Confused on Steam Play and Proton? Be sure to check out our guide.
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.

Valve's Dota themed card game Artifact has now well and truly failed, as they've now stopped the 2.0 redevelopment which is now named Artifact Foundry with the original as Artifact Classic and both now free to play.

In a post titled "The Future of Artifact", Valve mentioned how the player count fell off dramatically and it was pretty much dead shortly after being released. Even though the big 2.0 revamp was far along in development, they've now formally and totally shelved it as they "haven't managed to get the active player numbers to a level that justifies further development at this time".

Neither game has micro-transactions, they're both properly free now. However, previous purchases entitle players to Collectors Edition cards. These special cards can be bought and sold on the Steam Market, players who purchased it originally will also be able to earn these cards by playing, free players joining now will not.

There are some major differences between them like how you play across the board. The original, now Artifact Classic you would play each lane across the game in a sequence of turns, but Artifact Foundry has a more simplified take on it where you have the whole board and play in any lane at a time. Each version also has different game modes available.

For a full run-down of the differences between Artifact Classic and Artifact Foundry, see this post.

Both versions are now on the combined Steam store page.

Personally, I am sad to see this. Artifact had fun and engaging gameplay, along with great visuals but it was the monetization model that ultimately killed it. The idea that you had to pay for it, then pay more to play more of it across some of the modes was not good. Perhaps in time now it's free, it might see a reasonable rise in the player count. For now though, Valve has no further plans to update either version.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
13 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly checked on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly. You can also follow my personal adventures on Bluesky.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
25 comments
Page: 1/2»
  Go to:

rkfg Mar 4, 2021
The long haul has finally ended. It's truly sad, the game was fun while it lasted.
Kimyrielle Mar 4, 2021
May it be a lesson to the industry that there are limits to how much you can milk people with shady monetization schemes. It might work for a long time, but eventually people are going to notice that they're getting nickeled and dimed.
questioner9 Mar 4, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter
I don't really understand this. Hasn't Artifact 2 been in closed beta? How would they expect to get the player count up before they released it or made it an open beta?
I had the Artifact Beta 2 steam page on my wishlist and never saw anything about it becoming available.
RickAndTired Mar 5, 2021
I signed up for the closed beta and never got invited.

They chose to not let people play and then said not enough people played.
dubigrasu Mar 5, 2021
Well, is Valve. They may get back to it in 10 years or so. Time flows differently for them.
Rooster Mar 5, 2021
I completely forgot that this was a thing.
TheSHEEEP Mar 5, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
I don't really understand this. Hasn't Artifact 2 been in closed beta? How would they expect to get the player count up before they released it or made it an open beta?
I had the Artifact Beta 2 steam page on my wishlist and never saw anything about it becoming available.
Yeah, their reasoning is more than a little shady.

"We didn't get high player numbers with our opt-in beta that many didn't even know about."
No shit.
I, too, was just waiting for 2.0 to come out to give it a go. As I suspect the vast majority of others were.

IMO, it's probably just a pretext argument for them losing faith either that it will do good once out or losing faith that they can actually fix the problems.


Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 5 March 2021 at 7:48 am UTC
arvigeus Mar 5, 2021
They chose to not let people play and then said not enough people played.

Probably they got negative feedback and this was the final nail in the coffin.
Arten Mar 5, 2021
So we now know who get job collect data for Apple court order...
junibegood Mar 5, 2021
I can't tell if they are really abandonning the game and just being nice with players who supported it so far, or if it's a devious attempt at attracting more players, only to gradually switch back to a pay-to-win model again once those new players are settled and can be milked more easily...
gustavoyaraujo Mar 5, 2021
If it was free to play from start, maybe the result would be different.
14 Mar 5, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
On the funding model, I compare to Magic. You walk into a brick and mortar store never having played Magic before. An employee says, "Hey, give it a shot," and hands you a free demo deck (30 cards). You get a good idea how the game works at its basic level. Maybe you want more now, so you buy a starter deck. You get bored of your options there, so you start buying booster packs, etc.

I don't see anything wrong with selling a digital card game product the same way. Where you can go wrong is: no demo mode to try it out, or unfair advantage for those who buy more cards. It's hard to balance, yes, but the people who have more cards should ideally just have more variety and those with fewer cards should still be able to win. I never played Artifact, so I don't know what the paid cards situation was like, but I know Valve failed giving a free taste.
Purple Library Guy Mar 5, 2021
If it was free to play from start, maybe the result would be different.
Yeah . . . maybe it would have been a massive success and yet lost them money.
HAHAHA!

C'mon lazy fatman! The only Valve game We want has a number 3 on it...
TheSHEEEP Mar 6, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
HAHAHA!

C'mon lazy fatman! The only Valve game We want has a number 3 on it...
Artifact 3.0?
Purple Library Guy Mar 6, 2021
HAHAHA!

C'mon lazy fatman! The only Valve game We want has a number 3 on it...
Artifact 3.0?
No, silly! Portal 3!
Mal Mar 6, 2021
  • Supporter
Artifact story is the most obvious and immediate proof that in gaming there are no untouchable Gods when it comes to publishers.

Valve is a beacon of light for gamers with Steam. But when it pushes to far and go anti-consumer they are as vulnerable to gamers backlash as anyone else. We've seen this many times and also with other companies (CD - project). These facts dismantle the rethoric other openly anti consumer companies argue to attack us when we strongly oppose their misdeeds, that in some way gamers are Valve groupies always ready to defend them against anyone and anything and at the same time attacking their competitors with no logic or reasonable argument.

Artifact in specific has been a well deserved failure. But it has been a publishing failure rather than a development one. The game was actually good, it was the monetization model chosen that killed it. Maybe making it F2P might allow it to live a 2nd, or better, an actual life.
stuff Mar 6, 2021
I made a posting and suggested to make Foundry open source. Probably won't happen (as they probably already decided against it, as otherwise they already would have done it. They know what open source is and already contribute with things like proton), but perhaps Valve will consider it, if there is enough interest:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1269260/discussions/0/3112522283879362228/
Purple Library Guy Mar 7, 2021
Artifact story is the most obvious and immediate proof that in gaming there are no untouchable Gods when it comes to publishers.

Valve is a beacon of light for gamers with Steam. But when it pushes to far and go anti-consumer they are as vulnerable to gamers backlash as anyone else. We've seen this many times and also with other companies (CD - project). These facts dismantle the rethoric other openly anti consumer companies argue to attack us when we strongly oppose their misdeeds, that in some way gamers are Valve groupies always ready to defend them against anyone and anything and at the same time attacking their competitors with no logic or reasonable argument.

Artifact in specific has been a well deserved failure. But it has been a publishing failure rather than a development one. The game was actually good, it was the monetization model chosen that killed it. Maybe making it F2P might allow it to live a 2nd, or better, an actual life.
Generally agreed. But I don't think it's paying for the game that bothered people so much as the pay-to-win model imported from physical card games.
1xok Mar 8, 2021
I have made a quick starting guide:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2418823427

The game is fun and not to hard.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
The comments on this article are closed.