Now on to the next point of comparison: RNG elements. ![]() Really I don't have a clear culprit on this one. Maybe the difference is simply the lack of an "auto-pass" button in Artifact? However, Magic the Gathering uses a fairly similar system, and I don't think I have to go into detail over just how popular Arena has become. At first I speculated that it was a symptom of the initiative system where players pass actions back and forth, requiring both players to not just be constantly waiting on their opponent, but also responding, even if that response is just "pass". I agree with the sentiment that Artifact games feel longer than they actually are, and in contrast to Auto Chess I have some ideas on why that might be. I think that with Auto Chess being so popular, we can confidently strike that one out, because Auto Chess matches take up to 40-50 minutes, and it obviously hasn't harmed the game's appeal at all.īut that's not to say that player perception isn't valid. The first thing I want to compare is something that many people have said is one of the big reasons why Artifact lacks long-term appeal: that the matches are too long. Auto Chess, on the other hand, is such a massive out of nowhere success that if we separated it from Dota 2, it would be the 4th most played game on Steam. It's not dead, and those numbers would be fine for a small indie game or otherwise niche genre, but from a major, reputable developer like Valve, it's pretty embarrassing. I think we all know at this point that Artifact is barely hanging on, with less than 1000 players most of the time, often dipping down to sub 500.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |