkillable monsters that need to be nerfed into obsolescence constantly.
Again, the problem i have is most interactivity is made pointless because the simple answer in the game was just "kill all of it dead" multiple times. Maybe if that and cheat death werent there, the game would have had a chance. But at the end of the day, the games took too long, there wasnt any agency on the board, and having most of said agency front loaded to the hand meant whoever top decked first was basically the loser, even with the draw 2.
@@8Kazuja8 well what REALLY HAPPENED was Valve thought the Richard Garfield they had work on was 1993 Richard Garfield that made MTG. Instead they had 2016 Richard Garfield, who is not at all the same person and designer he was back then. It's like if I hired Shigeru Miyamoto to make a game and thinking I was going to get the next Super Mario 3 or World and instead I end up with Wii Music or Star Fox Zero. The decades just run roughshod on you as a person and the result are as everyone saw it. I can totally understand that Valve KNEW they had a piece of shit on their hands because of the complaints leading up to release but spent so much money on RnD and already had the design in place before the game made closed beta that nothing could be changed without making a new game. And that ended up being true. But by then Valve didn't care. Had a ghost crew make the into what should have been from the start, only to leave even THAT unfinished because Steam Deck and VR are the things the company and employees care about now and DCGs are on their way out. And they were right. LoR , the "best one" has only made 16 mil in it's 2 years on the market. The games balance is in shambles and most players don't enjoy the crap PvP. Which sucks because everything else around it is great and amazing. MTGA is trying to destroy itself over greed and Hearthstone is doing whatever while the Blizzard offices are on fire. It just all kinds blows tbh.
@@8Kazuja8 I don't get it either myself. I miss good Card RPGs like Pokemon TCG GB, Card Fighters Clash, Monster Rancher Card, and the Yugioh DS and PSP games. Where it was just about playing cool decks and earning cards at your own pace and sometimes playing against people with your pet deck you've been building. The only game released since like that is Cardpocalypse, and that game is far more story driven and linear and the art style really isn't for everyone. Everything else is just a "lifestyle" game where all of your time and money needs to be devoted to it or you won't be able to compete, and that's how a lot of these games fail. NOBODY does that anymore. Nobody wants to spend every cent they have to get the best cards. nobody wants to travel everywhere just to get to the next big tournament. Definitely not now with COVID. Nobody wants to spend a million dollars for this huge ass tournament spectacle that only a few diehards are interested. And no dev team wants to make cards for the rest of their lives to feed the TCG/DCG beast.
If these were just simple buy to play games that were updated once or twice a year for like a year or 2 with an expansion and additional story you could pay one price for, then I think that would be enough. If there was an actual tournament/league mode with rules you could make up, drafts, special promo art cards in the code you could get for participating with players, it would be FINE. But the days of these lifestyle TCG/DCG games is just over.
That documentary feels very indulgent. I got PTSD watching it. It was like reading all over again those reddit or steam fanboys posts explaining that it was all a misunderstanding, that it was just bad press, that the game was excellent, that it's just a problem of "perception", etc.
Maybe it's just that it gives so much space to those close-beta players (that were a HUGE part of the problem IMHO).
I think their biggest problem was the hype that got built around it. From what I remember it either got leaked or teased just with the name Artifact. Just from that people speculated. From the name it could be a lot of things. Card game market was already fairly saturated at that point too. And to add insult to injury it cost money unlike it's competitors. So no one expected it to be a card game, the market was already fairly saturated and unlike it's competitors it had an "entrance fee". It's like how blizzard overhyped a mobile game.
I was waiting for them to finish Artifact. I wanted to really play it as my main card game
Cover duelyst! The game had so much potential
Man, I COMPLETELY forgot about Duelyst! That game was crazy fun.
I feel that if Valve had more first party output, this wouldn't have been nearly as ill received.
This was an amazing. You're team has a knack for long form production and I would 100% watch another one again.
1 hour video from the best esports docs channel on the platform?
Sign me up.
That was really well done, very enjoyable, have you considered doing one on Heroes of the Storm?
They do have one on heroes of the storm! ruclips.net/video/W7F67W7sglI/видео.html
It feels so weird seeing people defend the monetisation model when even if “its cheaper than heartstone” is a decent defence. Building a digital card game exactly like its a physical one just doesn’t work. Especially as the big point was the marketplace to basically give a digital card game a secondary market, but with valve always taking a cut, the only reason to sell was if you really only wanted one deck and sold everything else, the card was bad and nobody wanted it, or you wanted to leave and recoup some of your lost cash. And seeing the game close down is exactly why this model doesn’t work, because the cards aren’t really your property the same way they are in a physical tcg.
How is that different than a digital card game making it laborious or downright impossible to obtain all of the cards without spending a substantial amount of money? Most people are reasonable enough to see that free-to-play digital card games are the greatest offenders of pushing monetization to the point where a player is pressured to spend money if they want a chance at staying competitive. On Magic Arena, people spend hundreds of dollars despite the fact that none of the cards have physical value, and to make things even more insane, most of the supporters are people who also play the physical version of mtg, so they are in essence paying for the same cards on an app that is inferior to what they already physically own.
I would gladly spend $20 to play a game than hundreds of dollars every couple of sets to remain relevant in Magic Arena.
Artifact failed because people were not interested in another digital card game (there were many at that time), not to mention that the game did not receive the support that was advertised earlier on. If Artifact released with the same model, reduced ambitions, but at the time of Hearthstone, then the game would likely still be around.
@@richardsejour7731 You’re missing the point here, I’m not defending the system most games use, just saying this system doesn’t work because it didn’t understand that digital card games aren’t just a tcg on a computer screen, the audience and expectations are different. Part of what makes a secondary market work in a tcg is the fact its secondary, buying singles a direct competition to sealed product, not another fork of monetisation where the game owners take a cut.
@@Cassapphic I understand your point, and I am suggesting that you reconsider your stance since magic arena uses the tcg formula in digital format, yet Magic Arena is extremely successful. For example,
1) Reprints of the same cards (from different sets) are treated as separate cards even if you can have 4 copies of a single card in a deck. This means that you can unlock 12 copies of the same cards (4 copies from 3 different sets) and receive no compensation. This is a major issue because WOTC is notorious for reprinting a LOT of cards, sometimes reprinting the same card 3 times within the last 4 sets. Reprints should not ve included in digital card games since they function exactly the same, but with different skins. There should be an option to get the alternative skin, but its forced on the player thereby reducing the value they get from card packs.
2) Powercreep is rampant. People typically refer to power creep as the practice of releasing cards that fit a similar role as an existing card, but is overall superior. However, the worst form of powercreep is the practice of releasing cards that superannuate existing cards. By that, I mean that 2 cards have the exact same effect, but one card is cheaper to cost, thereby making the other card objectively inferior and useless. A few examples are (Stomp vs. Hunt the Weak, Luminous Bonds Vs. Pacifism, Cancel Vs. Sabotage/every other 3 mana counter, Hieromancer's Cage Vs. Conclave Tribunal/Ixalan Binding, Fabled Passage vs. Evolving Winds, Murderous Rider Vs. Murder, Raging Ceratoks Vs. Questing Beast, Bone Splitters Vs. Spark harvest, Ram through vs Rabid Bite, dual lands from M19 vs many other dual lands, and these examples are only from a few sets). Also, every creature card without an effect is absolutely garbage since they offer no advantage nor are their any archetypes for normal monsters, which Yu-Gi-Oh supports. Digital card games should NOT have cards that are flat out weaker than other cards since it devalues a system where cards already have no value.
Why is it that Magic Arena incorporated more tcg elements which are inherently anticonsumer, yet WOTC makes record highs in revenue each year since Arena's release? The only logical answer is that success of digital card games stem from the support and temperament of the community. Most people who play Arena are hardcore fans who would rather play a restricted version of magic because its convenient, and far cheaper than paper. Very few people who play Arena are newcomers since the economy is so anticonsumer and rigid that its nearly impossible to have a sizeable collection without spending some money right off the bat. However, in Artifact's case the core Valve community wanted the game to fail even going as far to aggressively mount a campaign to discredit and sabotage Artifact. Monetization is just an excuse when in reality microtransactions and other monetization scams are nothing new, and are FAR more exploited in other games that are incredibly popular.
This is like a full fledged documentary on topics I am gravitating around ever slightly. Gonna see if I find more and sub afterwards!
Wow. I thoroughly enjoyed this video. The production is off the charts. Keep going! I’ve got notifications turned on.
1 hour! I hope Akshon makes more of these, I love it!
I never really hyped any game ever, I know they always exaggerate on the marketing of the game and most of the times disappoint when it's released. This should be mandatory at this point: always set low expectations for whatever product any company is announcing, to avoid this excessive disappointments
This sure was a piece of engaging work, as someone who would never set my foot into playing a card game myself. I feel deeply saddened that the plans fell through for this game as there seemed to be major potential. At the very least some players got to keep some rather fond memories.
this game's announcement was much more painful than "you guys have phones right?" from blizzard on diablo immortal mobile game.
Just the initial reaction of the game was more than enough to doom it.
That announcement was like going to a restaurant, asking for the chef's choice and seeing the waiter come out with a tray of twix bars... Nothing wrong with twix bars, infact, you would be delighted to see a tray of twix bars 99,9% of the time, just not at that particular context.
@@j0nasbs Yeah, it’s honestly a HUGE contrast compared to Riot’s LoR. It was announced during an important date within their 10 year anniversary stream. Difference is that it wasn’t the only announcement, they delivered on what they promised with their monetization policy, and they actually listen to their playerbase’s feedback. It’s Leagues better than Artifact ever was.
@@FabschOblivion669 1st impression is important. But how you manage your game is still what decide your fate. Despite all the bad press, Artifact still manage to gain some big numbers after launch. They just doesn't know how to keep the momentum.
While Riot did well with their first impression. I'd still put more credit on their management side more than the marketting. Had Valve did the same to artifact, they could've survived. Such a shame
Yeah you really can't do shit when people refuse to give you a chance.
So many games get made excuses for fuckup after fuckup but when the memes say you can't succeed, you can't succeed.
@@Stroggoii It really do be like that sometimes. In the entertainment industry, regardless of the piece of media (movies, games, comics, shows, etc) first impressions are EVERYTHING.
I love these types of game documentaries, and the editing during it all was amazing! 10/10
The reason it failed was not the pricing model, not the RNG - the ONLY reason it failed was Valve giving up on it.
Wow, didn't expect an hour long video out of this channel. I'm gonna enjoy this one over the next few days
They were able to make a video about artifact that's longer than the lifespan of the game itself.
yay, underlords next
I'm so expecting this episode and to put riots autochess success in contrast with underlord
Wait, autochess is still a thing? As of right now, Mobile MOBA, Genshin, and the strange crypto game is hot right now in south east asia, in which I do not play.
@@triadwarfare I don't know if riots game(TFT?) is doing well or not. but this video is a 1h postmortem, can do the same for underlord
@@williamboshi1855 riot's tft has 10million players per day, so i think yeah it doing all right
@@williamboshi1855 it's doing great actually also their card game is also entering its 5 or 6th expansion later this week so every multiplayer game Riot has released has been successful for a online game
This editing is AMAZING, wow instant sub, this is the kind of quality is Movie level! This is a Movie, hour long! Love it! Kinda sad to see what happened to Artifact.
Artifact is unique, they could end up successfull like LoR if they done it right.
Its a miss from the start, pr,marketing,business model,gameplay
Library of ruina?
@@qempire7833 Legends of Runeterra, another card game.
@@amacheez3270 he's trolling, typical dotard
@@johnpauljonesisabadass8134
Legends of Runeterra is garbage
League of Legends is garbage
Team Fight Tactics is garbage
Valorant is garbage
Arcane is garbage
The nail in the coffin for me was how the card economy was tied to the steam community market, you know how high those prices can go if your played dota or csgo.
And since it was based on a free2play game, people expected it to be similar.
But instead it had a price tag, had a pay 2 play model(tickets), had paywall content(the card packs are loot boxes), more computer intensive(it had higher pc spec requirement than Dota2) and unfun gameplay(most games won around not letting players play cards).
Yeah also don't like the idea of 15% of every purchase or card sale going to valve
The fall of Artifact is always an interesting story
Cool vid, from a huge hs player when I heard the hype I was interested in seeing a competitor, but after seeing a bit of gameplay I knew this appealed to whole different type of player. Dota II pretty much abandoned their willingness to accept teaching new players with their complete lack of a proper tutorial, so I knew it would be the same for artifact. The fact they kept to that on a novel game was bewildering to say the least. Hs in a sense is easy to learn but hard to master (maybe less so on the master part, but not super off either), making the f2p aspect the perfect model. Artifact essentially went a route of hard to learn and master, which meant that even if did succeed it would not be a ‘Hearthstone killer’. It’s a tcg yes, but that’s where the similarities end with a game like hs. It’s a great story, but I found it laughable to consider in hs competition, not due to quality, but the style.
Just one thing I missed: The first gameplay video we had, was from a smartphone camera from someone filming people playing at PAX west, yeah, the first view on the gameplay wasn't a 1080p gameplay trailer
Amazing video. I was, forever will be a "Long Hauler", I think almost all of us accepted that it's ded, but boy it was a good ride. and a good game is a good game, even when everyone stops playing it.
Great video. Makes me feel nostalgic without ever playing the game.
Hope you guys do more videos like these even just once every few months.
It's impressive how much Valve improved since Artifact and Underlords, an incredible comeback story.
what they improved.both game have no update more than 2 years is that the thing you reference as 'improving' ?