• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

NeoRaider

Member
Feb 7, 2018
7,321
The collectible card game Artifact released on November 28, and had 60,740 concurrent players that day. A good start—but it was all downhill from there. Last night, its total concurrent players dipped just below 1,500 for the first time ever—a 97.5 percent drop from launch. Yes, many online games struggle to find an audience on Steam, but not usually the ones made by Valve itself.

Today, Artifact game is currently ranked 145 on Steam Charts out of all games being played on Steam. That wedges it in-between Dark Souls II and Assassin's Creed Origins, two single-player games that have been out for over a year. Even Portal 2, Valve's much-praised puzzler from 2011, currently has more players online than Artifact.

The Dota 2-inspired card game caught some negative press early on when it came out that there was no way to get new cards without paying money. Contrary to the free-to-play model established by the most successful digital card game of the last few years, Blizzard's Hearthstone, Valve decided to charge $20 for Artifact and also for tickets to compete in its "gauntlet" mode where prizes could be earned. Artifact cards can also be resold between players, creating a secondary market where players can pay money directly for better decks.

I wrote at the time that this alternative model didn't feel unusually onerous, and I still think that. But it's become clear in the weeks since that the model is not attracting players to the game. An early round of review bombing by people angry with the game's monetization scheme has only given way to more negative reviews, despite Valve's initial attempts to make Artifact more balanced and add a way to earn new packs simply by playing.

A December 11 update added two sorely-needed features: leaderboards for certain modes and a chat wheel that let players communicate with one another during matches. On December 20, Valve released another big update, this time rebalancing some of the more overpowered cards and, more importantly, adding skill ratings for players and a leveling system that allowed players to earn free card packs after reaching certain milestones.

Players apparently remained unimpressed, since they continued to steadily leave the game in the subsequent weeks. Some of them have complaints about the game's reliance on RNG mechanics, while others say they're tired of having to continually pay for tickets to compete in the game's prize modes

More: https://kotaku.com/valves-card-game-artifact-is-running-out-of-players-1831816328
 

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,821
I wonder if they'll try and salvage it by going F2P before it's completely dead.
 

gschmidl

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Dec 3, 2017
122
It's true, Dark Souls II has been out for over a year.
 

Ferrio

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,046
After it's all said and done I'd really like a post mortem about this games inception and development. Seems like there'd be a ton of interesting stories and lessons to be learned.

Do we have any interviews with Garfield about this games development and him working with Valve?
 

Maple

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,719
Less than 1500 concurrent players for a newly release game from Valve, based on Dota 2 lore, and designed from the ground up to be competitively viable.

It's really just stunning.
 

Trace

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,688
Canada
Less than 1500 concurrent players for a newly release game from Valve, based on Dota 2 lore, and designed from the ground up to be competitively viable.

It's really just stunning.

I'm still bitter from what they did at PAX and I'm never playing it after how they had that booth set up. It seems like almost everything about this game, from the promotion, to the monetization, to the release was botched.
 

dDASTARDLY

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
702
I know nothing about the game really, but whenever I get in the mood to play a card game I prefer playing on mobile.

Why isn't this game on android or the apstore?
 

Butch

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,438
Valve will probably bring it back up eventually, it happened before to other gaas games, I wouldn't say it's going to die just yet.
 

Deleted member 49438

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 7, 2018
1,473
Less than 1500 concurrent players for a newly release game from Valve, based on Dota 2 lore, and designed from the ground up to be competitively viable.

It's really just stunning.

I had no idea it was based in DOTA 2 lore. Does DOTA 2 have Lore that people care about? I assume people just care about DOTA 2 because of the gameplay, seeing as it's main selling point is that it is the updated version of the old Warcraft fan mod.
 

Maple

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,719
It feels like Valve has just been holding back for so long, and then when they finally try a little to make a new game, they fail. I think Artifact would have obviously been far more successful if the monetization model was tweaked for F2P.

But they have other opportunities as well that they don't seem to be taking advantage of. Team Fortress 3 in the Source 2 engine. F2P. Boom...there's your Overwatch competitor that would probably do insanely well.
 

Lunaray

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,731
Valve needs to make F2P events, like casual/tournament play with only preconstructed decks. Maybe make actually accessible tutorials for the game that walks players through the nuances step by step. I'm having a blast now but the skill floor is high and the learning curve is probably what is really messing with retention because no one knows what they're doing the first several hours of the game and continually losing isn't fun.
 

collige

Member
Oct 31, 2017
12,772
They need to pull a FFXIV on it, really. It's not unsalvageable.
I know nothing about the game really, but whenever I get in the mood to play a card game I prefer playing on mobile.

Why isn't this game on android or the apstore?
They announced mobile versions, but there's no ETA on when they're coming out. I suspect getting the microtransactions working in the iOS ecosystem is going to be a huge pain.
 

Ferrio

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,046
But they have other opportunities as well that they don't seem to be taking advantage of. Team Fortress 3 in the Source 2 engine. F2P. Boom...there's your Overwatch competitor that would probably do insanely well.

Overwatch would murder TF3. It just has a way wider appeal.
 

Deleted member 8593

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
27,176
As I mentioned in the other thread, this reeks of Lawbreakers with the reporting and user feedback generating a snowball effect that will slowly but surely kill the game. It's Valve so they aren't really in a position where they have to worry and I am sure they could reinvigorate it but alas.
 

dDASTARDLY

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
702
The game wouldn't even be mobile friendly imo. More involved than your average CCG.

Ugh, why would you launch a game like this and can't even compete in the spaces the competition competes in?

F2P and mobile is what's needed. I don't know anyone that plays ccg's on a desktop...a phablet maaaybe, but a phone screen is just right imo.
 

TheClaw7667

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,704
I really enjoy playing it. I've mostly played Call To Arms as I am not good enough to construct my own deck. I think the biggest hurdle is price and how unfriendly it is to new spectators.

Before it came out I hated watching streams as I just couldn't wrap my head around what was happening. It's not that complicated once you play through the tutorial but that requires people to spend money on the game.

It really is a shame how bad it's doing as I think it's a really well designed game.
 

AvernOffset

Member
May 6, 2018
546
It's a real shame. The core gameplay is fantastic, but they've everything around it. It's one of the cheapest digital card games to play competitively right now, yet people think it's really expensive. It's a really challenging, complex game, yet people seem to go in expecting a light and breezy experience and end up hating it as a result. There were some questionable balance decisions pointed out during the beta, but they were ignored until after the game launched. They had early tournaments that didn't have casters attempting to explain the gameplay, despite it only having been played by closed beta players. They've basically fucked up on literally everything except the gameplay itself. I really hope they can turn things around, but they've been so quiet lately that I'm rapidly losing hope that the game can be redeemed.
 

Lunaray

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,731
Ugh, why would you launch a game like this and can't even compete in the spaces the competition competes in?

F2P and mobile is what's needed. I don't know anyone that plays ccg's on a desktop...a phablet maaaybe, but a phone screen is just right imo.

I disagree that it's model unfriendly. I think it's quite intuitive to implement swipe left or right to switch lanes. Aside from the lanes it's not much different from other board games on mobile. I hope they get rid of all the superfluous animations in the mobile version - it's kind of distracting.
 

Weebos

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,060
I don't think there is room in the market for so many digital card games.

Tons of physical card games have come and gone, some with enormous development investment. The same will happen to these, inevitably a big one was destined to fail.
 

impact

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,380
Tampa
As I mentioned in the other thread, this reeks of Lawbreakers with the reporting and user feedback generating a snowball effect that will slowly but surely kill the game. It's Valve so they aren't really in a position where they have to worry and I am sure they could reinvigorate it but alas.
If the games weren't dying these articles would never have been written.

Its time to stop blaming everyone else but the devs for their failed games.
 

Ferrio

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,046
Ugh, why would you launch a game like this and can't even compete in the spaces the competition competes in?

F2P and mobile is what's needed. I don't know anyone that plays ccg's on a desktop...a phablet maaaybe, but a phone screen is just right imo.

Because it's a board game that they're trying to force to be a CCG. This game should have never been framed as competition for MTG/Hearthstone, it's too different. Doing that just made everyone compare it to those games. Now they're paying for it because surprise surprise, MTG/Hearthstone are really good at being CCGs.
 

Rover

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,412
I would certainly drive the price lower since way more people would be getting free packs, but it would probably still be better than now.

I mean they wouldn't be able to have it. As far as I am aware, there is no F2P game that allows you to sell in-game stuff for money. It would be too prone to card farmers just doing stupid shit to grind cards to sell for cash. I could be wrong about that, but it sounds like a bad idea. $20 to play a game is not an outrageous concept, especially when you can sell cards you don't want to offset the cost.
 

Yerffej

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,493
As I mentioned in the other thread, this reeks of Lawbreakers with the reporting and user feedback generating a snowball effect that will slowly but surely kill the game. It's Valve so they aren't really in a position where they have to worry and I am sure they could reinvigorate it but alas.
This makes little sense. Implying bad word of mouth is killing the numbers? C'mon. A lot of big card game streamers were all about it early on. Crickets now. It's not a conspiracy.
 

Rover

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,412
Because it's a board game that they're trying to force to be a CCG. This game should have never been framed as competition for MTG/Hearthstone, it's too different. Doing that just made everyone compare it to those games.

There isn't really a functional distinction here, and the fact is that it is still more like a CCG than not.