Kaplan Says Overwatch Heroes Could Be Retired Eventually

General Discussion
Prev 1 8 9 10 26 Next
That would be horrible. I paid for loot boxes specifically to get stuff for one character. (Tracer) I maxed out overything but the sprays so far and if they retired her I'd be seriously upset. I'm invested in the game price plus an extra $150 just to do that. That's over two hundred bucks to play 90% of the time as one character.
Note that he said 'could' be retired. He didn't say they would be.

Though I wonder if they'll 'retire' the old heroes like Ana, S76, Reinhardt, etc. and just replace them with younger heroes with the same skill sets. Essentially it would be just changing the voice actors and skins on the heroes by default.
I could see this happening in Competitive Play, or even because of "lore" reasons. If so, there should be a mode where these are all still available, because of the money (cosmetics) tied to champions.
08/24/2016 05:45 PMPosted by Urazz
Note that he said 'could' be retired. He didn't say they would be.

Though I wonder if they'll 'retire' the old heroes like Ana, S76, Reinhardt, etc. and just replace them with younger heroes with the same skill sets. Essentially it would be just changing the voice actors and skins on the heroes by default.


That is way too rational a thought for these people. Up the anger and angst a bit.
Going to throw Blizzard a life preserver here just in case they really are thinking of doing this asinine thing.

First (virtual slap across your face) don't you ever dare remove any heroes.

Second, if balancing an unwieldy roster ever gets to be too much for you then create character blocks where you can only choose characters from a specific block to play with characters from the same block. This way you only have to balance say 100 characters against one another at any one time.

Not saying I would enjoy that very much, but at least it's a better alternative to out and out taking our favorites behind the barn and shooting them.
Tried to make a reddit thread on r/Overwatch. Was deleted instantly
Jeff. I like ya, you sometimes seem to have the best interests of the game in mind, but then you turn around and do stuff like this. Not the first time, probably not the last.

You're considering at some point retiring characters. Of course you didn't say you ~will~, but the thought alone is scary. Let's talk about this a bit.

First, I'm assuming that Overwatch will never amass a cast the size of DotA2, or, worse, League of Legends. I think no one expects it, and I think no one wants it. Overwatch started with an respectable cast, and that's how I hope it stays.

That begs the question: Why even consider retiring characters? It's not like all these characters were cheaply made: Each character has unique voice clips, skins, sprays, and a lot of other cosmetics. I know a lot of time, money, and effort is spent on games. You're willing to just...throw that away? Just because their kits don't mesh with the meta and you don't wanna waste resources balancing them? What gives?

Not to mention players have favorite heroes, and they play a lot, buy lootboxes, trying to customize them the way they want. Is there any guarantee that players would be compensated if their favorite hero is retired, and all of their collectables are lost?

I have a lot of questions, and I'm hoping, Jeff, you'll give us some answers. I know you said nothing concrete, but I feel the ~consideration~ alone is scaring me.

I bought Overwatch because of the promise of free future content. I am very strapped for cash, and I can only make a few major purchases per year in general, not just video games. It's not 'entitlement' or anything, it's why I bought the game. That promise made me commit to Overwatch.

And don't give me this crap about how you can't keep developing new content if microtransactions were gone or anything. Splatoon did it without any extra money coming in, that started the thought that "Hey, extra content doesn't always have to cost money". That's where, I assume, you picked up the idea.

The recent events is making me worried, Jeff. Please. Say something to help with this. I don't want my favorite hero retired, even if they are weak in the meta or whatever the case may be.
Removing characters is the way for a lazy, incompetent development team to "balance" their game. This isn't just directed to Blizzard, but any game company in general.

Removing a character is the same as saying "We know we f*cked up, but we are not going to fix our mistake". Hearthstone has done something vaguely similar, introducing Standard Mode.

Standard Mode, however, brings much more merit than harm, so I feel it was an acceptable decision to make (and many CCG/TCGs do this anyways). Meanwhile, the similar merits of Standard Mode (which was the reason Naxxramas and GvG was removed from the competitive scene) do not exist in Overwatch.

For those with no Hearthstone background., Naxxramas and GvG were the first Adventure and Card Pack expansions for Hearthstone respectively. These introduced cards that were extremely higher than the previous power curve, creating a large amount of power-creep. Rather than balance all the offending cards, Standard was introduced as a format where only the Classic set and most recent 4 expansions (Adventures/Card Packs) are playable. The immediate effect of this format was to eliminate GvG and Naxxramas from competitive. However, merits of this include making it so new players could jump in easier as they would not be disadvantaged by not having old cards and promote new deck archetypes for classes as old ones were phased out. Alongside that, old content could still be used in Wild format or disenchanted (traded in) for vials (currency) which could be used to craft almost any card in the game (excluding a few achievement cards and cards from adventures).

Meanwhile, Overwatch has no where enough gameplay content (Characters) that even thinking about removing some of them is justified. There is no greater barrier of entry for new players either, as all gameplay content (Maps and Heroes) are unlocked from the beginning, or at least what their advertisements in the past of Overwatch has suggested.

Games with hundreds of characters (League of Legends, DOTA2) have plenty of "obsolete" or "overpowered" characters that do not belong in the meta, and their development teams take the time to revisit them rather than simply remove them, sometimes even hotfixing them the same day of release. This takes more resources and time than removing a character completely, but shows a development team committed to at least trying to maintain game balance and putting in effort, rather than an incompetent team that does not try to address past mistakes.

Secondly, old content becomes completely obsolete. For example, if they remove a hero from a game completely, your cosmetics would theoretically become unusable, and they would have no disenchant value like in Hearthstone, as you are both not allowed to trade skins in for currency, and as the previous summer games box has demonstrated, your currency is unable to be used towards most new cosmetics.

TL;DR Actually removing heroes shows not only that the Overwatch team doesn't care about the players, but also an incompetent development team unwilling to address past design mistakes.
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.
Highly Rated
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


The internet is a panicky group. Thank you for nipping this one in the bud.
Highly Rated
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


Thanks for clarifying.
Mountain out of a molehill? Yes. Illegitimate concern? No.
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


thank you for injecting some sanity back into these damn forums. this place is friggen wild. Glad to hear it nonetheless. The amount of people that were ready to crucify you guys over the remote possibility was absolutely mindboggling. At this point people just want a reason to be mad.
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


Overwatch players making mountain's out of molehills? Surely you jest good sir.
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


Thats awesome to know, can you tell us your thoughts on trading n the future?
Highly Rated
Well, that "door" better stay freaking "closed" then.
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.

I think retiring heroes wouldn't make sense in a long term situation, seeing as ive seen mains with every character, however i do think if it was linked to lore a temporary retirement would be a cool event
Highly Rated
08/24/2016 05:56 PMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
We don't have any plans to retire any heroes. The interviewer asked if there was a possibility that this could ever happen and I "left the door open". The original poster in this thread did not even link to the original article but rather to an article quoting the article in question.

We're not even remotely thinking about retiring heroes right now or anytime in the foreseeable future.

I think this thread is making a mountain out of a molehill.


You would not believe how glad I am to hear this. But the door shouldn't even be left open, its universally a terrible idea.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum