I think the reason that the artifact lands are on the banlist is simply because of variance. To put it short, either the Affinity player wins on turn 3 or gets blown out easily by artifact hate. Affinity right now is somewhere on the middle, with good synergy between its cards but with ample amount of hate (but not insurmountable) in the format. Unbanning the said lands would devolve matches into blowouts for either side, which is not very fun.
Concerning its power level, without testing, I feel that they will definitely power up Affinity. While this is only my opinion, it takes common sense that using artifact lands would make the deck ride the variance train even more. Also, Mox Opal is probably better than some artifact lands, like Tree of Tales, but it makes sense aesthetically to put all 5 on the ban list instead of having 3 or 4 + Mox Opal.
I think generally the point of that reply was that archetypes in modern should be conducive to newer players. When a new player gets to play stax or storm as their first few games, it would definitely leave a bad taste as it is quite uninteractive. This is where I feel that Valanarch doesn't get the fact that Wizards is trying to boost interactivity within games, in light with the recent weakenings of storm and their non support for prison stax and old school blue draw go style of control. It makes sense that this line of reasoning is what would sustain Wizards in getting a steady influx of new players over the years. Also, for me it seems that what Valanarch says is simply what he wants for the format; his definition of control seems to be old school control, which is what Wizards doesn't seemingly want.
Black: Discard + removal
White: Removal + lifegain to sustain the long game
Red: Removal + reach via burn
Now, you might disagree on Red, but it's just the way control in modern is now. Deal with it. Old school blue control is pretty much dead. Nowadays control also wants to interact with the board (mostly with creatures) instead of hard countering. Maybe your definition of Control is different with mine, which is very fine, but yours probably isn't going to happen. And I'm saying this as a Cruel Control player.
While I would prefer draw-go/prison to be very alive, I believe it not existing is for the general better of the game, as I feel casuals hate playing against these kinds of decks and Wizards simply cares about the majority of the player base (which are the casuals). I know I did when I first played the game. I would probably like to see a Preordain or AV unban, but I understand that these may cause other decks to become more powerful.
Prison deck players are probably not jerks and do not want to annoy their opponent. While this is likely the case, they might also not realize that the way their deck is constructed is that it tries to make the opponent not able to do anything.
I used to play prison in both MTG and Yu-Gi-Oh, with a casual playgroup, which led me to find out the hard way that it really is not fun to play with and play against.
Now, for pro players, they don't care, they're used to these things as the main goal is to win. But now, for the casual player, which constitutes most of the MTG player base, they would definitely find it annoying to face a prison deck.
For reference, in modern I play Cruel Control with only Snaps and Cliques, so hopefully I do not come out biased against creatureless strategies. I understand what Wizards is trying to do, and yes, it is to make some $$$. If this leads to a format with dudes simply turning sideways then so be it, I would still play as long as I still enjoy it.
In summary, with the vision of Wizards has for the game, creatureless decks is probably less likely to happen as time goes by.
Concerning its power level, without testing, I feel that they will definitely power up Affinity. While this is only my opinion, it takes common sense that using artifact lands would make the deck ride the variance train even more. Also, Mox Opal is probably better than some artifact lands, like Tree of Tales, but it makes sense aesthetically to put all 5 on the ban list instead of having 3 or 4 + Mox Opal.
I think generally the point of that reply was that archetypes in modern should be conducive to newer players. When a new player gets to play stax or storm as their first few games, it would definitely leave a bad taste as it is quite uninteractive. This is where I feel that Valanarch doesn't get the fact that Wizards is trying to boost interactivity within games, in light with the recent weakenings of storm and their non support for prison stax and old school blue draw go style of control. It makes sense that this line of reasoning is what would sustain Wizards in getting a steady influx of new players over the years. Also, for me it seems that what Valanarch says is simply what he wants for the format; his definition of control seems to be old school control, which is what Wizards doesn't seemingly want.
Black: Discard + removal
White: Removal + lifegain to sustain the long game
Red: Removal + reach via burn
Now, you might disagree on Red, but it's just the way control in modern is now. Deal with it. Old school blue control is pretty much dead. Nowadays control also wants to interact with the board (mostly with creatures) instead of hard countering. Maybe your definition of Control is different with mine, which is very fine, but yours probably isn't going to happen. And I'm saying this as a Cruel Control player.
While I would prefer draw-go/prison to be very alive, I believe it not existing is for the general better of the game, as I feel casuals hate playing against these kinds of decks and Wizards simply cares about the majority of the player base (which are the casuals). I know I did when I first played the game. I would probably like to see a Preordain or AV unban, but I understand that these may cause other decks to become more powerful.
Sorry if quite off-topic.
I used to play prison in both MTG and Yu-Gi-Oh, with a casual playgroup, which led me to find out the hard way that it really is not fun to play with and play against.
Now, for pro players, they don't care, they're used to these things as the main goal is to win. But now, for the casual player, which constitutes most of the MTG player base, they would definitely find it annoying to face a prison deck.
For reference, in modern I play Cruel Control with only Snaps and Cliques, so hopefully I do not come out biased against creatureless strategies. I understand what Wizards is trying to do, and yes, it is to make some $$$. If this leads to a format with dudes simply turning sideways then so be it, I would still play as long as I still enjoy it.
In summary, with the vision of Wizards has for the game, creatureless decks is probably less likely to happen as time goes by.